2017 Playoffs

Started by Andy Jamison - Walla Walla Wildcat, October 31, 2017, 01:17:58 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

HScoach

Quote from: WRMUalum13 on December 16, 2017, 10:04:16 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 16, 2017, 12:23:26 AM
I will always remember how many times the ESPNU commentators made reference to how cold and windy it was.

https://vortex.plymouth.edu/wxpmaps/uschill.gif

At 0400 Zulu 12/16/2017 it is 24 near Salem; 44 in Houston and 16 near Canton.

Yeah... that's one reason I'm not convinced canton is an optimal location for a December championship

The temps might be a few degrees colder, but their was ZERO wind in Canton which is very the case in Salem.
I find easily offended people rather offensive!

Statistics are like bikinis; what they reveal is interesting, what they hide is essential.

WRMUalum13

Quote from: HScoach on December 16, 2017, 03:06:50 PM
Quote from: WRMUalum13 on December 16, 2017, 10:04:16 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 16, 2017, 12:23:26 AM
I will always remember how many times the ESPNU commentators made reference to how cold and windy it was.

https://vortex.plymouth.edu/wxpmaps/uschill.gif

At 0400 Zulu 12/16/2017 it is 24 near Salem; 44 in Houston and 16 near Canton.

Yeah... that's one reason I'm not convinced canton is an optimal location for a December championship

The temps might be a few degrees colder, but their was ZERO wind in Canton which is very the case in Salem.

Quite a bit of snow though

Ralph Turner

UMHB had a hard run to the Stagg.

After first round Chapman:

Linfield #6
St Thomas #4
Brockport #5.

UMU had:
W&L  (RV27)
CWRU #13
FSU #9
UWO #3

Ralph Turner

#258
MUC and I were discussing the most recent Stagg Bowl.  I have moved the conversation from the ASC board to a more appropriate (National) board.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 29, 2017, 08:25:23 PM
Quote from: MUC57 on December 29, 2017, 02:14:48 PM

D O. C.

Mount goes thru the bracket given them by the NCAA. Over the years, Mount has played: UWW, UMHB, Wesley, Wittenberg, Wabash, St. John's, St. Thomas, North Central, UWO, Bethel, Wheaton and numerous others  - in the playoffs. These are teams that are always top rated. Maybe it's just me, but it doesn't sound all that easy.
Try as you may, you can't belittle 13 national championships.
Happy New Year and best to the 'Cats in 2018!
I took your post as an opportunity to look at the "Run to Salem" for UMU and their opponents.

As a proxy for strength of opponent, I used D3football.com's Week #11 Top 25. For a bye or an unranked team, I gave a value of 26. So, the lower the total, the tougher the schedule. (The first Top 25 was in 2003.)

2003  UMU  Bye-26   UWL 7  Wheaton IL 5 Bridgewater 10  =  48
          SJU  Crown -26  SNC  26   Linfield 3 RPI 26   = 81

2005  UMU  MSJ 26  Augie 10 Capital 10 Rowan 11 = 63
         UWW Central 18  SJU 3 Linfield 1 Wesley 24  = 46

2006  UMU  Hope 26  Wheaton IL  18 Capital 4 SJF  16 =  64
          UWW  SNC 26 UWL 7  SJU 12 Wesley 3   = 48

2007   UMU  Ithaca 26  TCNJ 26  SJF 5 Bethel 9 = 66
          UWW  Capital 14  NCC 20 Wabash 12 UMHB 4  = 50

2008  UMU   RMC  26 Hobart 23 Cortland 16 Wheaton IL 25 = 90
         UWW SJU 24 Willamette 6 Wartburg 26 UMHB 5  =  61

2009  UMU W&J 20 Montclair St 24 Albright 26 Wesley 3  = 73
         UWW  Lakeland 26 IWU 14 Witt 12 Linfield  5 = 57

2010  UMU  St Lawrence 26  Del Valley 18 Alfred 26 Bethel 14  = 84
         UWW Franklin 26 Trine 12 NCC 5 Wesley 3  = 44

2011 UMU  Benedictine 26  Centre 25  Wabash 9 Wesley 7  = 67
        UWW  Albion  26 Franklin 17 Salisbury 10 Tommies 3 = 56

2012  UMU  CNU 26  JHU 19 Widener 9 UMHB 2  = 56
         Tommies  SNC 26 Elmhurst 17 Hobart 7 UWO 5 = 55

2013  UMU  W&J 26 Witt 12 Wesley 15 NCC 4 = 57
         UWW  SNC 26 Franklin 20 Linfield 2 UMHB 3  = 51

2014  UMU  Adrian 26 W&J 19 JCU 6 Wesley 4 = 55
         UWW  Macalester 26 Wabash 14 Wartburg 5 Linfield 10 = 55

2015  UMU  St Lawrence 26 Albright 20 Wesley 11 UWW 5 = 60
         Tommies La Verne 26 SJU 10 Wabash 7 Linfield 2  = 45

2017  UMU W&L 26 CWRU 16 Frostburg St 15 UWO 3 = 60
         UMHB Chapman 26 Linfield 8 Tommies 4 Brockport 10 = 48

Using this metric, UMU consistently has had the easier opponents on the way to the Stagg Bowl.

Ralph Turner

edward de vere made the next post.

Quote from: edward de vere on December 30, 2017, 01:48:25 AM
Since somebody has to have the easiest run to the Stagg Bowl for the last 15 years, I invite Ralph Turner, DOC Trolliday and others to make two lists, with teams ranked one through five, regarding who should have had the easiest run to the Stagg Bowl in aggregate the last 15 years.

LIST ONE:  Using the criteria the D3 committee uses, including geography, especially geography of the 500-mile nature.

LIST TWO:  Pure merit, by which I mean the quality of the team.

For instance, LIST ONE might say:  1) Mount Union  2)  Whitewater 3) UMHB  4) St. Thomas 5) Wesley

LIST TWO might say:  1)  Whitewater 2) Mount Union 3) St. Thomas 4)  UMHB 5) Linfield

* * *  Please note:  I just threw out these two lists off the top of my head.  I put about 30 seconds thought into them, just so there would be examples.  * * *

Here are my two questions:  Is there a sane person on Planet Earth who would put Mount Union on LIST ONE (using the committee criteria) lower than number one?  If so, how much lower and WHY?   Is there a sane person on Planet Earth who would Mount Union on LIST TWO ( the pure merit list) any lower than number two?  If so, how much lower and WHY?

Ralph Turner

#260
I made the next post.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 30, 2017, 03:17:00 PM
Thanks for the comment, edward.

What we are seeing in the 2 lists is a significant difference in the 2 roads to the Stagg.

The perfect 32- team bracket would be List #2. Let's imagine the perfectly seeded bracket (Made possible by Trillions of NCAA March Madness TV dollars). Let's assume the winners always moved forward.

North #1(UMU)  would play #32 national, then #16, then #8 then #4 = 60 points. Since I assigned only 26 points to non-rated teams, we have 26 + 16 + 8 + 4  = 54 points

Other bracket #1 (UMU's Stagg Challenger) would play #31, then #15, then #7 then #3 = 56 points.  Since I assigned only 26 points to non-rated teams, we have 26 + 15 + 7 + 3 = 51 points.

The 51-54 point range would be the average bracket.

Fewer than 51-54 points is a tougher post-season bracket. More than 51-54 points is an easier than average bracket.

List 1 is documented on this beautiful D3 football map that was created by the father of a D3 player about a decade ago.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/NCAA_Division_3_football_map.gif

(There needs to be some minor revisions,  but it serves the general purpose.)

Mount Union has the good fortune to be one of the closest teams to the East Region.

Meanwhile UWW, UST, Linfield, and UMHB are not uncommonly meeting in the early rounds, as noted above.
I have emboldened the games in which one of the "five" played each other in the first 3 rounds, before the Semifinals.

It works out to 5 times for the Non-UMU team and none for UMU.

I have italicized the semi-final matchups involving two of the "five". IN that case, there were 7 semi-final games between the non-UMU teams. Twice UMU faced one of the other teams of the "five".

Ralph Turner

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 30, 2017, 02:51:07 PM

Quote from: MUC57 on December 29, 2017, 02:14:48 PM

D O. C.

Mount goes thru the bracket given them by the NCAA. Over the years, Mount has played: UWW, UMHB, Wesley, Wittenberg, Wabash, St. John's, St. Thomas, North Central, UWO, Bethel, Wheaton and numerous others  - in the playoffs. These are teams that are always top rated. Maybe it's just me, but it doesn't sound all that easy.
Try as you may, you can't belittle 13 national championships.
Happy New Year and best to the 'Cats in 2018!
I took your post as an opportunity to look at the "Run to Salem" for UMU and their opponents.

As a proxy for strength of opponent, I used D3football.com's Week #11 Top 25. For a bye or an unranked team, I gave a value of 26. So, the lower the total, the tougher the schedule. (The first Top 25 was in 2003.)

2003  UMU  Bye-26   UWL 7  Wheaton IL 5 Bridgewater 10  =  48
          SJU  Crown -26  SNC  26   Linfield 3 RPI 26   = 81

2005  UMU  MSJ 26  Augie 10 Capital 10 Rowan 11 = 63
         UWW Central 18  SJU 3 Linfield 1 Wesley 24  = 46

2006  UMU  Hope 26  Wheaton IL  18 Capital 4 SJF  16 =  64
          UWW  SNC 26 UWL 7  SJU 12 Wesley 3   = 48

2007   UMU  Ithaca 26  TCNJ 26  SJF 5 Bethel 9 = 66
          UWW  Capital 14  NCC 20 Wabash 12 UMHB 4  = 50

2008  UMU   RMC  26 Hobart 23 Cortland 16 Wheaton IL 25 = 90
         UWW SJU 24 Willamette 6 Wartburg 26 UMHB 5  =  61

2009  UMU W&J 20 Montclair St 24 Albright 26 Wesley 3  = 73
         UWW  Lakeland 26 IWU 14 Witt 12 Linfield  5 = 57

2010  UMU  St Lawrence 26  Del Valley 18 Alfred 26 Bethel 14  = 84
         UWW Franklin 26 Trine 12 NCC 5 Wesley 3  = 44

2011 UMU  Benedictine 26  Centre 25  Wabash 9 Wesley 7  = 67
        UWW  Albion  26 Franklin 17 Salisbury 10 Tommies 3 = 56

2012  UMU  CNU 26  JHU 19 Widener 9 UMHB 2  = 56
         Tommies  SNC 26 Elmhurst 17 Hobart 7 UWO 5 = 55

2013  UMU  W&J 26 Witt 12 Wesley 15 NCC 4 = 57
         UWW  SNC 26 Franklin 20 Linfield 2 UMHB 3  = 51

2014  UMU  Adrian 26 W&J 19 JCU 6 Wesley 4 = 55
         UWW  Macalester 26 Wabash 14 Wartburg 5 Linfield 10 = 55

2015  UMU  St Lawrence 26 Albright 20 Wesley 11 UWW 5 = 60
         Tommies La Verne 26 SJU 10 Wabash 7 Linfield 2  = 45

2017  UMU W&L 26 CWRU 16 Frostburg St 15 UWO 3 = 60
         UMHB Chapman 26 Linfield 8 Tommies 4 Brockport 10 = 48

Using this metric, UMU consistently has had the easier opponents on the way to the Stagg Bowl.


I have emboldened the games in which one of the "five" played each other in the first 3 rounds, before the Semifinals.

It works out to 5 times for the Non-UMU team and none for UMU.

I have italicized the semi-final matchups involving two of the "five". In that case, there were 7 semi-final games between the non-UMU teams. Twice UMU faced one of the other teams of the "five" in the semi-finals.

bleedpurple

Wow. Lots of work put in here. Thanks for that. I  am not sure of the context of all this, however. Is it because:
1. There is a dispute as to whether Mount Union's runs to the Stagg are easier than the other top seeds?
2. The perceived disparity between Mount's path and that of the other top seeds is somehow nefarious?
3. The perceived disparity between Mount's path and that of the other top seeds taints the number of championships?
4. Something else.

I think Mount probably has had the easier path many years. But I don't think there is anything nefarious involved. First, they are often the eastern-most number one seed.  Second, having established themselves as an annual power, they will normally get a top two seed, giving them all home games in their run to the Stagg. I think in any given year, it's hard to argue where they have been seeded. 

To be honest, I don't think Mount's path has always served them well in the Stagg Bowl.

hsbsballcoach7

Quote from: bleedpurple on December 30, 2017, 10:41:49 PM
Wow. Lots of work put in here. Thanks for that. I  am not sure of the context of all this, however. Is it because:
1. There is a dispute as to whether Mount Union's runs to the Stagg are easier than the other top seeds?
2. The perceived disparity between Mount's path and that of the other top seeds is somehow nefarious?
3. The perceived disparity between Mount's path and that of the other top seeds taints the number of championships?
4. Something else.

I think Mount probably has had the easier path many years. But I don't think there is anything nefarious involved. First, they are often the eastern-most number one seed.  Second, having established themselves as an annual power, they will normally get a top two seed, giving them all home games in their run to the Stagg. I think in any given year, it's hard to argue where they have been seeded. 

To be honest, I don't think Mount's path has always served them well in the Stagg Bowl.

Agreed that this hasn't always benefitted UMU. Let me ask this, do you want the number one team to face the toughest challenge? Usually you want to earn a 1 seed to have a slightly "easier" path to the championship. I think that would be a major point. As mentioned before Mount has benefited from being within driving distance to East Region teams, but also because a larger number of quality teams are located in WI, MN, IA, IL, etc.

Just points to ponder.

Ralph Turner

Quote from: hsbsballcoach7 on December 31, 2017, 11:55:50 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on December 30, 2017, 10:41:49 PM
Wow. Lots of work put in here. Thanks for that. I  am not sure of the context of all this, however. Is it because:
1. There is a dispute as to whether Mount Union's runs to the Stagg are easier than the other top seeds?
2. The perceived disparity between Mount's path and that of the other top seeds is somehow nefarious?
3. The perceived disparity between Mount's path and that of the other top seeds taints the number of championships?
4. Something else.

I think Mount probably has had the easier path many years. But I don't think there is anything nefarious involved. First, they are often the eastern-most number one seed.  Second, having established themselves as an annual power, they will normally get a top two seed, giving them all home games in their run to the Stagg. I think in any given year, it's hard to argue where they have been seeded. 

To be honest, I don't think Mount's path has always served them well in the Stagg Bowl.

Agreed that this hasn't always benefitted UMU. Let me ask this, do you want the number one team to face the toughest challenge? Usually you want to earn a 1 seed to have a slightly "easier" path to the championship. I think that would be a major point. As mentioned before Mount has benefited from being within driving distance to East Region teams, but also because a larger number of quality teams are located in WI, MN, IA, IL, etc.

Just points to ponder.
Excellent post.

I agree with the slightly easier path.

In the perfect 32-team bracket, and assuming the higher seed wins in each round, #1 seed will face #32, #16, #8 and #4.

Using the Top 25 scoring system, 26 points + 16 +8 = 50 points.

The #4 seed in its bracket will face #29, #13, #5, and then #1 in the semifinals.

Using the Top 25 scoring system, 26 points + 13 + 5 = 44 points.

That looks the appropriate degree "easier".  We can explain it with geography.

MUC57

#265
Ralph Turner

You're certainly a class act. I think some other posters could emulate your attitude when responding to comments. Not hostile or argumentative but rather lets look at the situation and talk about it. Damn, that's refreshing.                                 
I have watched football for a lot of my 81 years. However; you have a much better feel for the fine points, like analysis of playoffs, than I.
I tried looking for flaws in your breakdown of the playoffs but, alas, could not find any.
Having said all the above, my comments - for what they're worth.
We. Mount fans have known for some time that we seem to get an easier bracket than others. Meaning no disrespect for these teams, but a 1st round game against St. Lawrence, Randolph-Macon, Adrian, Benedictene is not exactly a challenge. As has been mentioned, maybe a reward for being a #1 seed. We are aware of the situation. I guess we get a little testy when someone points it out!
However; let's look at another aspect of your analysis as it relates to 2017.
UMU had the easier bracket and UMHB had the harder bracket. No argument! But Mount beat UMHB. Can we then infer that Mount could have won the UMHB bracker! Maybe, but I know it doesn't work that way. The old A beats B, B beats C; therefore A beats C. Doesn't work that way. But , something to think about, I guess!
So, given that we have a not quite perfect playoff system, what's the solution? A few tears back we opened the playoffs against Randolph-Macon who came in with a record of 6-4. But they were ODAC champions, although tied with 3 others at 6-4. Should they really be in the playoff Spot? How about a team with no losses that doesn't make it. Or a team with a record of 8-2 or even 7-3 in a tough conference, like the WIAC that can't make it in.
Thanks Ralph for all your work on the playoffs. Thanks also to bleedpurple, several Mount posters and anyone else who contributed to the discussion.
Hey, gives us something to talk about for awhile.
At the risk of being repetitious , Happy New Year. And may your team do well in 2018!
I'm old! I get mixed up and I forget things! Go Everybody! 🏈 ☠

MUC57


Ralph Turner

Also snuk (or is it snuck), how about sneaked, in a +k.
I'm old! I get mixed up and I forget things! Go Everybody! 🏈 ☠

bleedpurple

Quote from: MUC57 on December 31, 2017, 02:02:27 PM

Ralph Turner

Also snuk (or is it snuck), how about sneaked, in a +k.

It's "gave you".  ;D

Happy New Year MUC57 and all posters!

MUC57

#268
bleedpurple

Yes, I "gave it" to him, but I didn't tell anyone. So..........
Nah nah nah nah nah - followed by sound like the raspberries. So there!

And you said Happy New Ayear. Well, the same to you, fellow.
I'm old! I get mixed up and I forget things! Go Everybody! 🏈 ☠

MUC57

 
This is an add-on to my long post above.

And UMHB was the defending national champion and ranked #1 all season. Does it matter that Mount had the easier road to the Stagg? Except for UWO, of course. Theoretically, the Stagg Bowl features the top 2 teams in the country. OK, OK, not always in reality but you know what I mean!

Mount Union plays the teams in their quarter of the bracket as set up by the NCAA. Mount has no control over who it is. Someone mentioned earlier that an easy path doesn't help prepare them for the Stagg, or even the semifinal. And that is certainly true! But, so far, for the most part at least, they have done OK.

Would love to hear from others.
I'm old! I get mixed up and I forget things! Go Everybody! 🏈 ☠