Pool C -- 2011

Started by Ralph Turner, October 09, 2011, 04:31:59 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

wally_wabash

Quote from: smedindy on November 09, 2011, 04:34:27 PM
I'm not either. But if they want to make a system based on regionality, they'd have to reward an undefeated regional record.

CWRU lost a game to team that they share a conference with in every other NCAA sponsored sport.  I know this isn't every other sport, but come on.  That game has to count.  It's not like they lost to Grand Valley State.  They lost to a Division III team that we know isn't great.  The result is relevant. 

The point is moot...if the regional record is going to carry that much weight, then CWRU will be the Pool B selection and won't be on this board anyway.
"Nothing in the world is more expensive than free."- The Deacon of HBO's The Wire

SUADC

Quote from: wally_wabash on November 09, 2011, 04:18:19 PM
Did a little Pool C analysis...a couple of things that I'm assuming:
- Hobart either goes to Pool A or gets knocked below Endicott
- The NJAC runner up will fall below Endicott
- The national committee will reorder IWU and CWRU on the North tableau
- Linfield isn't losing to Lewis & Clark
- Wesley beats Huntingdon and is selected in Pool B

So I've got two scenarios...one if Delaware Valley wins, one if Delaware Valley loses. 

If Del Val wins, my selections are:
Round 1: Endicott, IWU, McMurry, Redlands - Titans have the same number of wins over RR'd teams as McMurry and Redlands, but have a higher SOS
Round 2: Endicott, CWRU, McMurry, Redlands -  Redlands and McMurry have very similar resumés, I think the edge goes to Redlands because they have a better win
Round 3: Endicott, CWRU, McMurry, Illinois College - McMurry is quite clearly the best of this group...the other three do not have a win over a RR'd team and have inferior SOS's
Round 4: Endicott, CWRU, Centre, Illinois College - Centre, I believe actually looks better than McMurry and probably would have been taken immediately if they were on the board.  The national committee may "fix" that order in the South
Round 5: Endicott, CWRU, Louisiana College, Illinois College - Louisiana College has a stronger schedule, but they have zero wins against ranked teams and have the extra loss.  Endicott is the choice based on SOS.
Round 6: NJAC runner up, CWRU, Louisiana College, Illinois College - The NJAC runner up will have a strong case here, particularly if it's Kean as they will have a win over a ranked team (the SOS will get a boost as well this week).  Ultimately, I think the committee prefers that you don't lose twice and Illinois College has a slight SOS edge on CWRU. 

Now, if Del Val loses, Del Val will be the first up in the East.  I won't go through the whole process again...IWU, Redlands, McMurry, and Centre and still my choices for the first four rounds all ahead of Delaware Valley.  Then Del Val comes off, then Endicott.  Del Val could go ahead of McMurry, but then McMurry will go followed immediately by Centre, then we're back to the same final four at the table for the last spot.  Basically, if Del Val loses, they're in, Illinois College is out. 

And now let the week 11 hysteria begin and blow all of this right out of the water. :)

Definitely right about the hysteria...the rest of this week and the weekend is going to bring everything to light. Some may like, a lot will not.

smedindy

I'm just looking at the criteria, Wally. You can say "the game has to count" all you want but for the primary criteria, it doesn't, and you always pointing out that it 'should' count (and my acknowledgement that it should count, realistically, but doesn't), means nothing.

It's all dependent on how the NCAA wants to look at the primary criteria. And there's a big chasm in SOS numbers between Wesley's SOS and CWRU, but not so much, really between IC, Endicott and CWRU.

I could see the criteria applied this way:

The difference between SOS for Wesley, and their beating of regionally ranked Salisbury, outflanks CWRU's regional record for the "B".
The regional record of CWRU outflanks the advantage in SOS for IC and Endicott.

That's very plausible.


Ralph Turner

The Handbook doesn't say "wins". It says "results".  That is the way that the committee can consider how the game counts!

If Kean/Montclair State is a close game, why do you drop the loser too far?  Any game between those two teams will have a loser. A 4-point outcome, plus or minus 3 points Home Field Advantage is what I would expect.

wally_wabash

Quote from: smedindy on November 09, 2011, 04:49:31 PM
I'm just looking at the criteria, Wally. You can say "the game has to count" all you want but for the primary criteria, it doesn't, and you always pointing out that it 'should' count (and my acknowledgement that it should count, realistically, but doesn't), means nothing.

I approached this all from the same perspective last year.  Apply the criteria, primary then secondary, and select teams accordingly.  But if the committee did that, Wabash was a slam dunk for invitation because the loss to WashU never gets evaluated.  But the committee did include that loss in their evaluation and Wabash just missed out.  And they were right. 

With just 10 games to try and distinguish between teams, you just can't ignore results that are obviously relevant.  I don't know how relevant McMurry's loss to SFA is.  How do you judge what the expectation is for that game?  I can absolutely judge CWRU's loss to in-division Rochester...in the same way that we could all judge Wabash's in-division loss to WashU last season.  In practice, or so it seems, the lines of regionality get stomped out a bit when it comes to football selection.  And rightly so.  There just aren't enough results to throw some out based on arbitrarily determined "regions". 
"Nothing in the world is more expensive than free."- The Deacon of HBO's The Wire

smedindy

Then don't make it as part of the criteria, then. Why have criteria when they don't use it? Again, the written primary criteria ignores that result.

And there's a big difference between a one-loss region team (Wabash last year ) and a undefeated region team (CWRU).

wally_wabash

Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 09, 2011, 04:51:15 PM
The Handbook doesn't say "wins". It says "results".  That is the way that the committee can consider how the game counts!

If Kean/Montclair State is a close game, why do you drop the loser too far?  Any game between those two teams will have a loser. A 4-point outcome, plus or minus 3 points Home Field Advantage is what I would expect.

I dropped the Montclair/Kean loser below Endicott because there just isn't much precedent for the committee selecting 2-loss teams ahead of 1-loss teams, regardless of SOS or results vs. ranked teams.  In today's rankings there is not an instance of a 2-loss team being ranked ahead of a 1-loss team. 
"Nothing in the world is more expensive than free."- The Deacon of HBO's The Wire

wally_wabash

Quote from: smedindy on November 09, 2011, 05:14:24 PM
Then don't make it as part of the criteria, then. Why have criteria when they don't use it? Again, the written primary criteria ignores that result.

I said the same exact thing last year.  I think it was Pat that answered back, and I'm paraphrasing...I'll try to find the exchange later, that these criteria are used throughout the division in all sports and there might be something un-D3 about writing a different set of rules for football even if it completely makes sense and doesn't in any way sully the greatness of Division III events. 
"Nothing in the world is more expensive than free."- The Deacon of HBO's The Wire

jknezek

Yeah. Pat got me with that one a few weeks ago on the same topic. Football, with it's limited schedule, is a different animal. Sometimes common sense has to apply. Unfortunately we are very good at writing rules so no one has to apply common sense. The committee has the leeway to do whatever it wants. If I was in the North region, I'd be praying that CWRU gets the Pool B because I could see them tying up a Pool C slot for a good long time...

ExTartanPlayer

Quote from: wally_wabash on November 09, 2011, 05:11:40 PM
With just 10 games to try and distinguish between teams, you just can't ignore results that are obviously relevant.  I don't know how relevant McMurry's loss to SFA is.  How do you judge what the expectation is for that game?  I can absolutely judge CWRU's loss to in-division Rochester...in the same way that we could all judge Wabash's in-division loss to WashU last season.  In practice, or so it seems, the lines of regionality get stomped out a bit when it comes to football selection.  And rightly so.  There just aren't enough results to throw some out based on arbitrarily determined "regions".

I've gone around in circles on this subject a few times recently, so I'll try not to continue, but let's just say that I agree with the bolded parts 100%.  With such a short schedule, I hate throwing away any Division III results, especially because they're relatively easy to evaluate.

However, wally, Keith made a nice point for the origins of the focus on regional-record, even if it doesn't hold up well in practice.  As Keith put it, under the criteria, the idea was "play the good teams close to you and you'll get in."  Teams wouldn't have to feel like they had to travel in search of an impressive nonconference win. 

Do I still disagree?  Yeah.  I don't think that eliminating the emphasis on regional games will result a sudden arms-race for nonconference games, but as Keith/Pat constantly have to remind us (and you just said above), most of these rules are written with all sports in mind, not just football.
I was small but made up for it by being slow...

http://athletics.cmu.edu/sports/fball/2011-12/releases/20120629a4jaxa

wally_wabash

#220
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 09, 2011, 07:22:45 PM
However, wally, Keith made a nice point for the origins of the focus on regional-record, even if it doesn't hold up well in practice.  As Keith put it, under the criteria, the idea was "play the good teams close to you and you'll get in." Teams wouldn't have to feel like they had to travel in search of an impressive nonconference win. 

With the recent adjustments to what counts as "in region", we don't have any idea what playing good teams close to you means anymore.  Wabash playing a game vs. a team from St. Louis is not regional.  North Central playing a team from southern California is.  CWRU playing a team in northwestern New York is not regional.  Wittenberg playing a team in Alabama is.  There's a pretty serious disconnect there.  I understand the idea behind the administrative regions and how it helps to give teams more options for finding regional games, but why stop there?  There really isn't a good reason why we can't replace the language about "in-region" and just call it "in-division" because, in practice, I think that's what teams get judged on.  And I don't think saying that explicitly in the football handbook makes D-III football any less D-III. 

As far as encouraging teams to play other teams close to them, I think that happens organically.  Schools are naturally going to gravitate toward games against natural geographic rivals.  Most teams aren't going to want to spend the money to travel all over the country playing football (see the dissolution of the SCAC as a prime example).  For a majority of D-III, there are plenty of games to be had fairly close to home.  For the parts of D-III that are on what's become known as "islands", some travel for non-league games is just going to be the nature of the beast. 
"Nothing in the world is more expensive than free."- The Deacon of HBO's The Wire

Mr. Ypsi

Quote from: jknezek on November 09, 2011, 06:59:39 PM
Yeah. Pat got me with that one a few weeks ago on the same topic. Football, with it's limited schedule, is a different animal. Sometimes common sense has to apply. Unfortunately we are very good at writing rules so no one has to apply common sense. The committee has the leeway to do whatever it wants. If I was in the North region, I'd be praying that CWRU gets the Pool B because I could see them tying up a Pool C slot for a good long time...

As a fan of IWU (the team most likely to get screwed if current regional standings persist and Wesley beats out Case for the B), I'm fervently hoping for one (or more ;)) of the following:

The (secret) final-final rankings flip Case and IWU.
CMU takes down Case and renders the point moot.
Huntingdon takes down Wesley, which makes Case the likely B (unless Huntingdon then jumps them!)

K-Mack

Quote from: AUKaz00 on November 09, 2011, 08:41:37 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 09, 2011, 03:02:34 AM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 07, 2011, 06:04:15 PM
if Endicott gets in the playoffs at 9-1 without winning the NEFC title, that's an absolute travesty, and I don't care how good they look via the criteria.

Plymouth State went in this manner a few years ago, and although they lost at Cortland, that was the year Curry won in the first round at Ithaca.

I think Endicott going is much more of a possibility than people seem to be considering, if DelVal wins.
You got it backwards, Keith.  Plymouth State went via the NEFC AQ and Curry claimed a Pool C the year after beating Hartwick in the first round.  Semantics perhaps, but while Endicott made the dance last year they didn't win.  It'll be interesting to see what happens in regards to regional rankings today and selections on Sunday.  Plus, I'd guess it's a 50/50 proposition that one of the 1-loss Pool C contenders loses this weekend (though it's likely the same proposition that Del Valley loses, so it could be a wash for teams on the bubble).

Gotcha, I do too much of my board posting off the top of my head. After 12 years, stuff runs together. Curry indeed beat Hartwick in the first round one year, and Ithaca the next.

This actually strengthens the point though. No longer can we assume having a Pool C team from the NEFC is a "travesty" if it is capable of beating a playoff team from one of the better leagues in D-III, the Empire 8.

I'm not saying I would pick Endicott to beat Baldwin-Wallace straight up, but committees seem to favor 9-1 teams to 8-2 teams, and I don't know that it would reach travesty level if they did it in this case.
Former author, Around the Nation ('01-'13)
Managing Editor, Kickoff
Voter, Top 25/Play of the Week/Gagliardi Trophy/Liberty Mutual Coach of the Year
Nastradamus, Triple Take
and one of the two voices behind the sonic #d3fb nerdery that is the ATN Podcast.

smedindy

I do feel that if Case finishes 9-0 in region, and doesn't make the playoffs, then it blows the whole 'regional' concept to heck.

K-Mack

Quote from: wally_wabash on November 09, 2011, 04:18:19 PM
Did a little Pool C analysis...a couple of things that I'm assuming:
- Hobart either goes to Pool A or gets knocked below Endicott
- The NJAC runner up will fall below Endicott
- The national committee will reorder IWU and CWRU on the North tableau
- Linfield isn't losing to Lewis & Clark
- Wesley beats Huntingdon and is selected in Pool B

So I've got two scenarios...one if Delaware Valley wins, one if Delaware Valley loses. 

If Del Val wins, my selections are:
Round 1: Endicott, IWU, McMurry, Redlands - Titans have the same number of wins over RR'd teams as McMurry and Redlands, but have a higher SOS
Round 2: Endicott, CWRU, McMurry, Redlands -  Redlands and McMurry have very similar resumés, I think the edge goes to Redlands because they have a better win
Round 3: Endicott, CWRU, McMurry, Illinois College - McMurry is quite clearly the best of this group...the other three do not have a win over a RR'd team and have inferior SOS's
Round 4: Endicott, CWRU, Centre, Illinois College - Centre, I believe actually looks better than McMurry and probably would have been taken immediately if they were on the board.  The national committee may "fix" that order in the South
Round 5: Endicott, CWRU, Louisiana College, Illinois College - Louisiana College has a stronger schedule, but they have zero wins against ranked teams and have the extra loss.  Endicott is the choice based on SOS.
Round 6: NJAC runner up, CWRU, Louisiana College, Illinois College - The NJAC runner up will have a strong case here, particularly if it's Kean as they will have a win over a ranked team (the SOS will get a boost as well this week).  Ultimately, I think the committee prefers that you don't lose twice and Illinois College has a slight SOS edge on CWRU. 

Now, if Del Val loses, Del Val will be the first up in the East.  I won't go through the whole process again...IWU, Redlands, McMurry, and Centre and still my choices for the first four rounds all ahead of Delaware Valley.  Then Del Val comes off, then Endicott.  Del Val could go ahead of McMurry, but then McMurry will go followed immediately by Centre, then we're back to the same final four at the table for the last spot.  Basically, if Del Val loses, they're in, Illinois College is out. 

And now let the week 11 hysteria begin and blow all of this right out of the water. :)

This is very close to what my analysis looks like, except I don't think it's safe to assume the committee will prefer to IWU to CWRU. I can't figure out why, but this is twice now that they've had Case in front of the Titans -- has to be on regional record.

Therefore I think I go CWRU 4th, IWU 5th, Endicott 6th if Del Val wins, and Del Val in early, CWRU 5th and IWU 6th if Widener wins. So Widener could bump Endicott by winning.

Again, this is not what I would do if I were on the commitee, it's what I think they will do based on the quick analysis and consideration of history I've done so far.

That said, you're right ... Week 11 usually brings some crazy carnage. One reason I like Endicott to withstand it all is becaue they can't lose, and because they played both WNEC and Framingham State, their SoS can't suffer. (They'd be better off if WNEC won though).
And yes, some wacky
Former author, Around the Nation ('01-'13)
Managing Editor, Kickoff
Voter, Top 25/Play of the Week/Gagliardi Trophy/Liberty Mutual Coach of the Year
Nastradamus, Triple Take
and one of the two voices behind the sonic #d3fb nerdery that is the ATN Podcast.