Pool C -- 2011

[K-Mack]

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.

For the record, I agree with the stuff in bold too.

I was just trying to guess/explain where the regional focus comes from.

You guys have pretty much hit all the nails on their heads. Bottom line, we all understand the issues, we seem to prefer that the strong two-loss teams be considered, but it all matters how the committee interprets.

I wonder how much changing members of the committee can influence results.

Also bringing up the Wabash example from last year is very relevant.

[Pat Coleman]

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.

I think we're getting a little overreliant on one game for a conference that is 2-13 in the playoffs.

[K-Mack]

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.

I think we're getting a little overreliant on one game for a conference that is 2-13 in the playoffs.

We? I didn't know I had any company.

NEFC beat Empire 8 twice, once as a Pool C. At the very least, given the weakness of the Pool C playoff candidates this year and given the fact that the NEFC has been given a C before and its team went on the road and beat an E8, it's enough to convince me that it would not be a "travesty" if it happened again.

I would prefer two-loss teams with powerful schedules got greater consideration. Yet Endicott making it at the expense of this particular two-loss crowd doesn't bother me as much as it apparently bothers others. No big. Differing opinions are encouraged.

[ADL70]

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.

Or would it just mean the committee gave greater weight to results against in-region regionally ranked teams, if Wesley, Huntingdon or Illinois Wesleyan keep CWRU out?

[lakeshore]

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.

I think SJF, W&L & Wheaton get to the table way before Louisiana because of SOS and probably before Endicott and IC.

[ExTartanPlayer]

I think SJF, W&L & Wheaton get to the table way before Louisiana because of SOS and probably before Endicott and IC.

Perhaps that should happen, but wally has pointed out, the committee has show a strong preference for one-loss teams.  wally's scenario is quite plausible, although I really think that it SHOULDN'T unfold that way. 

W & L is 8-2 with no wins over regionally ranked teams and is currently unranked, while LaCollege is ranked #9 in the latest regional rankings.  Assuming LaCollege beats HSU this week, it's hard to see how W & L jumps ahead of them now.

SJF could be stuck behind Endicott because they'll be 8-2 to Endicott's 9-1, and they are currently behind Endicott in the regional rankins.  There is a precedent here for a 9-1 NEFC team to be selected as a Pool C (Curry in 2008).

Wheaton is 8-2 and is currently ranked behind CWRU in the regional rankings; while they probably are a better team, it's not that farfetched to imagine them sitting there waiting behind CWRU for a while.

IWU, Redlands, McMurry, and Centre all seem deserving of Pool C's, but Endicott and Illinois College probably aren't.  I'd much prefer to see the NJAC runner-up in place of Endicott (which is conceivable, as Kean & Montclair are currently #3 and #4 in the regional rankings...they might end up on the board before Endicott even with an 8-2 record), and despite my misgivings about CWRU, I think that they deserve to go before Illinois College (although I see why wally thinks that might happen).

[smedindy]

Thought about this more.

If Huntingdon beats Wesley, then they'll have results against several regionally ranked teams. That may put them over the top in "B" even if Case goes 9-0.

Then the committee needs to figure out what to do with Wesley. They'd have to slot in behind the NJAC runner-up with their loss to Kean, so they may be out. Does that further remove Endicott from the table?

[AUKaz00]

I'd much prefer to see the NJAC runner-up in place of Endicott (which is conceivable, as Kean & Montclair are currently #3 and #4 in the regional rankings...they might end up on the board before Endicott even with an 8-2 record.

The Montclair/Kean game, like Salisbury/Fisher, pits the #s 3 and 4 teams in the East for the second straight week.  Fisher's loss dropped them below Endicott who was unranked a week ago.  That seems like clear evidence that the NJAC loser will also fall below Endicott in the "final-final" rankings.

[SUADC]

I think SJF, W&L & Wheaton get to the table way before Louisiana because of SOS and probably before Endicott and IC.

I'd much prefer to see the NJAC runner-up in place of Endicott (which is conceivable, as Kean & Montclair are currently #3 and #4 in the regional rankings...they might end up on the board before Endicott even with an 8-2 record

Totally agree with you Tartan, I think that the runner-up of the NJAC espescially if Montclair State losses a close game to Kean can use that they only lost by six to a good TCNJ team and Kean, who had beaten #7 Wesley. However, if Kean losses, I believe they will have a tougher time proving their case, because that loss to 2-7 Brockport State (even though Brockport State only lost by an average of 11 points in all of its 7 losses, including two 21 point losses) hurts. Nevertheless, I know Endicott has only 1-loss, but they're only going to be #3 in their conference at the end of the day and I don't think the Committee is going to allow a #3 place finisher out of a weak conference (not taking anything away from Endicott)into the playoffs. Based on how last year played out with Montclair State going to the South and the South inserting Salisbury to the "East", you can see it like this with MUC playing the #5 seed because of travel.

1) MUC (Pool A)
2) Johns Hopkins (Pool A)
3) Salisbury (Pool A)
4) Widener (Pool A)
5) NJAC Winner (Pool A)
6) Hobart (Pool A)
7) NEFC Winner (Pool A)
8) Norwich (Pool A)

[jknezek]

I know this IS a Pool C board so we are fired up about who gets it, but I really don't think the committee is going to do anything drastic. History shows the 1 loss teams get preference. At this point, we have enough 1 loss teams to fill the Pool C slots without too much problem. Of those 1 loss teams, we are arguing about whether the last two, Endicott especially, should be subbed for a two loss team. In a field of 32 teams, to only really have qualms about 2 teams is pretty good. I have to admit, even if Case and Endicott hit the field above two very strong two loss teams, I'm not going to be upset.

At the beginning of the year you know you need to win your conference. Barring that, you need to lose one game to be in consideration. If there were a whole bunch of 1 loss teams and we were arguing their relative SOS I'd be more interested. At this point, the two loss teams have gotten pretty much what they deserved... a spot on the outside praying the committee doesn't follow history... Essentially you have lost 20% of your games.  Given only 32 out of 240 teams (roughly 13%) make the playoffs, that's just too much and I don't really care who you played (although I would have eaten those words if UWO went 8-2 with losses only to the Purple Powers).

[jam40jeff]

Can't help but think that Baldwin-Wallace is REALLY going to regret that early-season loss to Capital...few teams have been as impressive as B-W over the last couple weeks, with five straight OAC wins in October, and rallying from a 19-0 deficit to take the lead in the second half AT Mount Union is no joke.

I agree.  I just can't understand how a team that can give Mount Union a scare can only put up 11 points and lose to a not very good Capital team (which JCU handled pretty easily, scoring 37 points).

I think the JCU/BW game will be a much better game than most people think.  JCU traditionally gives BW a good game, such as last year when BW came in with the same record (losses only to UMU and ONU) and JCU beat them.

[ExTartanPlayer]

At the beginning of the year you know you need to win your conference. Barring that, you need to lose one game to be in consideration. If there were a whole bunch of 1 loss teams and we were arguing their relative SOS I'd be more interested. At this point, the two loss teams have gotten pretty much what they deserved...

Well said.  I did argue this a while back on the East Region boards a little bit, when the subject was whether AQ's should be granted to very weak conferences, and I said that any team in Pool C ultimately shouldn't have THAT big of a gripe because they DID have a chance to get in via Pool A.

Certainly, several two-loss teams could claim that they are better than some teams in the field (heck, the entire top half of the WIAC and ASC might be better than the last few Pool A teams in) but that's not the point.  It's a NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP tournament; you can't very well stake a claim to the national title when you did not win your conference.

With that said - I suppose my arguments are more of an objection to a team like Endicott being IN (since they didn't win their conference either, and their conference is widely acknowledged as one of the 3-4 weakest in Division III) than to any specific Pool C team being left OUT.

[wally_wabash]

If the committee has been consistent about one thing from year to year and from committee to committee, it is that they really prefer you not lose twice, regardless of what league you play in or what your schedule strength might be.  Is that an absolute?  Of course not, but that's been the strong tendency over the years. 

[emma17]

At the beginning of the year you know you need to win your conference. Barring that, you need to lose one game to be in consideration. If there were a whole bunch of 1 loss teams and we were arguing their relative SOS I'd be more interested. At this point, the two loss teams have gotten pretty much what they deserved...

Well said.  I did argue this a while back on the East Region boards a little bit, when the subject was whether AQ's should be granted to very weak conferences, and I said that any team in Pool C ultimately shouldn't have THAT big of a gripe because they DID have a chance to get in via Pool A.

Certainly, several two-loss teams could claim that they are better than some teams in the field (heck, the entire top half of the WIAC and ASC might be better than the last few Pool A teams in) but that's not the point. It's a NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP tournament; you can't very well stake a claim to the national title when you did not win your conference.
With that said - I suppose my arguments are more of an objection to a team like Endicott being IN (since they didn't win their conference either, and their conference is widely acknowledged as one of the 3-4 weakest in Division III) than to any specific Pool C team being left OUT.

Tell that to the St. Louis Cardinals. 

[jknezek]

I've always said MLB and their wildcards was one the last big sellouts in pro sports. Done for the money, not to make the game better...