D3boards.com

I know this is early to be starting the Pool C board, but ...

https://www.d3football.com/notables/2022/08/conference-teams-will-not-have-to-play-in-first-round

Conference teams playing in the 1st round.

Of course, it is much harder for that to happen with only 5 Pool C bids.

For contemplation (and we have some great non-conference games this season)

Must the loser of these games win their conference to earn a bid?

UMHB Muhlenburg
UMHB Whitewater
UWW St John's
UWW Berry
Trinity Wheaton IL
North Central Wabash

Any 2-loss WIAC team?

Others that I have not listed, after a quick run of the top half of the Top 25...

Same number of Pool C bids we've had since starting in 2017.

My bad.
I thought we had 6 in the more recent past.

I would say any OOC game losses eliminates you from going to the playoffs without winning your conference.  It's so slim in Group C that there are teams that are 9-1 with their only loss being to a 10-0 conference team.  Also add that is you lose an OOC game and don't win your conference, that means you have 2 losses, at least.  So no, that doesn't get you in as a Group C. 

Quote from: Ralph Turner on August 21, 2022, 04:20:30 PM
I know this is early to be starting the Pool C board, but ...

https://www.d3football.com/notables/2022/08/conference-teams-will-not-have-to-play-in-first-round

Conference teams playing in the 1st round.

Of course, it is much harder for that to happen with only 5 Pool C bids.

For contemplation (and we have some great non-conference games this season)

Must the loser of these games win their conference to earn a bid?

UMHB Muhlenburg
UMHB Whitewater
UWW St John's
UWW Berry
Trinity Wheaton IL
North Central Wabash

Any 2-loss WIAC team?

Others that I have not listed, after a quick run of the top half of the Top 25...

If UWW, splits with UMHB and St. John's, and both those team won their conference / remaining games, UWW could get in at 8-2, given their RRO would be 1-2 at worst, maybe 3-2, and SOS would be through the roof. 

Starting the Pool C bubble.

It will hard to get a Pool C bid with 2 losses, but I think we can start the weekly count down.

(D3 top 25 ranking has no bearing on Pool C selection criteria)

Muhlenberg lost to UMHB. Must win the Centennial
UMHB lost to UWW. Must win the ASC.
UWW lost to St Johns. Must win the WIAC.
Wheaton IL lost to Trinity TX. Must win the CCIW
Bethel lost to UW-Platteville. Must win the MIAC.
RPI lost to Carnegie-Mellon. Must win the Liberty League.
UW-River Falls lost to St Johns. Must win the WIAC.
Salisbury lost to Stevenson. Must win the NJAC.

IMHO, St Johns has the inside track to hosting a semi-final.

One more, Ralph:  Birmingham-Southern lost to Huntingdon.  Must win the SAA.

Are we really sure about this?

Did IC's season last year really close the door on the 2-loss Pool C?

Quote from: IC798891 on September 11, 2022, 06:10:22 PM
Are we really sure about this?

Did IC's season last year really close the door on the 2-loss Pool C?

Thank you for the comment.
Every season is different. This year, we have had incredible non-conference games among Top 25 programs from Power Conferences.

Look at the strong teams from Power Conferences who have losses, as listed above.
(E.g., consider WIAC, ASC, MIAC, CCIW. Even the Centennial is no slouch of a conference. It appears that the OAC had no surprises in the first two weeks.)

Let's go to Selection Saturday night as the committee tries to fill 5 Pool C bids and look at the Regional Rankings.

I can imagine the committee looking at 2-loss UMHB on the table from Region 3, followed by 2-loss BSC. Are they behind a 1-loss ODAC team?
In Region 6, imagine we have 2-loss Bethel and 2-loss UWW. Might they be behind a 1-loss NWC runner-up? GFU might go 9-1/6-1. There are 4 WIAC's in the Top 17.
In Region 5, we have 2-loss Wheaton. Are they behind a 1-loss ARC team in the final Regional Rankings?
In Region 2, if RPI wins the LL, does an Ithaca College with losses to RPI and Cortland in the Cortaca Jug game get in? A 2-loss Muhlenberg will get a bid boost from the UMHB in the OWP?
In Region 1, is some 1-loss team from the MAC, NEWMAC, etc., passed over for 5 rounds as the committee picks up a 2-loss team from another region?
Region 4. This may be straightforward. The 1-loss runner up from the OAC probably gets in. Baldwin-Wallace has a loss to Mt St Joseph. I think that Heidelberg is in good shape if they go 9-1. There goes a bid. What about 1-loss runners-up from the other conferences?

Quote from: IC798891 on September 11, 2022, 08:26:20 PM
Here's sort of my big-picture question (It's entirely too soon to go through scenarios for me):

What happens to the solid, if unspectacular OOC games if the teams feel that precedent has essentially become: run the table in OOC if you want a Pool C?

The UMHB and UWW types of the division, they have the mentality (and critically, the institutional support) to take the "Anyone, anywhere" mentality to heart. They're aiming for a Stagg, and that's how they get their team ready.

But what about some of these games between two solid, fringy playoff programs: Say what we saw with IC and Brockport these last few years.

Are they going to view the upside of a *stronger* 9-1 resume as greater than the downside of possibly being 8-2?

Or are they going to just go schedule someone that might be looking for a 10th game like TCNJ to make sure they're 9-1?

Because regardless of all the various what ifs and SOS numbers and what we might say about every year being different, with IC's resume last year having such a high SOS, and UMHB losing to a possible top 5 OOC opponent by literal inches, it might be pretty hard to convince these schools that the argument isn't just "9-1 > 8-2" and that the best way to give themselves a second lifeline for the playoffs is to take the road that gets them there.

IC798891 wrote...

---

Here's sort of my big-picture question (It's entirely too soon to go through scenarios for me):

What happens to the solid, if unspectacular OOC games if the teams feel that precedent has essentially become: run the table in OOC if you want a Pool C?

The UMHB and UWW types of the division, they have the mentality (and critically, the institutional support) to take the "Anyone, anywhere" mentality to heart. They're aiming for a Stagg, and that's how they get their team ready.

But what about some of these games between two solid, fringy playoff programs: Say what we saw with IC and Brockport these last few years.

Are they going to view the upside of a *stronger* 9-1 resume as greater than the downside of possibly being 8-2?

Or are they going to just go schedule someone that might be looking for a 10th game like TCNJ to make sure they're 9-1?

Because regardless of all the various what ifs and SOS numbers and what we might say about every year being different, with IC's resume last year having such a high SOS, and UMHB losing to a possible top 5 OOC opponent by literal inches, it might be pretty hard to convince these schools that the argument isn't just "9-1 > 8-2" and that the best way to give themselves a second lifeline for the playoffs is to take the road that gets them there.

---

I really like your post. +1 and I have taken it out of the quotes and enlarged the font to give it more presence and emphasis.

I think that you have framed the question facing the Selection Committee on  November 12th.

The way that I interpreted all of the really great OOC games was that they were playing for home field advantage to the deepest week in the playoffs.

What if Muhlenberg had beaten UMHB and won the Centennial?  Does that 10-0 record earn the seeding to host all the way to the Semi-finals, including hosting Mount Union? Muhlenberg would have had an OOC win over UMHB; UMU over Defiance. A 9-1 Muhlenberg might be in consideration for hosting 3 rounds in an "eastern seaboard" bracket.

For me, the question as to who has home field advantage in the Western bracket thru the semi-finals after week #2 comes down to St Johns versus NCC.

Linfield looks strong thru 3 rounds, especially if the Huntingdon win over BSC gets better in retrospect.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 11, 2022, 09:42:38 PM
The way that I interpreted all of the really great OOC games was that they were playing for home field advantage to the deepest week in the playoffs.

Right, I think your assessment is dead on there.

But the division isn't just those types of teams. And, with all due respect to those teams, I'm not even sure those games — and the larger goal stated above — are really in line with the D3 ethos.

Great games? Absolutely. Great teams? 100%. And it's not like there's anything ethically wrong with any of it. But D3 places an emphasis on regional play and conference championships. Traveling across the county to essentially play for HFA in the national quarters/semis is not that.

So I think it's reasonable to ask if the unintended trickle down effect of those games — as it relates to the remaining 98% of the division and their OOC scheduling, is a good thing.

Quote from: IC798891 on September 12, 2022, 10:59:28 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 11, 2022, 09:42:38 PM
The way that I interpreted all of the really great OOC games was that they were playing for home field advantage to the deepest week in the playoffs.

Right, I think your assessment is dead on there.

But the division isn't just those types of teams. And, with all due respect to those teams, I'm not even sure those games — and the larger goal stated above — are really in line with the D3 ethos.

Great games? Absolutely. Great teams? 100%. And it's not like there's anything ethically wrong with any of it. But D3 places an emphasis on regional play and conference championships. Traveling across the county to essentially play for HFA in the national quarters/semis is not that.

So I think it's reasonable to ask if the unintended trickle down effect of those games — as it relates to the remaining 98% of the division and their OOC scheduling, is a good thing.

What would you propose for the island teams to do to fill those OOC matchups besides traveling across the country?  Hardin-Simmons called 150+ teams this year trying to get an out of conference game and they were only able to get one of the two they needed.  With the conference getting smaller next year they're going to need three games.  Or, since "D3 places an emphasis on regional play and conference championships" should they be excluded because no one wants to play them and they're on an island? 

Quote from: IC798891 on September 12, 2022, 10:59:28 AM
Great games? Absolutely. Great teams? 100%. And it's not like there's anything ethically wrong with any of it. But D3 places an emphasis on regional play and conference championships. Traveling across the county to essentially play for HFA in the national quarters/semis is not that.

So I think it's reasonable to ask if the unintended trickle down effect of those games — as it relates to the remaining 98% of the division and their OOC scheduling, is a good thing.

If nobody regional will play them, I'll take games like the ones we got Saturday 100 times out of 100 versus more games with NAIAs or (worse) teams playing just 9 games.  It seems like it was inevitable that eventually, the tippy top teams that can't get OOC agreements were going to have to start playing each other.  Or playing non-division games.  Or losing competition opportunities completely. 

Options are limited on the Texas island.  What's capital R Regional there isn't exactly travel friendly for schools working with limited budgets. I don't believe this earns teams on the islands a pass when it comes to selection/seeding criteria- but we can acknowledge the additional challenge they have compared to teams that exist in densely populated D3 areas. 

If the power programs consolidating their positions by playing each other in the OOC portion of they year is troubling to the other 98% of the division, there's an easy solution.  If you're one of first, say 50 schools, that Jesse Burleson or Kevin Bullis or Larry Harmon calls to play a game, say yes. 

I really like the schedule and the efforts to have great games that UWW and SJU, UMHB and Berry have put into this.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 12, 2022, 12:28:33 PM
I really like the schedule and the efforts to have great games that UWW and SJU, UMHB and Berry have put into this.

Absolutely.  Even though my team came out on the short side of the stick Saturday, that was a November/December quality game played in Week 2.

Everyone's making valid points. It's hard to put one region against the other, without bias, and who played who and who beat who. Ultimately you win your conference and your in. With all the high profile OOC games this year, it was inevitable this would happen. Now since this is a Pool C topic of discussion we can continue to play the what if game.

It's almost a a given that there may be an 8-2 team from the LL, ASC, WIAC, or SAA that will come up when deciding who goes in or who stays. Another week or two should clear things up a bit, but it's a long season and you never know with injuries and a dark horse team coming on strong later in the year. Since we have seen teams beat and lose to one another already, how would the OOC SOS come to play when they start to cancel each other out? I know anything can happen but how would the selection committee treat a 8-2 UWRF vs an 8-2 UMHB vs 8-2 Berry. We can use poll rankings but NCAA uses the regional. Say RF only loses to WW and STJ. Or WW loses to RF and STJ. Or UMHB has two losses to WW and possibly HSU. Berry plays a tight game to UWW and possibly loses to TU.

Of course these games haven't happened, but say it plays out that way, who gets selected? Maybe BSC finishes strong at 8-2, would they be in the conversation losing two  tight games to HC and TU? The SAA has won head to head battles with some of the ASC team in early OOC play. Would the SA send two and ASC only send one?  Would an IC 8-2 team leap frog all of them? Does Bethel get their QB back and win their regular season showdown against STJ but then lose the conf championship to STJ and sneak back in? Would an 8-2 Wheaton team be deserving if they play another close one vs NCC.

The WIAC teams will beat up on each other as will the ASC and SAA. I think there's 5-6 Wisconsin teams receiving votes right now  :o . In the ASC you have to two juggernauts that will battle it out. Could Sul Ross play spoiler? The played a tight game against D2 powerhouse A&M kingsville last week. They had a lot of talented players on a young team vs Trinity in week one. Then The SAA will have Berry,BSC, Centre, Trinity battling each other. Would an 8-2 SAA runner up that lost to the presumed WIAC and SAA favorite beat out a possible 8-2 ASC team?

Biggest question.... do two or more 8-2 teams make it this season due to OCC play or will regional ranking over rule them.

Quote from: Cowboy2 on September 12, 2022, 01:55:48 PM
Biggest question.... do two or more 8-2 teams make it this season due to OCC play or will regional ranking over rule them.

The regional rankings determine the order in which teams may be considered for selection- so yes, the regional rankings rule.  But win% is just one criteria.  SOS and results vs. RRO are going to play (maybe presumptive of me...should play is maybe a better way to say this) a role in how the rankings shake out.

Currently, I think UMHB and UWW would be favored to run the table (yes, I know the WIAC is an absolute meat grinder).  8-2 for either of them would be a surprise.  Muhlenberg and Wheaton are more likely to see 8-2 and be in this scenario.  I don't think Muhlenberg's 49 point loss is helpful if we get into a scenario where Muhlenberg and Wheaton (OT loss to Trinity, particularly if Trinity can run the table and be #1 in Region 3) are in play for one of the last spots.  That's advantage Wheaton all day - in my view.  I'm not on the committee. 

+1! Wally.

It sure is fun having Pool C talk after the 2nd week of the season.
it builds some drama, as if we needed more drama.

;D

This really emphasizes that you need to win your league, and barring that, play top drawer competition even if you get two losses. I'd have to say that they'd select an 8-2 team with a great non-conference schedule than a 9-1 team that played their region's weaker teams.

But the committee can and will surprise us.

So, I feel like maybe I'm misstated my point here.

I'm not being critical of UMHB or UWW or SJU.

My original point was actually in favor of not penalizing those power island teams for what they've done. That's why I was wondering if we're going too far doing what the first posts in this tread were doing — immediately dismissing them from Pool C contention because they have two losses.

As for my comment on it not being part of the D3 ethos, I'm not sitting there shaming them for it and apologize if that's how it came across. It is simply acknowledging that because they are doing something that's, by design, not the norm in D3, we need to be careful what division-wide trends we let the results of those games influence.


I was in no way trying to imply those schools were doing anything wrong, and apologize if that was unclear

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2022, 12:12:36 PM

If the power programs consolidating their positions by playing each other in the OOC portion of they year is troubling to the other 98% of the division, there's an easy solution.  If you're one of first, say 50 schools, that Jesse Burleson or Kevin Bullis or Larry Harmon calls to play a game, say yes.

I think this is a pretty silly response Wally. My issue is not that these games shouldn't be getting played because it's not fair because it makes those good teams get even better.

My issue is that, aside from simply not wanting to lose by 50 points (which yes, is a big part of it), maybe D3 teams in the NE/East don't want to go to Texas, or Wisconsin, or Oregon because most teams don't have the resources to ship an entire football team across the country for one OOC game.

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 01:51:40 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2022, 12:12:36 PM

If the power programs consolidating their positions by playing each other in the OOC portion of they year is troubling to the other 98% of the division, there's an easy solution.  If you're one of first, say 50 schools, that Jesse Burleson or Kevin Bullis or Larry Harmon calls to play a game, say yes.

I think this is a pretty silly response Wally. My issue is not that these games shouldn't be getting played because it's not fair because it makes those good teams get even better.

My issue is that, aside from simply not wanting to lose by 50 points (which yes, is a big part of it), maybe D3 teams in the NE/East don't want to go to Texas, or Wisconsin, or Oregon because most teams don't have the resources to ship an entire football team across the country for one OOC game.

I don't think UMHB or HSU flying up to Wisconsin for games is their top choice either, but hey, lemons to lemonade and whatnot. 

I also don't think it's incumbent on teams in R1 and R2 to go to Texas.  That doesn't make a ton of sense when there are 60 other games those teams can make within 200 miles of home base.  But nobody going to Texas or Wisconsin to play has kind of forced those teams into their own pen to play in.  And if they don't all knock each other out of the tournament, they may well end up enhancing each other's chances of being selected. 

+1! IC798891

The commenters on this board have been discussing these matters for 2 decades. I enjoy the depth of consideration that we read here. I do not think that anyone has denigrated a poster. Rather, I believe that we are "Working the Problem", to borrow the line out of the movie, Apollo 13.

I think that we are focusing on the issues that the Selection Committee for this sport and the Competition Committees across D3 need to keep in mind.

I love those post-season games when a Region 1 or 2 team matches up with a team from the other Regions in the playoffs. I would hope that the Selection Comte on November 12th, gets the best 5 Pool C teams for the playoffs.

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 14, 2022, 02:19:52 PM

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 01:51:40 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2022, 12:12:36 PM

If the power programs consolidating their positions by playing each other in the OOC portion of they year is troubling to the other 98% of the division, there's an easy solution.  If you're one of first, say 50 schools, that Jesse Burleson or Kevin Bullis or Larry Harmon calls to play a game, say yes.

I think this is a pretty silly response Wally. My issue is not that these games shouldn't be getting played because it's not fair because it makes those good teams get even better.

My issue is that, aside from simply not wanting to lose by 50 points (which yes, is a big part of it), maybe D3 teams in the NE/East don't want to go to Texas, or Wisconsin, or Oregon because most teams don't have the resources to ship an entire football team across the country for one OOC game.

I don't think UMHB or HSU flying up to Wisconsin for games is their top choice either, but hey, lemons to lemonade and whatnot. 

Right, but they can. They're willing/able to spend the money to do that.

I don't think most D3 schools are in the same boat. I think we just have to be willing to state that most teams aren't going to go to these lengths to get 10 games. I'm not sure it's a "problem" either way, again, until we try to apply a division-wide system (Pool C) across the two worlds

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 03:02:45 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 14, 2022, 02:19:52 PM

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 01:51:40 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2022, 12:12:36 PM

If the power programs consolidating their positions by playing each other in the OOC portion of they year is troubling to the other 98% of the division, there's an easy solution.  If you're one of first, say 50 schools, that Jesse Burleson or Kevin Bullis or Larry Harmon calls to play a game, say yes.

I think this is a pretty silly response Wally. My issue is not that these games shouldn't be getting played because it's not fair because it makes those good teams get even better.

My issue is that, aside from simply not wanting to lose by 50 points (which yes, is a big part of it), maybe D3 teams in the NE/East don't want to go to Texas, or Wisconsin, or Oregon because most teams don't have the resources to ship an entire football team across the country for one OOC game.

I don't think UMHB or HSU flying up to Wisconsin for games is their top choice either, but hey, lemons to lemonade and whatnot. 

Right, but they can. They're willing/able to spend the money to do that.

I don't think most D3 schools are in the same boat. I think we just have to be willing to state that most teams aren't going to go to these lengths to get 10 games. I'm not sure it's a "problem" either way, again, until we try to apply a division-wide system (Pool C) across the two worlds

I am not certain that HSU is as willing and able as you might think. They haven't had a non conference game outside the state of Texas since 2013, playing a mixture of non ASC but based in Texas D3 teams and NAIA teams. I truly think last year was the straw that broke the camels back, where one of the big reasons they did not get in the playoffs was they played a non D3 team as there only non conference game. They seemed perfectly happy to not overly strain themselves to get a 10th game but in the end I believe they felt if they wanted a better shot they had to do it.

Quote from: crufootball on September 14, 2022, 04:36:18 PM

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 03:02:45 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 14, 2022, 02:19:52 PM

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 01:51:40 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2022, 12:12:36 PM

If the power programs consolidating their positions by playing each other in the OOC portion of they year is troubling to the other 98% of the division, there's an easy solution.  If you're one of first, say 50 schools, that Jesse Burleson or Kevin Bullis or Larry Harmon calls to play a game, say yes.

I think this is a pretty silly response Wally. My issue is not that these games shouldn't be getting played because it's not fair because it makes those good teams get even better.

My issue is that, aside from simply not wanting to lose by 50 points (which yes, is a big part of it), maybe D3 teams in the NE/East don't want to go to Texas, or Wisconsin, or Oregon because most teams don't have the resources to ship an entire football team across the country for one OOC game.

I don't think UMHB or HSU flying up to Wisconsin for games is their top choice either, but hey, lemons to lemonade and whatnot. 

Right, but they can. They're willing/able to spend the money to do that.

I don't think most D3 schools are in the same boat. I think we just have to be willing to state that most teams aren't going to go to these lengths to get 10 games. I'm not sure it's a "problem" either way, again, until we try to apply a division-wide system (Pool C) across the two worlds

I am not certain that HSU is as willing and able as you might think. They haven't had a non conference game outside the state of Texas since 2013, playing a mixture of non ASC but based in Texas D3 teams and NAIA teams. I truly think last year was the straw that broke the camels back, where one of the big reasons they did not get in the playoffs was they played a non D3 team as there only non conference game. They seemed perfectly happy to not overly strain themselves to get a 10th game but in the end I believe they felt if they wanted a better shot they had to do it.

Yeah, it wasn't that long ago they were having severe money problems and had to cut a bunch of programs.  They're also being sued by McMurry for over a million dollars right now lol.

Quote from: Etchglow on September 14, 2022, 04:52:58 PM

Quote from: crufootball on September 14, 2022, 04:36:18 PM

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 03:02:45 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 14, 2022, 02:19:52 PM

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 01:51:40 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2022, 12:12:36 PM

If the power programs consolidating their positions by playing each other in the OOC portion of they year is troubling to the other 98% of the division, there's an easy solution.  If you're one of first, say 50 schools, that Jesse Burleson or Kevin Bullis or Larry Harmon calls to play a game, say yes.

I think this is a pretty silly response Wally. My issue is not that these games shouldn't be getting played because it's not fair because it makes those good teams get even better.

My issue is that, aside from simply not wanting to lose by 50 points (which yes, is a big part of it), maybe D3 teams in the NE/East don't want to go to Texas, or Wisconsin, or Oregon because most teams don't have the resources to ship an entire football team across the country for one OOC game.

I don't think UMHB or HSU flying up to Wisconsin for games is their top choice either, but hey, lemons to lemonade and whatnot. 

Right, but they can. They're willing/able to spend the money to do that.

I don't think most D3 schools are in the same boat. I think we just have to be willing to state that most teams aren't going to go to these lengths to get 10 games. I'm not sure it's a "problem" either way, again, until we try to apply a division-wide system (Pool C) across the two worlds

I am not certain that HSU is as willing and able as you might think. They haven't had a non conference game outside the state of Texas since 2013, playing a mixture of non ASC but based in Texas D3 teams and NAIA teams. I truly think last year was the straw that broke the camels back, where one of the big reasons they did not get in the playoffs was they played a non D3 team as there only non conference game. They seemed perfectly happy to not overly strain themselves to get a 10th game but in the end I believe they felt if they wanted a better shot they had to do it.

Yeah, it wasn't that long ago they were having severe money problems and had to cut a bunch of programs.  They're also being sued by McMurry for over a million dollars right now lol.

What are they being sued for??? 

And after BSC lost a tight one to Huntingdon this past weekend, I'm happy to still be getting mentioned.  Of course, at this point, we all still control our own destiny. 

The MIAA is 13-1 through the first two weeks... if they continue that performance through the next two weeks, I gotta think they'll have a good shot at their first-ever Pool C bid.

Quote from: BSCpanthers on September 14, 2022, 05:17:20 PM

Quote from: Etchglow on September 14, 2022, 04:52:58 PM

Quote from: crufootball on September 14, 2022, 04:36:18 PM

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 03:02:45 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 14, 2022, 02:19:52 PM

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 01:51:40 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2022, 12:12:36 PM

If the power programs consolidating their positions by playing each other in the OOC portion of they year is troubling to the other 98% of the division, there's an easy solution.  If you're one of first, say 50 schools, that Jesse Burleson or Kevin Bullis or Larry Harmon calls to play a game, say yes.

I think this is a pretty silly response Wally. My issue is not that these games shouldn't be getting played because it's not fair because it makes those good teams get even better.

My issue is that, aside from simply not wanting to lose by 50 points (which yes, is a big part of it), maybe D3 teams in the NE/East don't want to go to Texas, or Wisconsin, or Oregon because most teams don't have the resources to ship an entire football team across the country for one OOC game.

I don't think UMHB or HSU flying up to Wisconsin for games is their top choice either, but hey, lemons to lemonade and whatnot. 

Right, but they can. They're willing/able to spend the money to do that.

I don't think most D3 schools are in the same boat. I think we just have to be willing to state that most teams aren't going to go to these lengths to get 10 games. I'm not sure it's a "problem" either way, again, until we try to apply a division-wide system (Pool C) across the two worlds

I am not certain that HSU is as willing and able as you might think. They haven't had a non conference game outside the state of Texas since 2013, playing a mixture of non ASC but based in Texas D3 teams and NAIA teams. I truly think last year was the straw that broke the camels back, where one of the big reasons they did not get in the playoffs was they played a non D3 team as there only non conference game. They seemed perfectly happy to not overly strain themselves to get a 10th game but in the end I believe they felt if they wanted a better shot they had to do it.

Yeah, it wasn't that long ago they were having severe money problems and had to cut a bunch of programs.  They're also being sued by McMurry for over a million dollars right now lol.

What are they being sued for??? 

And after BSC lost a tight one to Huntingdon this past weekend, I'm happy to still be getting mentioned.  Of course, at this point, we all still control our own destiny.

Something about a shared nursing school.

Quote from: Etchglow on September 14, 2022, 05:27:13 PM

Quote from: BSCpanthers on September 14, 2022, 05:17:20 PM

Quote from: Etchglow on September 14, 2022, 04:52:58 PM

Quote from: crufootball on September 14, 2022, 04:36:18 PM

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 03:02:45 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 14, 2022, 02:19:52 PM

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 01:51:40 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2022, 12:12:36 PM

If the power programs consolidating their positions by playing each other in the OOC portion of they year is troubling to the other 98% of the division, there's an easy solution.  If you're one of first, say 50 schools, that Jesse Burleson or Kevin Bullis or Larry Harmon calls to play a game, say yes.

I think this is a pretty silly response Wally. My issue is not that these games shouldn't be getting played because it's not fair because it makes those good teams get even better.

My issue is that, aside from simply not wanting to lose by 50 points (which yes, is a big part of it), maybe D3 teams in the NE/East don't want to go to Texas, or Wisconsin, or Oregon because most teams don't have the resources to ship an entire football team across the country for one OOC game.

I don't think UMHB or HSU flying up to Wisconsin for games is their top choice either, but hey, lemons to lemonade and whatnot. 

Right, but they can. They're willing/able to spend the money to do that.

I don't think most D3 schools are in the same boat. I think we just have to be willing to state that most teams aren't going to go to these lengths to get 10 games. I'm not sure it's a "problem" either way, again, until we try to apply a division-wide system (Pool C) across the two worlds

I am not certain that HSU is as willing and able as you might think. They haven't had a non conference game outside the state of Texas since 2013, playing a mixture of non ASC but based in Texas D3 teams and NAIA teams. I truly think last year was the straw that broke the camels back, where one of the big reasons they did not get in the playoffs was they played a non D3 team as there only non conference game. They seemed perfectly happy to not overly strain themselves to get a 10th game but in the end I believe they felt if they wanted a better shot they had to do it.

Yeah, it wasn't that long ago they were having severe money problems and had to cut a bunch of programs.  They're also being sued by McMurry for over a million dollars right now lol.

What are they being sued for??? 

And after BSC lost a tight one to Huntingdon this past weekend, I'm happy to still be getting mentioned.  Of course, at this point, we all still control our own destiny.

Something about a shared nursing school.

Yes, years ago Abilene Christian, McMurry and HSU all shared a nursing program, ACU left about 10 years ago and it seems like now McMurry is not happy with the way HSU is trying to get out of the agreement and form their own program.

https://www.bigcountryhomepage.com/news/education/mcmurry-files-lawsuit-against-hardin-simmons-seeking-more-than-1-million/

Quote from: BSCpanthers on September 14, 2022, 05:17:20 PM
And after BSC lost a tight one to Huntingdon this past weekend, I'm happy to still be getting mentioned.  Of course, at this point, we all still control our own destiny.

Huntingdon made their case to host a 1st round game with the win over BSC, if BSC finishes strong (8-2 or better). Linfield is my favorite to go undefeated and host the SCAIC Champ in the first round.
The win over Huntingdon, as a Pool A, and possibly Redlands as the SCIAC Pool A, helps Linfield toward the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

It is tough out here west of the 87th longitude (Chicagoland). I make the case that we have 10-11 of the top 12-14 teams in D3 out here.

CCIW - NCC & Wheaton
WIAC - UWW and WIAC #2 and sometimes #3
MIAC - SJU and usually Bethel
SAA - Coach Urban has his Trinity program running full speed just like 10-15 years ago
ASC - UMHB & HSU
NWC - Linfield

About the Region 1 and 2 teams - a lot of them have limited travel budgets and can't realistically travel much past their region. The state schools in New England, for one, have limited travel. They're not going to go the UMHB or Whitewater, no matter if they can compete with them.

Many other teams have a travel issue as well. The teams of the South and West have decided that they will travel to play football. They certainly don't have to - Colorado College backed out a few years ago. 

Quote from: crufootball on September 14, 2022, 05:35:49 PM

Quote from: Etchglow on September 14, 2022, 05:27:13 PM

Quote from: BSCpanthers on September 14, 2022, 05:17:20 PM

Quote from: Etchglow on September 14, 2022, 04:52:58 PM

Quote from: crufootball on September 14, 2022, 04:36:18 PM

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 03:02:45 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 14, 2022, 02:19:52 PM

Quote from: IC798891 on September 14, 2022, 01:51:40 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2022, 12:12:36 PM

If the power programs consolidating their positions by playing each other in the OOC portion of they year is troubling to the other 98% of the division, there's an easy solution.  If you're one of first, say 50 schools, that Jesse Burleson or Kevin Bullis or Larry Harmon calls to play a game, say yes.

I think this is a pretty silly response Wally. My issue is not that these games shouldn't be getting played because it's not fair because it makes those good teams get even better.

My issue is that, aside from simply not wanting to lose by 50 points (which yes, is a big part of it), maybe D3 teams in the NE/East don't want to go to Texas, or Wisconsin, or Oregon because most teams don't have the resources to ship an entire football team across the country for one OOC game.

I don't think UMHB or HSU flying up to Wisconsin for games is their top choice either, but hey, lemons to lemonade and whatnot. 

Right, but they can. They're willing/able to spend the money to do that.

I don't think most D3 schools are in the same boat. I think we just have to be willing to state that most teams aren't going to go to these lengths to get 10 games. I'm not sure it's a "problem" either way, again, until we try to apply a division-wide system (Pool C) across the two worlds

I am not certain that HSU is as willing and able as you might think. They haven't had a non conference game outside the state of Texas since 2013, playing a mixture of non ASC but based in Texas D3 teams and NAIA teams. I truly think last year was the straw that broke the camels back, where one of the big reasons they did not get in the playoffs was they played a non D3 team as there only non conference game. They seemed perfectly happy to not overly strain themselves to get a 10th game but in the end I believe they felt if they wanted a better shot they had to do it.

Yeah, it wasn't that long ago they were having severe money problems and had to cut a bunch of programs.  They're also being sued by McMurry for over a million dollars right now lol.

What are they being sued for??? 

And after BSC lost a tight one to Huntingdon this past weekend, I'm happy to still be getting mentioned.  Of course, at this point, we all still control our own destiny.

Something about a shared nursing school.

Yes, years ago Abilene Christian, McMurry and HSU all shared a nursing program, ACU left about 10 years ago and it seems like now McMurry is not happy with the way HSU is trying to get out of the agreement and form their own program.

https://www.bigcountryhomepage.com/news/education/mcmurry-files-lawsuit-against-hardin-simmons-seeking-more-than-1-million/

After talking with someone on the McM team doing the digging about the details, I'll just say that HSU tried to pull some shady stuff and got called on it, and McM has receipts. Ralph do you have any insight you can share?

This is the extent of my knowledge.

https://www.bigcountryhomepage.com/news/education/mcmurry-files-lawsuit-against-hardin-simmons-seeking-more-than-1-million/

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 18, 2022, 10:22:55 PM
This is the extent of my knowledge.

https://www.bigcountryhomepage.com/news/education/mcmurry-files-lawsuit-against-hardin-simmons-seeking-more-than-1-million/

Thanks Ralph. I could possibly offer more info, but apparently not without editorializing based on my feelings about current HSU admiistration. I do not want to do that; so,I will refrain

Quote from: Toby Taff on September 19, 2022, 05:47:30 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 18, 2022, 10:22:55 PM
This is the extent of my knowledge.

https://www.bigcountryhomepage.com/news/education/mcmurry-files-lawsuit-against-hardin-simmons-seeking-more-than-1-million/

Thanks Ralph. I could possibly offer more info, but apparently not without editorializing based on my feelings about current HSU admiistration. I do not want to do that; so,I will refrain

Ahhhh where is the fun in that Toby haha with all seriousness is it Saturday yet?

Quote from: crufootball on September 19, 2022, 08:53:23 PM

Quote from: Toby Taff on September 19, 2022, 05:47:30 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 18, 2022, 10:22:55 PM
This is the extent of my knowledge.

https://www.bigcountryhomepage.com/news/education/mcmurry-files-lawsuit-against-hardin-simmons-seeking-more-than-1-million/

Thanks Ralph. I could possibly offer more info, but apparently not without editorializing based on my feelings about current HSU admiistration. I do not want to do that; so,I will refrain

Ahhhh where is the fun in that Toby haha with all seriousness is it Saturday yet?

I will gladly editorialize in person, standing in front of my name on the HSU alumni wall wearing Cru gear on Saturday if you want to hear the deets. And, sadly, no. It isn't saturday I have 4 more days of middle schoolers before we get there.

Quote from: Toby Taff on September 20, 2022, 02:04:59 PM

Quote from: crufootball on September 19, 2022, 08:53:23 PM

Quote from: Toby Taff on September 19, 2022, 05:47:30 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 18, 2022, 10:22:55 PM
This is the extent of my knowledge.

https://www.bigcountryhomepage.com/news/education/mcmurry-files-lawsuit-against-hardin-simmons-seeking-more-than-1-million/

Thanks Ralph. I could possibly offer more info, but apparently not without editorializing based on my feelings about current HSU admiistration. I do not want to do that; so,I will refrain

Ahhhh where is the fun in that Toby haha with all seriousness is it Saturday yet?

I will gladly editorialize in person, standing in front of my name on the HSU alumni wall wearing Cru gear on Saturday if you want to hear the deets. And, sadly, no. It isn't saturday I have 4 more days of middle schoolers before we get there.

I have two degrees from HSU and worked at the University under the current Administration. Will be at the game Saturday and would love to hear your opinions.

Quote from: HSUCowboy2015 on September 20, 2022, 02:10:25 PM

Quote from: Toby Taff on September 20, 2022, 02:04:59 PM

Quote from: crufootball on September 19, 2022, 08:53:23 PM

Quote from: Toby Taff on September 19, 2022, 05:47:30 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 18, 2022, 10:22:55 PM
This is the extent of my knowledge.

https://www.bigcountryhomepage.com/news/education/mcmurry-files-lawsuit-against-hardin-simmons-seeking-more-than-1-million/

Thanks Ralph. I could possibly offer more info, but apparently not without editorializing based on my feelings about current HSU admiistration. I do not want to do that; so,I will refrain

Ahhhh where is the fun in that Toby haha with all seriousness is it Saturday yet?

I will gladly editorialize in person, standing in front of my name on the HSU alumni wall wearing Cru gear on Saturday if you want to hear the deets. And, sadly, no. It isn't saturday I have 4 more days of middle schoolers before we get there.

I have two degrees from HSU and worked at the University under the current Administration. Will be at the game Saturday and would love to hear your opinions.

Are you still in Abilene? I'll happily meet you for coffee and have that conversation

Bethel 28, SJU 24.

Johnnies enter Pool C.

Quote from: Cowboy2 on September 12, 2022, 01:55:48 PM
Does Bethel get their QB back and win their regular season showdown against STJ but then lose the conf championship to STJ and sneak back in?

Biggest question.... do two or more 8-2 teams make it this season

Good game and their QB is good!

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 24, 2022, 05:03:28 PM
Bethel 28, SJU 24.

Johnnies enter Pool C.

Utica 31 (E8)  #25 Union 24 (LL)

Union goes to Pool C.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 24, 2022, 05:03:28 PM
Bethel 28, SJU 24.

Johnnies enter Pool C.

Not really- the MIAC has a conference championship game where, unless things get super weird, St. John's and Bethel are going to play again for the Pool A bid.  That game will be in Collegeville.  If they lose that one, then yes, they're in Pool C. 

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 24, 2022, 06:13:01 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 24, 2022, 05:03:28 PM
Bethel 28, SJU 24.

Johnnies enter Pool C.

Utica 31 (E8)  #25 Union 24 (LL)

Union goes to Pool C.

How does a non-conference loss put Union in pool C?

Quote from: wally_wabash on September 24, 2022, 06:31:17 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 24, 2022, 05:03:28 PM
Bethel 28, SJU 24.

Johnnies enter Pool C.

Not really- the MIAC has a conference championship game where, unless things get super weird, St. John's and Bethel are going to play again for the Pool A bid.  That game will be in Collegeville.  If they lose that one, then yes, they're in Pool C.

My bad!  My brain has not re-programmed for the MIAC Championship game.

However, that loser may get knocked out of Pool C this year.

As of today and without the championship game, I would have given Bethel the Pool A and SJU a Pool C bid.

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 24, 2022, 06:59:23 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 24, 2022, 06:13:01 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 24, 2022, 05:03:28 PM
Bethel 28, SJU 24.

Johnnies enter Pool C.

Utica 31 (E8)  #25 Union 24 (LL)

Union goes to Pool C.

How does a non-conference loss put Union in pool C?

Thanks Grizzly.

More accurately, I believe that they must win the LL (beat Ithaca) to get a bid, a Pool A.

UWW takes care of business and remains undefeated in the WIAC. UWO probably wins out and finishes with 2 losses (UWW and UWRF).

JHU holds off the Mules, 34-27.

Pool C exhales in relief.

Did it last year, here it is again. A nice visual representation of who could have any shot at Pool C.

Before asking "why is X listed as 2 loss when they only have 1 loss", it's because they must lose again to be in pool C. For example, Mary Hardin-Baylor already has 1 loss. If they finish with one loss they are in via pool A. Therefore they are listed as two loss pool C because if they end up in pool C they must have at least two losses.

This has no future predictions made, it's solely as things stand about pool C right now.
Just because a team is listed in red doesn't mean they can't win their conference and make the playoffs via Pool A.
Just because a team is in the 1 loss pool C category doesn't mean they have a realistic shot at pool C.

(https://i.imgur.com/wT1Fu3C.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/iu0y6Hf.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/CiaKxcY.png)

Two notable changes, per the D3 championships committee report (https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/committees/d3/champs/SEP2022D3CC_September1213Report.pdf):

1. No region will have more than seven teams ranked.

2. The flight threshold is back at 500 miles.

Respectfully, I read paragraph 5c to mean 600 miles for this calendar year.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 17, 2022, 03:08:03 PM
Respectfully, I read paragraph 5c to mean 600 miles for this calendar year.

I sort of read it the other way.  That is, if this is the 2022-2023 championship season, those always kind of throw me...  On the other hand they should probably learn to write more clearly and concisely lol.

Quote
Championship mileage radius. Last year, the committee increased the 500-mile radius for flights to 600 miles to mitigate the pandemic's impact on the airline industry (e.g., limited flights and increased cancellations).  It discussed if the current 600-mile radius for flights should be retained for the 2022-23 championships but agreed to revert back to the 500-mile radius.

I thought this part was pretty clear - "but agreed to revert back to the 500-mile radius." Looks like it's 500 miles this year.

Thanks.

SJU vs GAC this Saturday. Winner has pole position for representing the "Northwoods Division" in the MIAC Championship Game for the Pool A bid. Carleton also unbeaten, but hasn't played Concordia, SJU, or GAC yet (they don't play Bethel since they are protected from playing top cross division teams this scheduling go around). Bethel manhandled Concordia to secure first in their division. All signs point to the GAC vs. SJU tilt being a play in for the MIAC Championship Game.

Bethel's loss to UWP (without Roste at QB) means they need to beat SJU again (at SJU) to secure Pool A. They'd be in a precarious spot with 2 losses for Pool C. A two loss SJU, with both losses to Bethel would be strangely similar to the Bethel team that got in via Pool C last year. The caveat being SJU would have two good/great wins against UWRF and UWW on their resume as well.

Quote from: hazzben on October 21, 2022, 01:52:41 PM
SJU vs GAC this Saturday. Winner has pole position for representing the "Northwoods Division" in the MIAC Championship Game for the Pool A bid. Carleton also unbeaten, but hasn't played Concordia, SJU, or GAC yet (they don't play Bethel since they are protected from playing top cross division teams this scheduling go around). Bethel manhandled Concordia to secure first in their division. All signs point to the GAC vs. SJU tilt being a play in for the MIAC Championship Game.

Bethel's loss to UWP (without Roste at QB) means they need to beat SJU again (at SJU) to secure Pool A. They'd be in a precarious spot with 2 losses for Pool C. A two loss SJU, with both losses to Bethel would be strangely similar to the Bethel team that got in via Pool C last year. The caveat being SJU would have two good/great wins against UWRF and UWW on their resume as well.

Going 2-2 against RR teams in football (as opposed to hoops or baseball) is an impressive "Records Against Regionally Ranked Teams", because those teams will be ranked very highly in the respective regions.

IMHO, a 2-loss SJU gets a Pool C bid. (Now all that has to happen is for UWRF to remain in the Regional Rankings...)

And in the WIAC-ky today, UW-Platteville 17, UW-Whitewater 13.
Nice win for HSU's Pool C chances.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 22, 2022, 04:51:55 PM
And in the WIAC-ky today, UW-Platteville 17, UW-Whitewater 13.
Nice win for HSU's Pool C chances.

Feel like they pretty much have to include HSU if Trinity/HSU/UMHB all win out. Even though D3 playoffs all comes down to money for the NCAA, I can't see them making UMHB/Trinity play each other again first round this year. Even less likely is the NCAA flying in TWO teams to play separate first round matchups against UMHB and Trinity, which is the way it should be. So, assuming the teams win out, HSU is all but guaranteed in as a Pool C for money reasons alone and gets a first-round matchup against Trinity. UMHB gets the benefit of the rule of not having first-round matchups include teams who played each other in the regular season [is that still a rule?] and a team other than HSU gets flown in for the first-round slaughter against UMHB.

Quote from: tigerguy on October 22, 2022, 05:15:09 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 22, 2022, 04:51:55 PM
And in the WIAC-ky today, UW-Platteville 17, UW-Whitewater 13.
Nice win for HSU's Pool C chances.

Feel like they pretty much have to include HSU if Trinity/HSU/UMHB all win out. Even though D3 playoffs all comes down to money for the NCAA, I can't see them making UMHB/Trinity play each other again first round this year. Even less likely is the NCAA flying in TWO teams to play separate first round matchups against UMHB and Trinity, which is the way it should be. So, assuming the teams win out, HSU is all but guaranteed in as a Pool C for money reasons alone and gets a first-round matchup against Trinity. UMHB gets the benefit of the rule of not having first-round matchups include teams who played each other in the regular season [is that still a rule?] and a team other than HSU gets flown in for the first-round slaughter against UMHB.

Money does not dictate who gets in and who doesn't.  Full stop. 

Stop perpetuating this nonsense. 

Quote from: tigerguy on October 22, 2022, 05:15:09 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 22, 2022, 04:51:55 PM
And in the WIAC-ky today, UW-Platteville 17, UW-Whitewater 13.
Nice win for HSU's Pool C chances.

Feel like they pretty much have to include HSU if Trinity/HSU/UMHB all win out. Even though D3 playoffs all comes down to money for the NCAA, I can't see them making UMHB/Trinity play each other again first round this year. Even less likely is the NCAA flying in TWO teams to play separate first round matchups against UMHB and Trinity, which is the way it should be. So, assuming the teams win out, HSU is all but guaranteed in as a Pool C for money reasons alone and gets a first-round matchup against Trinity. UMHB gets the benefit of the rule of not having first-round matchups include teams who played each other in the regular season [is that still a rule?] and a team other than HSU gets flown in for the first-round slaughter against UMHB.

If HSU and UWW are on the table at the same time, HSU has a win over a common opponent with UWW.

SJU took care of business today against GAC. That helps.
Cortland monkey-stomped Utica today 48-21, being up 41-7 early in the 3rd quarter.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 22, 2022, 06:07:41 PM

Quote from: tigerguy on October 22, 2022, 05:15:09 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 22, 2022, 04:51:55 PM
And in the WIAC-ky today, UW-Platteville 17, UW-Whitewater 13.
Nice win for HSU's Pool C chances.

Feel like they pretty much have to include HSU if Trinity/HSU/UMHB all win out. Even though D3 playoffs all comes down to money for the NCAA, I can't see them making UMHB/Trinity play each other again first round this year. Even less likely is the NCAA flying in TWO teams to play separate first round matchups against UMHB and Trinity, which is the way it should be. So, assuming the teams win out, HSU is all but guaranteed in as a Pool C for money reasons alone and gets a first-round matchup against Trinity. UMHB gets the benefit of the rule of not having first-round matchups include teams who played each other in the regular season [is that still a rule?] and a team other than HSU gets flown in for the first-round slaughter against UMHB.

If HSU and UWW are on the table at the same time, HSU has a win over a common opponent with UWW.

SJU took care of business today against GAC. That helps.
Cortland monkey-stomped Utica today 48-21, being up 41-7 early in the 3rd quarter.

Whitewater will also have better (more) results vs RRO and a far superior SOS.  These decisions could be extremely difficult. 

I believe the most likely scenario remains that UWW and UWL win out, UWW qualifies through Pool A, UWL qualifies through Pool C.  But, as we were reminded again today, you gotta play the games!

Quote from: wally_wabash on October 22, 2022, 06:11:16 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 22, 2022, 06:07:41 PM

Quote from: tigerguy on October 22, 2022, 05:15:09 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 22, 2022, 04:51:55 PM
And in the WIAC-ky today, UW-Platteville 17, UW-Whitewater 13.
Nice win for HSU's Pool C chances.

Feel like they pretty much have to include HSU if Trinity/HSU/UMHB all win out. Even though D3 playoffs all comes down to money for the NCAA, I can't see them making UMHB/Trinity play each other again first round this year. Even less likely is the NCAA flying in TWO teams to play separate first round matchups against UMHB and Trinity, which is the way it should be. So, assuming the teams win out, HSU is all but guaranteed in as a Pool C for money reasons alone and gets a first-round matchup against Trinity. UMHB gets the benefit of the rule of not having first-round matchups include teams who played each other in the regular season [is that still a rule?] and a team other than HSU gets flown in for the first-round slaughter against UMHB.

If HSU and UWW are on the table at the same time, HSU has a win over a common opponent with UWW.

SJU took care of business today against GAC. That helps.
Cortland monkey-stomped Utica today 48-21, being up 41-7 early in the 3rd quarter.

Whitewater will also have better (more) results vs RRO and a far superior SOS.  These decisions could be extremely difficult. 

I believe the most likely scenario remains that UWW and UWL win out, UWW qualifies through Pool A, UWL qualifies through Pool C.  But, as we were reminded again today, you gotta play the games!

UWW has a win over common opponent UMHB. (Sorry to forget about that one. I am not an alumus of Hardened Sinners University)

Quote from: wally_wabash on October 22, 2022, 06:05:55 PM

Quote from: tigerguy on October 22, 2022, 05:15:09 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 22, 2022, 04:51:55 PM
And in the WIAC-ky today, UW-Platteville 17, UW-Whitewater 13.
Nice win for HSU's Pool C chances.

Feel like they pretty much have to include HSU if Trinity/HSU/UMHB all win out. Even though D3 playoffs all comes down to money for the NCAA, I can't see them making UMHB/Trinity play each other again first round this year. Even less likely is the NCAA flying in TWO teams to play separate first round matchups against UMHB and Trinity, which is the way it should be. So, assuming the teams win out, HSU is all but guaranteed in as a Pool C for money reasons alone and gets a first-round matchup against Trinity. UMHB gets the benefit of the rule of not having first-round matchups include teams who played each other in the regular season [is that still a rule?] and a team other than HSU gets flown in for the first-round slaughter against UMHB.

Money does not dictate who gets in and who doesn't.  Full stop. 

Stop perpetuating this nonsense.

Respectfully, you won't be able to convince me that the NCAA takes money into consideration when placing teams in the bracket, but doesn't - even the slightest bit - in deciding what teams they give Pool C bids to.

Quote from: tigerguy on October 22, 2022, 07:07:44 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on October 22, 2022, 06:05:55 PM

Quote from: tigerguy on October 22, 2022, 05:15:09 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 22, 2022, 04:51:55 PM
And in the WIAC-ky today, UW-Platteville 17, UW-Whitewater 13.
Nice win for HSU's Pool C chances.

Feel like they pretty much have to include HSU if Trinity/HSU/UMHB all win out. Even though D3 playoffs all comes down to money for the NCAA, I can't see them making UMHB/Trinity play each other again first round this year. Even less likely is the NCAA flying in TWO teams to play separate first round matchups against UMHB and Trinity, which is the way it should be. So, assuming the teams win out, HSU is all but guaranteed in as a Pool C for money reasons alone and gets a first-round matchup against Trinity. UMHB gets the benefit of the rule of not having first-round matchups include teams who played each other in the regular season [is that still a rule?] and a team other than HSU gets flown in for the first-round slaughter against UMHB.

Money does not dictate who gets in and who doesn't.  Full stop. 

Stop perpetuating this nonsense.

Respectfully, you won't be able to convince me that the NCAA takes money into consideration when placing teams in the bracket, but doesn't - even the slightest bit - in deciding what teams they give Pool C bids to.

I'd listen to Wally, he knows more about the selection process than most of the committee members. When the process is open as it is now, and as known as it is now, it's hard to sneak a 'money' team in there over a team with superior SOS and W/L vs. RR opponents.

Don't disagree with any of this. I just take issue with the hardline position that travel money doesn't, or couldn't, play a factor at all in Pool C bids - especially in close cases. Humans are making these decisions.

Man, there are a lot of 2-loss teams that look OK for a "C" right now.

In Region 6: UW - LAX has a tough schedule in front of it - three opponents of quality and distinction. The UWRF - UWW game is an elimination game.

St. John's - Carleton is definitely an elimination game. If St. John's and Bethel face each other in the MIAC championship, I don't know if loser is out of the running. The WIAC knocking each other silly helps, and unless George Fox stuns everyone, the NWC won't have a viable C contender. CMS vs. P-P is an elimination game as well.

I think the top Region 5 slot is the winner of Wheaton vs. Wash U. A 2-loss Wheaton isn't out of it. If Monmouth beats Ripon, that could mean Ripon's in the C mix but they haven't played the tomato cans of the MWC yet and that'll hurt the SOS.

Region 4 may be all about the MIAA. A 2-loss John Carroll loses luster as W&J stumbles. Alma and Albion end the year playing the same teams, then each other. If Olivet or Adrian pip one of them the MIAA could be shut out too.

If Howard Payne doesn't shock the world, HSU will be in a familiar "C" position. A Bridgewater loss to W&L will eliminate them, I think. Bellhaven's SOS is miserable.

Region 2 could be fun: Utica seems to be in a great spot if they beat Morristown, who also have to play Brockport. A 2-loss Union is shaky, as is a two-loss Ithaca. I think someone mentioned the Cortaca jug could be an elimination game for Ithaca. JHU and Susquehanna loser has to feel decent - if Susquehanna can get past Muhlenberg. Salisbury - CNU is probably an elimination game.

I'd love to see a 9-1 Kings in the tourney. The SOS is decent now but will drop a bit the next two weeks. If Salve Regina beats Endicott, is Endicott a 1-loss C contender??

Contenders (in no order):

Bethel / St. Johns rematch loser
Wheaton / Wash U winner
UWW / UW-LAX / UW-RF depending on results upcoming (A 2-loss LAX is definitely in some sort of mix)
HSU
Alma / Albion loser
Utica
JHU / Susquehanna loser
King's
Ripon if they lose to Monmouth
Bridgewater if they beat W&L
John Carroll could sneak in if chaos ensues.


Those top 3 will all have 2-losses. But I bet at least 2 get in.

QuoteContenders (in no order):

Bethel / St. Johns rematch loser
Wheaton / Wash U winner
UWW / UW-LAX / UW-RF depending on results upcoming (A 2-loss LAX is definitely in some sort of mix)
HSU

---

Alma / Albion loser
Utica
JHU / Susquehanna loser
King's
Ripon if they lose to Monmouth
Bridgewater if they beat W&L
John Carroll could sneak in if chaos ensues.

I like your top 4. It is #5 that is a real problem for me.
I can see a 1-loss Carnegie-Mellon if they lose to arch-rival CWRU as #5.

I didn't think C-M would lose. You are right though. A one-loss C-M spells trouble for the bubble teams.

Quote from: tigerguy on October 22, 2022, 07:43:29 PM
Don't disagree with any of this. I just take issue with the hardline position that travel money doesn't, or couldn't, play a factor at all in Pool C bids - especially in close cases. Humans are making these decisions.

Here's something to help you:

The committee cares about getting the best teams in.
The NCAA front office cares about the money.

The committee is in charge of which teams get in.
The NCAA, unfortunately, has the right to re-do bracketing.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 24, 2022, 01:25:56 PM

Quote from: tigerguy on October 22, 2022, 07:43:29 PM
Don't disagree with any of this. I just take issue with the hardline position that travel money doesn't, or couldn't, play a factor at all in Pool C bids - especially in close cases. Humans are making these decisions.

Here's something to help you:

The committee cares about getting the best teams in.
The NCAA front office cares about the money.

The committee is in charge of which teams get in.
The NCAA, unfortunately, has the right to re-do bracketing.

Touche.

Hey Pat,

Is it still once regionally-ranked, you always count as an RRO?  or is it only the last few rankings and not the alphabetically list? I could have sworn that it was one way, but is now the other.  Thanks

Quote from: D3fanboy on October 24, 2022, 01:40:19 PM
Hey Pat,

Is it still once regionally-ranked, you always count as an RRO?  or is it only the last few rankings and not the alphabetically list? I could have sworn that it was one way, but is now the other.  Thanks

Once ranked, always ranked hasn't been a thing for a while now.  Teams that count as RROs at the time of selection are teams that are ranked during the week of Week 11 and the teams that are ranked after Week 11 concludes.

Yes, what Greg said. So at selection time, it's teams who are in the Selection Sunday ranking, and the ones who were in the post-Week 10 ranking that qualify as RRO.

thanks dudes, looks like those final RR #7 spots are going to be very valuable for some higher ranked squads

Quote from: D3fanboy on October 24, 2022, 03:20:24 PM
thanks dudes, looks like those final RR #7 spots are going to be very valuable for some higher ranked squads

Which is why, yet again, the whole RR setup is so ridiculously stupid. A win against the seventh best team in a region is valuable while a win against the eighth best means nothing outside of being a win. In region 4, for instance, a win against Denison is marginally and debatably better than a win against Wabash or Wittenberg. And losing to Denison is nowhere near the same as losing to Platteville, despite both currently projected to be sitting on their region's 7th RR spot. We have SOS already; RRs are just an arbitrary line in the sand that has the potential to make a big impact depending on where the line is drawn. I'd much rather the committee go to a best wins, worst losses approach. Especially in football, where they're only looking to fill the 5 spots and only 10 teams will ever get to the table. The committee should be able to dissect each team's resume without being given any arbitrary number like 1-1 or 0-2....

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 24, 2022, 03:00:56 PM
Yes, what Greg said. So at selection time, it's teams who are in the Selection Sunday ranking, and the ones who were in the post-Week 10 ranking that qualify as RRO.

What did you or Greg (or anybody) think of once ranked always ranked? With as few as rankings as we get I could see some value in it, of course I get it would be easy to manipulate as well.

Quote from: HOPEful on October 24, 2022, 03:53:09 PM

Quote from: D3fanboy on October 24, 2022, 03:20:24 PM
thanks dudes, looks like those final RR #7 spots are going to be very valuable for some higher ranked squads

Which is why, yet again, the whole RR setup is so ridiculously stupid. A win against the seventh best team in a region is valuable while a win against the eighth best means nothing outside of being a win. In region 4, for instance, a win against Denison is marginally and debatably better than a win against Wabash or Wittenberg. And losing to Denison is nowhere near the same as losing to Platteville, despite both currently projected to be sitting on their region's 7th RR spot. We have SOS already; RRs are just an arbitrary line in the sand that has the potential to make a big impact depending on where the line is drawn. I'd much rather the committee go to a best wins, worst losses approach. Especially in football, where they're only looking to fill the 5 spots and only 10 teams will ever get to the table. The committee should be able to dissect each team's resume without being given any arbitrary number like 1-1 or 0-2....

What system would you propose then?

I think it's pretty good for the most part before it becomes  participation trophies. I mean if a team wins their league they're in. Each team controls their own destiny. Now for the leagues that are a bit stronger than some of the others, those teams have higher SOS, which help the
Over a weaker conference. I assure you a 9-1 solid resume is discussed. Sometimes They may not be as good as an 8-2 resume and are left out. Bethel proved that last season over HSU. There are Only 5 spots and 200 teams or so to choose from. I mean I guess the NCAA could do away with the bye weeks and start playoffs a week earlier. Add 16 more teams to the field and double up on 32 team rounds one and two for 2 weeks. Top teams would get a bye. But then people would argue how to assess the top teams to receive 1st round byes. And then there would be 7-3 or 8-2 teams that still missed the playoffs. Where does it stop?

The system is flawed but it's probably the best system. I don't know how to fix it. It stinks when a good team isn't in the bracket, but by the way of how the ball bounces and a few inches here or there, the team that misses out misses out because they didn't win their league to begin with, which means the deserving team for that conference in X region is already in and should be.

Quote from: smedindy on October 22, 2022, 07:59:04 PM
Man, there are a lot of 2-loss teams that look OK for a "C" right now.

In Region 6: UW - LAX has a tough schedule in front of it - three opponents of quality and distinction. The UWRF - UWW game is an elimination game.

St. John's - Carleton is definitely an elimination game. If St. John's and Bethel face each other in the MIAC championship, I don't know if loser is out of the running. The WIAC knocking each other silly helps, and unless George Fox stuns everyone, the NWC won't have a viable C contender. CMS vs. P-P is an elimination game as well.

I think the top Region 5 slot is the winner of Wheaton vs. Wash U. A 2-loss Wheaton isn't out of it. If Monmouth beats Ripon, that could mean Ripon's in the C mix but they haven't played the tomato cans of the MWC yet and that'll hurt the SOS.

Region 4 may be all about the MIAA. A 2-loss John Carroll loses luster as W&J stumbles. Alma and Albion end the year playing the same teams, then each other. If Olivet or Adrian pip one of them the MIAA could be shut out too.

If Howard Payne doesn't shock the world, HSU will be in a familiar "C" position. A Bridgewater loss to W&L will eliminate them, I think. Bellhaven's SOS is miserable.

Region 2 could be fun: Utica seems to be in a great spot if they beat Morristown, who also have to play Brockport. A 2-loss Union is shaky, as is a two-loss Ithaca. I think someone mentioned the Cortaca jug could be an elimination game for Ithaca. JHU and Susquehanna loser has to feel decent - if Susquehanna can get past Muhlenberg. Salisbury - CNU is probably an elimination game.

I'd love to see a 9-1 Kings in the tourney. The SOS is decent now but will drop a bit the next two weeks. If Salve Regina beats Endicott, is Endicott a 1-loss C contender??

Contenders (in no order):

Bethel / St. Johns rematch loser
Wheaton / Wash U winner
UWW / UW-LAX / UW-RF depending on results upcoming (A 2-loss LAX is definitely in some sort of mix)
HSU
Alma / Albion loser
Utica
JHU / Susquehanna loser
King's
Ripon if they lose to Monmouth
Bridgewater if they beat W&L
John Carroll could sneak in if chaos ensues.


Those top 3 will all have 2-losses. But I bet at least 2 get in.

As someone who's team is skating on very thin ice and needs total chaos, I am pulling for what I call WIAC Doomsday! That involves:

Whitewater losing to River Falls to finish 7-3
River Falls losing to LaCrosse to finish 7-3
LaCrosse losing to Oshkosh and Platteville to finish 7-3

that leaves 7-3 Platteville, possibly the biggest wild card in the field in this scenario, as the WIAC champion. Will they beat the MIAC champ or get smoked by the ASC runner up? Who knows!

I realize this scenario leave 7-3 Oshkosh in play with a 7-2 record within the division, but this is probably the only real scenario where the WIAC would only get 1 team in.

Quote from: Cowboy2 on October 24, 2022, 04:52:41 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on October 24, 2022, 03:53:09 PM

Quote from: D3fanboy on October 24, 2022, 03:20:24 PM
thanks dudes, looks like those final RR #7 spots are going to be very valuable for some higher ranked squads

Which is why, yet again, the whole RR setup is so ridiculously stupid. A win against the seventh best team in a region is valuable while a win against the eighth best means nothing outside of being a win. In region 4, for instance, a win against Denison is marginally and debatably better than a win against Wabash or Wittenberg. And losing to Denison is nowhere near the same as losing to Platteville, despite both currently projected to be sitting on their region's 7th RR spot. We have SOS already; RRs are just an arbitrary line in the sand that has the potential to make a big impact depending on where the line is drawn. I'd much rather the committee go to a best wins, worst losses approach. Especially in football, where they're only looking to fill the 5 spots and only 10 teams will ever get to the table. The committee should be able to dissect each team's resume without being given any arbitrary number like 1-1 or 0-2....

What system would you propose then?

I like the system. Just not RROs. We already have SOS and a committee. Why are we telling them in advance which wins and losses matter more in advance. Can't that figure that out themselves by looking at each team at the table, their SOS, their best wins, their worst losses, etc.? Why are we drawing an arbitrary line in the sand between the seventh and eighth best teams in each region?

I think it helps a committee know who experts in another region think are the best teams. Sure the line is a bit arbitrary, but it's a helpful data point for Region 6 to know where Huntington and their result against Linfield stacks up. That's not a team they probably have a ton of familiarity with. That said, I think once ranked always ranked for RRO is helpful to alleviate the problem you describe.

Quote from: crufootball on October 24, 2022, 04:27:07 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 24, 2022, 03:00:56 PM
Yes, what Greg said. So at selection time, it's teams who are in the Selection Sunday ranking, and the ones who were in the post-Week 10 ranking that qualify as RRO.

What did you or Greg (or anybody) think of once ranked always ranked? With as few as rankings as we get I could see some value in it, of course I get it would be easy to manipulate as well.

I've learned that I tend to be in the minority on this, but I liked once ranked, always ranked for the exact reason you cite- it's extra information. 

Having seen how the ranking process has evolved over time to include some maybe (definitely?) icky business at the bottom of the rankings, I think I'm ok with how it is now. 

I'll also acknowledge HOPEful's pain point on RROs as a kind of double counting of SOS.  There's some truth to that. 

We do go over this every year- it's not a perfect process.  This selection process is one that has to be robust enough to be good enough to use across all of D-III's team championships.  If we were goign to be allowed to start to update the process, I don't think I'd start with ORAR or even the number of teams being ranked, or number of rankings.  I'd probably start with a better SOS metric. 

Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2022, 06:28:35 PM
I'll also acknowledge HOPEful's pain point on RROs as a kind of double counting of SOS.  There's some truth to that. 

That's all I'm saying. It's an arbitrary double counting of SOS.

If you're going to do it, do the quadrant thing like D1 does for basketball. That way, even though you're still drawing lines at 25%, 50%, and 75% when the difference between the 25% and 26% is minimal, you're at least acknowledging that Q2 wins/losses are better than the undefeated conference champion who never played any school better than a Q3. You're also getting a broader picture of how a certain team's record and SOS are laid out and it forces you to take into account best wins and worst losses.

Quote from: HOPEful on October 25, 2022, 08:09:24 AM

Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2022, 06:28:35 PM
I'll also acknowledge HOPEful's pain point on RROs as a kind of double counting of SOS.  There's some truth to that. 

That's all I'm saying. It's an arbitrary double counting of SOS.

I don't think it's that at all.

SOS cares not (or little) about conference strength and weaknesses. The people who come up with RRs do.

Quote from: IC798891 on October 25, 2022, 05:31:05 PM
I don't think it's that at all.

SOS cares not (or little) about conference strength and weaknesses. The people who come up with RRs do.

I'm confused by this response. SOS is literally an algorithm to quantifiably rate the strength (or weakness) of a team's schedule. As Wally pointed out, you can certainly ask for the SOS metrics to be improved upon... but we disagree fundamentally on how to rank teams if you think a bunch of humans in a room, inherent with bias, are better at reassessing a team's strength of schedule.

I like the system. I think a committee is necessary to then take that data and debate/discuss which teams are most deserving. There are nuances that a computer alone shouldn't be solely responsible for working out. (I'm remembering the BCS and universal hatred for solely using computer rankings) But a committee then ranking those teams and creating a new metric (RRs) and then assessing teams solely on their performances against those teams and no one else, is an arbitrary and perverted double counting of SOS. In football, when each team at the table will have 1-3 losses, how does a RR of (2-2) better equip the committee than simply discussing the team's losses and best wins? Despite being from Michigan, I don't need a (1-1) metric next to Hardin Simmons to direct me to their 41-0 win at Platteville or their 50-20 home loss to MHB. And when RRs are shown on a list, all you see is Hardin Simmons (1-1) or Kings (1-1), as though those two records are equal. Never mind that Kings' win was against Stevenson and loss to Delaware Valley. Not to mention that the rest of the ASC teams not in the region 3 rankings are significantly better than the rest of the MAC teams not on region 1. No mention that (0-7) Albright took Kings to OT. Or that a 3-4 Lycoming team had the ball down 28-23 with a chance to win the game against them.

A national committee shouldn't need RRs to tell them which games were most meaningful. And I would strongly argue that using them doesn't aid the process but degrades it.

Hopeful you make good common sense arguments. I'm not going to act like I know why the committees do or don't do something.  I would say maybe it's more so to further emphasize why a team is regionally where they are on placement.

10-0 vs 10-0 doesn't show much. Yes you can look at SOS but does it really reflect how good a team is if it's a tenth or hundredth difference if they're in a weaker conference that has a down year?  When you factor in who a team beat or not, by not have the RR you can get into historical bias. Not knocking UWPs win or UWW, but if UWW loses again will they be in the  regional rankings? So for example would that loss UMHB had to UWW look as good? In my example, yes UWW is a historically amazing program, but if they're not in the regional rankings, with another unforeseen loss, you can't factor in who a team played well based on saying," hey so and so beat them or played close against them or them." You know?

IMHO it helps the regional committees ensure they get their teams right as opposed to letting the national committee just pencil whip a MU UWW etc in because they feel they would do the best. I think it makes sure they fill out the remaining spots of the bracket on teams that need state their case. In the end, if a team wins their league, they get the AQ...

Quote from: Cowboy2 on October 26, 2022, 10:33:08 AM
Hopeful you make good common sense arguments. I'm not going to act like I know why the committees do or don't do something.  I would say maybe it's more so to further emphasize why a team is regionally where they are on placement.

10-0 vs 10-0 doesn't show much. Yes you can look at SOS but does it really reflect how good a team is if it's a tenth or hundredth difference if they're in a weaker conference that has a down year?  When you factor in who a team beat or not, by not have the RR you can get into historical bias. Not knocking UWPs win or UWW, but if UWW loses again will they be in the  regional rankings? So for example would that loss UMHB had to UWW look as good? In my example, yes UWW is a historically amazing program, but if they're not in the regional rankings, with another unforeseen loss, you can't factor in who a team played well based on saying," hey so and so beat them or played close against them or them." You know?

IMHO it helps the regional committees ensure they get their teams right as opposed to letting the national committee just pencil whip a MU UWW etc in because they feel they would do the best. I think it makes sure they fill out the remaining spots of the bracket on teams that need state their case. In the end, if a team wins their league, they get the AQ...

They have done this on occasions, when all the data didn't makes sense, but the "eye test" was the most common sense way to go.

Also, I do agree that historical biases do play apart, but with so little crossover data and less information as our Div 1 FBS counterparts, it's something that is utilized. In some instances data may indicate that one team is still better than a team that another team loss to, that's when I have the issue, considering records are fairly similar and one team just didn't have a bad day or were missing key players. I'm sure the Committee uses the data it has as a starting point and then when it is necessary use "Eye Test/Historical Data/Common Sense" in less frequent occasions, for example Mount Union in 2016, that team resume is eerily similar to this year's team, but that 2016 team went on the road for three straight weeks, beat the best of R2 and then went toe to toe with the UMHB at UMHB.

Logan Hansen has an adjusted SOS metric that seems to more closely match the decisions that the committees actually make when it comes to ranking teams with the same record.

Quote from: Cowboy2 on October 26, 2022, 10:33:08 AM
10-0 vs 10-0 doesn't show much. Yes you can look at SOS but does it really reflect how good a team is if it's a tenth or hundredth difference if they're in a weaker conference that has a down year? 

I will agree that SOS is less valuable when comparing unbeaten teams. And I would be keener on using RRs when comparing teams without losses. But the only time we're comparing 10-0 teams is when we're considering matchups and hosting. If you're 10-0, you won your conference and the AQ that goes along with it. When it comes to pool C, the committee is comparing teams with 1 or 2 (on rare occasions 3) losses. At that point, I don't see how RRs is a useful stat when you can simply look at each teams SOS, their losses, and their best wins.

A bit off topic, but I think with all the social media outlets and recruiting nowadays, and the growing number of high schools, kids playing sports, more and more people will continue to want to play at the next level.

D3 is in a good spot numbers wise with so many programs. I think there is more parity at the top today then there may have been 10-20 years ago which is awesome. With that being said, there are only 5 coveted spots currently for pool c bids. I think moving forward the norm will be for more and more teams to schedule top tier programs OOC. Not so much to prove themselves on a national stage early in the season for regional rankings, but more so to get their squad ready for conference play. Granted, sometimes teams can only schedule someone that is available at the time, or where the budget makes sense for travel, but I think through attrition good teams in prior years will only be able to field better teams in OOC play. Plus with the rules for AQ, there may be less spots in the future for pool c with more conferences adjoining for travel costs.

Winning a high profile game does help RR or for polling, but it also helps coaches measure their team against the grain all while having the ultimate goal of making their team better for conference play. This is where RR help because some conferences do not have open weeks for OOC play. So when evaluating those final spots, it helps them look at the data on who is most deserving before the national committee makes the selection....without the underlying bias.

While this year has been chaos in evaluating The Who beat who for poll purposes, it also has opened eyes to the rise quality of play across the league. For example a program on the rise may go 0-3 in OOC play, but finish 6-1 in conference, they may be more prepared for playoffs. Yea, they'd be 6-4, but they're in the bracket and that's all that matters is 0-0 at that point.

Quote from: HOPEful on October 26, 2022, 12:53:27 PM

Quote from: Cowboy2 on October 26, 2022, 10:33:08 AM
10-0 vs 10-0 doesn't show much. Yes you can look at SOS but does it really reflect how good a team is if it's a tenth or hundredth difference if they're in a weaker conference that has a down year? 

I will agree that SOS is less valuable when comparing unbeaten teams. And I would be keener on using RRs when comparing teams without losses. But the only time we're comparing 10-0 teams is when we're considering matchups and hosting. If you're 10-0, you won your conference and the AQ that goes along with it. When it comes to pool C, the committee is comparing teams with 1 or 2 (on rare occasions 3) losses. At that point, I don't see how RRs is a useful stat when you can simply look at each teams SOS, their losses, and their best wins.

Were the NCAA's SOS metric better, maybe we could just have the SOS and leave it at that.  But the NCAA's SOS metric is a blunt instrument prone to being wildly misleading or even wrong. 

For instance, right now the NCAA's SOS metric tells us that Ripon has played a stronger schedule than UW-Oshkosh and Carnegie Mellon and Trintiy(TX) and that is...not correct.    If we're going to use SOS as a precision instrument, it needs serious calibrating. 

Though we can't just focus on the good teams - we need to take the whole schedule into consideration.

C-M has played Thiel, Allegheny, and Geneva. They're...not good.

Trinity has a lot of meh (Sul Ross, TLU, Hendrix, Rhodes)

In this formula, Oshkosh's seemingy good wins in conference get knocked down a bit because of how the WIAC bludgeons each other.

But Ripon's SOS will decline the next two weeks. They've not played the really bad teams of their conference, and with one non-conference game the SOS will hover up higher because of that.

But it's not a very good measure. The issue is that many teams have just 1 or 2 non-conference game and many are limited by geography and budget who they can play. Without some sort of metric formula that takes into account more than just winning percentage, we're going to get these odd results.

Sul Ross has a though schedule though. Two top 10 teams in their conference. Plus another one in their OOC vs Trinity and then played a 21-7 game vs D2 A&M Kingsville. Not sure how many teams in the rest of D3 have that to go against! I'd also say they have some studs that could start on most of any team...but they have like 80 freshman so they need some growth.

TLU plays UMHB HSU and TU every year as well....3 top 10 teams

Hendrix and Rhodes have to play Berry BSC Centre and Trinity every year... that's not an easy road either. All 4 of those teams have been in the top 25 or received votes until they get bounced by inter conference play. Heck Berry played a closer game against UWW than UWO in my opinion.

R3 may not get a lot of wow factor when looking at the gauntlet the R6 teams have to go through, but I think they still play good ball...not a meh schedule

Sul Ross lost to TAMUK 35-14 according to their site.  Still a great result against a Top-20 D2.

To make things more interesting, SR got down early 28 - 0 to HPU while they were breaking in their QB2.  The first string was injured the previous week against TLU but had been outstanding.  It's not completely out of the question that the SR/HPU game has a different result if their QB1 starts.  With that result, SR would have a 3-4 record and you probably could count the number of teams on one, maybe two hands, that would have had a better record given the same schedule.

I think this means that a full-strength SR ranges from an absolute floor of 'meh' to potentially quite a bit above average, but you can only play the games on your schedule with the people you have.

Those D2 results are nice, but they don't count.

Muskingum and Marietta have to play Mt. Union and John Carroll each year. Gustavus and Augsburg play St. John's and Bethel each year. This happens with teams in the top conferences.

I think this discussion does demonstrate the issue of this metric, especially with so few games outside of your conference for many teams. So it's hard to tell how good, say, Augustana or Carroll really are because the CCIW has 2 buzzsaws and a Wash U. that's improving.

Quote from: Bmo on October 26, 2022, 10:00:06 PM
Sul Ross lost to TAMUK 35-14 according to their site.  Still a great result against a Top-20 D2.

Apologies. You're correct. I guess the final score didn't populate when I looked at the scoreboard that day....but it was 21-7 into the 4Q and that's where it must have left in my memory bank.

That paired with the D3 juggernauts they've had to play, makes a winning culture hard to implement....but should make them stronger next season.

Nonetheless an impressive showing against a program that traditionally is known for football. The old saying in south Texas was, "Go to A&M to get your degree....go to A&I to get to the league!"

Working on my Pool C eliminator and I think the WIAC only has one team left with a Pool C shot... and that would be UWL. Only UWW and UWL have fewer than 3 D3 losses now and Whitewater won the h2h.
I'll have more scenarios on everyone else later tonight.

Birmingham Southern is still fighting for a spot. 

A)  While the SOS needs work, it is only one factor of several that help a committee choose team.  The selection committee definitely know its about more than just wins and losses. 
B)  Regional rankings are 100% needed.  There are 6 regions and 240 teams.  Even Pat and Greg can't keep up with every team in every region and understand who they played, who they beat, who their opponents beat.  Also, This is, again, only one of several factors that the RAC's use to choose the field.
C)  I don't know for certain, but I give the inherent human bias credit for putting NCC in the field in 2019.  They probably had a low SOS, and they got crushed by Wheaton, but someone had a feeling. I think they were the last team in maybe... Then they smoked everyone on their way to their first Walnut and Bronze for football.
D)  When does the first alphabetical list of proposed best teams by region come out? 

I think they usually come out on Wednesdays.

Yes, first rankings on Wednesday!

Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2022, 02:29:23 PM
Yes, first rankings on Wednesday!

That's what you said last week.  :o

Quote from: DuffMan on October 31, 2022, 07:16:01 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2022, 02:29:23 PM
Yes, first rankings on Wednesday!

That's what you said last week.  :o

Yep.  Big time fumble on that last week. 

Lol, I was originally thinking it'd be this week. Then, your discussion on the ATN podcast made me believe I was wrong.  1-0 for DuffMan, and that is my stat.  ;)

I know VOLLEYBALL came out last week. At least D-2, because we got the ol' alpha order ranking (CWU has a great volleyball program that plays in a meat-grinder conference). But I guess volleyball's a week ahead or they get an additional set?

I dunno, man. Just give us rankings, NCAA. And not the alphabetical ones. Do that for weeks 1-7. By week 8 they should be able to rank 'em.

Quote from: smedindy on November 01, 2022, 01:41:44 AM
I know VOLLEYBALL came out last week. At least D-2, because we got the ol' alpha order ranking (CWU has a great volleyball program that plays in a meat-grinder conference). But I guess volleyball's a week ahead or they get an additional set?

I dunno, man. Just give us rankings, NCAA. And not the alphabetical ones. Do that for weeks 1-7. By week 8 they should be able to rank 'em.

VB playoffs start in two weeks (Nov 10-12) and selections will be made after conference tournaments conclude this weekend.

As much as I hate the alpha rankings, if record vs RRO is a factor (and we all know it is) you can't have an initial ordered ranking unless you say it ignores that factor which would lead to some very strange situations the following week.   I guess they could start with an initial unpublished alpha ranking a week before the ranked ones come out (then publish the alpha ranking the same time as the first ordered ranking). 

Quote from: Ron Boerger on November 01, 2022, 07:05:35 AM

Quote from: smedindy on November 01, 2022, 01:41:44 AM
I know VOLLEYBALL came out last week. At least D-2, because we got the ol' alpha order ranking (CWU has a great volleyball program that plays in a meat-grinder conference). But I guess volleyball's a week ahead or they get an additional set?

I dunno, man. Just give us rankings, NCAA. And not the alphabetical ones. Do that for weeks 1-7. By week 8 they should be able to rank 'em.

VB playoffs start in two weeks (Nov 10-12) and selections will be made after conference tournaments conclude this weekend.

As much as I hate the alpha rankings, if record vs RRO is a factor (and we all know it is) you can't have an initial ordered ranking unless you say it ignores that factor which would lead to some very strange situations the following week.   I guess they could start with an initial unpublished alpha ranking a week before the ranked ones come out (then publish the alpha ranking the same time as the first ordered ranking).

YES, I can buy that enough of the ranking is impacted by lack of RRO for the first week but the alpha "rankings" never need to be seen by the public. We get such little data that this first week is like getting an apple for Halloween. I thought I had heard that the regional committees have typically been doing mock rankings for a week or two at this point so why not just make the last mock ranking the alpha list and then start the actual rankings this week.

Regional Rankings are live:

https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/football/d3/regional-rankings

Refreshingly easy to find a team with the alpha order!

Actual regional rankings out:
https://d3football.com/playoffs/2022/second-regional-ranking

weird way for Region 3 to get 8 teams ranked

I am shocked...shocked! that Region 3 would be the only region to have a "tie"

Will the real #7 team please stand up?

I've given this no thought and done no research.  But my pool C guess is:

UW-La Crosse
Bethel/St. John's loser
Hardin Simmons
Johns Hopkins
Wheaton

I see these teams on the board and under serious contention at some point:This all depending they don't lose (well, except Albion and Bethel or St. John's)

King's
JHU
Utica
HSU
Albion (if they lose to Alma)
JCU
Wheaton
Ripon
Bethel / St. John's Loser
UW - LAX

So it's 9 or 10 teams for five spots, unless there's anarchy.

Sorry BSU fans, their low regional ranking at this time means Hardin Simmons and Bridgewater will be on the board before BSU. I can only see them advancing above Bridgewater if the Eagles lose to Guilford.

I don't see Alma, Bellhaven, or Bridgewater making any case.

Quote from: D3fanboy on November 09, 2022, 04:33:38 PM
weird way for Region 3 to get 8 teams ranked

I am shocked...shocked! that Region 3 would be the only region to have a "tie"

It's a deep region.  ;D

Quote from: Cowboy2 on November 10, 2022, 09:47:26 AM

Quote from: D3fanboy on November 09, 2022, 04:33:38 PM
weird way for Region 3 to get 8 teams ranked

I am shocked...shocked! that Region 3 would be the only region to have a "tie"

It's a deep region.  ;D

And to be honest, BSC would probably spank most 4-7 RR teams in a handful of the other regions. Outside of getting toasted on the road last year to UMHB, remind you everyone else did as well, BSC has lost 3 other games the past two seasons; Two to Trinity on the last 10 seconds of each game by a total of 4 points. And 1 to Huntingdon, by 3 points.

Belhaven lost by a score maybe two to Huntingdon as well.

I think they're both deserving, maybe not as much as other teams, but what does it matter? Both will probably get left out. Everyone in the boards are freaking out. I don't think HSU has one of the top pool c resumes, but heck if they get in, in HSU UMHB or Trinity will be facing each other for 2 rounds. Woof!

If you want to know who is on the Regional Committees to set the order:

Region I:
Gregg Kaye, chair Commonwealth Coast Football Commonwealth Coast Football
Michael Lichten, University of New England Commonwealth Coast Football
Carey Eggen, Framingham State Massachusetts State Collegiate Athletic Conference
Mike Cerasuolo, Springfield College New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference
John Davis, Misericordia Middle Atlantic Conference
Scott Lin, Alfred State Eastern Collegiate Football Conference

Region II:
Blaise Faggiano, chair Utica Empire 8
Curt Fitzpatrick Morrisville State Empire 8
Kevin DeWall Hobart Liberty League
Amanda DeMartino The College of New Jersey New Jersey Athletic Conference
Brad Fordyce Dickinson Centennial Conference
Geno Demarco Geneva Presidents' Athletic Conference

Region III:
J.J. Nekoloff, chair Old Dominion Athletic Conference Old Dominion Athletic Conference
Hunter Sims Howard Payne American Southwest Conference
Scott Yoder Shenandoah Old Dominion Athletic Conference
Jerheme Urban Trinity Southern Athletic Association
Jeff Filkovski North Carolina Wesleyan USA South Athletic Conference

Region IV:
John Snell, chair Baldwin Wallace Ohio Athletic Conference
Matthew Theobald Hanover Heartland Collegiate Athletic Conference
Jason Couch Alma Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association
Matt Tanney Wabash North Coast Athletic Conference
Scott Donaldson Heidelberg Ohio Athletic Conference

Region V:
Matt Jeter, chair Simpson American Rivers Conference
Jeff McMartin Central American Rivers Conference
Jesse Scott Wheaton College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
Ben Cooprider Grinnell Midwest Conference
Jim Hamad Aurora Northern Athletics Collegiate Conference

Region VI:
Matt Moore, chair Northwestern-St. Paul
Nick Winecke Saint Mary's Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference
Keith Buckley Pacific University Northwest Conference
Chris Krich La Verne Southern California Intercollegiate Athletic Conference
Robbie Schomaker Greenville Upper Midwest Athletic Conference
Wesley Beschorner Wisconsin-Eau Claire Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

The National Committee is made up of the chair of each of the regions with JJ Nekoloff from Region III set as the National Chair.

Quote from: USee on November 10, 2022, 11:44:36 AM
If you want to know who is on the Regional Committees to set the order:


Region III:
J.J. Nekoloff, chair Old Dominion Athletic Conference Old Dominion Athletic Conference
Hunter Sims Howard Payne American Southwest Conference
Scott Yoder Shenandoah Old Dominion Athletic Conference
Jerheme Urban Trinity Southern Athletic Association
Jeff Filkovski North Carolina Wesleyan USA South Athletic Conference


The National Committee is made up of the chair of each of the regions with JJ Nekoloff from Region III set as the National Chair.

lol....just couldn't quite figure out how to break the 7th place tie

Quote from: Cowboy2 on November 10, 2022, 09:55:39 AM

Quote from: Cowboy2 on November 10, 2022, 09:47:26 AM

Quote from: D3fanboy on November 09, 2022, 04:33:38 PM
weird way for Region 3 to get 8 teams ranked

I am shocked...shocked! that Region 3 would be the only region to have a "tie"

It's a deep region.  ;D

And to be honest, BSC would probably spank most 4-7 RR teams in a handful of the other regions. Outside of getting toasted on the road last year to UMHB, remind you everyone else did as well, BSC has lost 3 other games the past two seasons; Two to Trinity on the last 10 seconds of each game by a total of 4 points. And 1 to Huntingdon, by 3 points.

Checks notes ... the Region 6 #4 team beat UMHB on the road  ;) BSC might make the top 10 in the region.  ;) 8-)

I'd love to hear from Pat or Wally on what they expect the National Committee to do here. Either the number is a solid 7, or other deep regions should be ranking down to 8 as well. How does this affect RRO given the extra slot? Does the National Committee have the power to tell Region 3 to cut it down to 7 or if you really can't break the tie, we'll just consider your top 6?

We've seen regions play with the criteria to help a Pool C candidate, etc. But this looks like a pretty bullish, to hell with what the rules say, we are ranking 8 and making our own rules kinda move.

Quote from: USee on November 10, 2022, 11:44:36 AM
If you want to know who is on the Regional Committees to set the order:

Region VI:
Nick Winecke Saint Mary's Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference


The National Committee is made up of the chair of each of the regions with JJ Nekoloff from Region III set as the National Chair.

Is this a typo, or are there actually reps on these committees from schools that don't have football teams?? Why on earth would a school that doesn't play football have any say in this process?

The rules should be the same in each region period.  That's glass to look at.  :-*

Quote from: hazzben on November 10, 2022, 11:57:21 AM

Quote from: USee on November 10, 2022, 11:44:36 AM
If you want to know who is on the Regional Committees to set the order:

Region VI:
Nick Winecke Saint Mary's Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference


The National Committee is made up of the chair of each of the regions with JJ Nekoloff from Region III set as the National Chair.

Is this a typo, or are there actually reps on these committees from schools that don't have football teams?? Why on earth would a school that doesn't play football have any say in this process?

Here is my source so see for yourself:

https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/football/d3/2022-23D3MFB_PreChampionshipManual.pdf

I would only point out that 3 of the regions have 6 members of the RAC and 3 have only 5 and this one is one of the ones with 6.

You get my VOTE. I agree with you "they" should NOT.  ??? :'(

No attempt to kill the messenger here USee, it's just really bizarre IMO.

It should be pointed out that the regional committees are only in an advisory role, and the regional rankings are completely up to the national committee to determine. 

Quote from: hazzben on November 10, 2022, 12:51:38 PM
No attempt to kill the messenger here USee, it's just really bizarre IMO.

I agree. No offense taken. Seems weird.

Quote from: hazzben on November 10, 2022, 11:53:25 AM
I'd love to hear from Pat or Wally on what they expect the National Committee to do here. Either the number is a solid 7, or other deep regions should be ranking down to 8 as well. How does this affect RRO given the extra slot? Does the National Committee have the power to tell Region 3 to cut it down to 7 or if you really can't break the tie, we'll just consider your top 6?

We've seen regions play with the criteria to help a Pool C candidate, etc. But this looks like a pretty bullish, to hell with what the rules say, we are ranking 8 and making our own rules kinda move.

Listened to the ATN podcast with Pat and J.J. Nekoloff, gotta say, it actually makes me less confident they rectify this. He never commits to this being bumped back to 7 for Region 3, and actually implies that they are totally comfortable with a "Tie" scenario and that there isn't likely to be a National Committee stepping in to say, figure out a way to break the tie. It's a bad look, only made worse by the fact that Nekoloff is leading the RAC that did it, and now leads the National Committee that has to police it.

The worst part of this is that we don't have visibility to the final Regional Rankings, so who knows if they actually fix it or not.  ::)

I think the two loss Pool C picture is interesting and far more precarious than most realize. Bethel/St Johns loser has very different circumstances than a year ago. If Bethel loses they will have 2 losses to their region #2 (presumably) and #6 vs last year they had 2 close losses to the undefeated consensus region #1. They also will have between 1-3 RRO wins. For St Johns, should they lose Saturday their 2 losses are to Region #2 with at least 1 other RRO win. For Wheaton their two losses are to undefeated Region 3 top seed and undefeated and probable overall #1 Region 5 top seed with another RRO win. This gets into a team's placement in a region and which region is stronger, etc. I am not sure how this gets sorted but it doesn't appear to be as clear cut as it may seem. The national committee might just avoid all the confusion and pick only 1 loss teams:

UWL
Kings
HSU
JHU
MIAA loser
Utica

Quote from: hazzben on November 10, 2022, 02:21:02 PM

Quote from: hazzben on November 10, 2022, 11:53:25 AM
I'd love to hear from Pat or Wally on what they expect the National Committee to do here. Either the number is a solid 7, or other deep regions should be ranking down to 8 as well. How does this affect RRO given the extra slot? Does the National Committee have the power to tell Region 3 to cut it down to 7 or if you really can't break the tie, we'll just consider your top 6?

We've seen regions play with the criteria to help a Pool C candidate, etc. But this looks like a pretty bullish, to hell with what the rules say, we are ranking 8 and making our own rules kinda move.

Listened to the ATN podcast with Pat and J.J. Nekoloff, gotta say, it actually makes me less confident they rectify this. He never commits to this being bumped back to 7 for Region 3, and actually implies that they are totally comfortable with a "Tie" scenario and that there isn't likely to be a National Committee stepping in to say, figure out a way to break the tie. It's a bad look, only made worse by the fact that Nekoloff is leading the RAC that did it, and now leads the National Committee that has to police it.

The worst part of this is that we don't have visibility to the final Regional Rankings, so who knows if they actually fix it or not.  ::)

its just really, really hard to figure out a way to break a tie, plus *technically* the rules never said that you couldn't have a tie.

I would love nothing more than a RAC to produce a ranking next week with 3 or 4 teams "tied" for 7th, because sometimes you just can't break a tie

Quote from: USee on November 10, 2022, 02:35:03 PMThe national committee might just avoid all the confusion and pick only 1 loss teams:

UWL
Kings
HSU
JHU
MIAA loser
Utica

Let's hope not! Part of what has made this season so special has been the crossover of elite teams willing to schedule and play each other non-conference. By refusing to look at 2 or even 3 loss teams, you're effectively telling those teams to only schedule non-conference games they know they'll win. I want to see the trend continue! And the only way to do that is reward teams for scheduling a gauntlet vs. a cakewalk.

I agree but when he says things like "the margin of victory in a RR result shouldn't be a factor" to which Pat replies "That's the first time a chair in ANY sport has ever said that..." it doesn't promote confidence that the guys at the top making these decisions "get it".

Quote from: hazzben on November 10, 2022, 11:57:21 AM

Quote from: USee on November 10, 2022, 11:44:36 AM
If you want to know who is on the Regional Committees to set the order:

Region VI:
Nick Winecke Saint Mary's Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference


The National Committee is made up of the chair of each of the regions with JJ Nekoloff from Region III set as the National Chair.

Is this a typo, or are there actually reps on these committees from schools that don't have football teams?? Why on earth would a school that doesn't play football have any say in this process?

I'm pretty sure this is wrong. Gary Fasching was on the Johnnie radio weekly show recently (just before the alphabetical ranking came out). He said he was the MIAC's rep for football this year and talked about the process they were going through to prepare.

Quote from: USee on November 10, 2022, 03:21:08 PM
I agree but when he says things like "the margin of victory in a RR result shouldn't be a factor" to which Pat replies "That's the first time a chair in ANY sport has ever said that..." it doesn't promote confidence that the guys at the top making these decisions "get it".

100% my take. Ummm, you are suddenly going to be hyper wooden on Regional Ranked Result = you can't factor in MOV?!? This from the guy who has no problem with 7ish/8 teams being ranked. I was glad Pat pointed out that this was a total break from how it's historically been approached. I wish he'd pushed a little more on the "it was a tie, what could we do, but the national committee is good with it" line. It's real simple, the NC tells the RAC, either you can figure out how to break the tie, or we will do it for you. So you can be driving the process for who gets the #7 spot or you can have your #7 spot dictated to you.

Quote from: hazzben on November 10, 2022, 11:53:25 AM

Quote from: Cowboy2 on November 10, 2022, 09:55:39 AM

Quote from: Cowboy2 on November 10, 2022, 09:47:26 AM

Quote from: D3fanboy on November 09, 2022, 04:33:38 PM
weird way for Region 3 to get 8 teams ranked

I am shocked...shocked! that Region 3 would be the only region to have a "tie"

It's a deep region.  ;D

And to be honest, BSC would probably spank most 4-7 RR teams in a handful of the other regions. Outside of getting toasted on the road last year to UMHB, remind you everyone else did as well, BSC has lost 3 other games the past two seasons; Two to Trinity on the last 10 seconds of each game by a total of 4 points. And 1 to Huntingdon, by 3 points.

Checks notes ... the Region 6 #4 team beat UMHB on the road  ;) BSC might make the top 10 in the region.  ;) 8-)

I'd love to hear from Pat or Wally on what they expect the National Committee to do here. Either the number is a solid 7, or other deep regions should be ranking down to 8 as well. How does this affect RRO given the extra slot? Does the National Committee have the power to tell Region 3 to cut it down to 7 or if you really can't break the tie, we'll just consider your top 6?

We've seen regions play with the criteria to help a Pool C candidate, etc. But this looks like a pretty bullish, to hell with what the rules say, we are ranking 8 and making our own rules kinda move.

I expect the national committee to break this tie.

I feel like I pressed that point as far as it needed to be.

Quote from: USee on November 10, 2022, 03:21:08 PM
I agree but when he says things like "the margin of victory in a RR result shouldn't be a factor" to which Pat replies "That's the first time a chair in ANY sport has ever said that..." it doesn't promote confidence that the guys at the top making these decisions "get it".

I mentioned in our post-interview conversation that this is something that is coming from above.

I really do think that the Bethel / St. John's loser will get in. #3 and #9 is SOS is hard to get around, even with 2 losses.

Wheaton's SOS will take a bit of a dive with North Park. Same with John Carroll and Otterbein.
King's will be strong since they end with Wilkes
I can't see them leaving HSU on the table, nor JHU.


The C bubble people should hope:

Mt. Union beats B-W
Platteville beats LaCrosse
Wilkes upsets King's
Albion beats Alma
SJF upsets Utica

A Mt. Union loss makes it a three-way tie at the top of the OAC. From what I heard, that means the other 7 OAC coaches vote on the auto bid. You know they'd love to get 2 schools in the tourney so they'd probably vote for JCU or B-W.

An LaCrosse loss gives them two losses and and they'll be firmly behind the St. John's / Bethel loser in the West pecking order.

Wilkes probably has a sour taste from their 28-0 loss to Stevenson, and it's for the pride of Wilkes-Barre, so this may be one to watch

Alma beating Albion, puts Albion on the board first in region 4 IF Mt. Union wins. The committe may elevate MSJ over Albion but I can't see them moving a two loss team ahead of them with Albion's SOS

Now the SJF / Utica upset may be on a limb, as it were, but SJF played Morrisville tough and it's a home game.

But that would clear out Utica from "C".

Right now the six on the board first would be:

King's
JHU
HSU
Alma / Albion / JCU (JCU may pip Alma if Alma loses...)
Wheaton
Bethel / St. Johns

Next up for each region:

Stevenson
Utica
Bridgewater
Alma / JCU
Ripon
UW - LaCrosse (assuming a UWW win and a UW-LAX win, UWW gets the tie)

If things go accoring to plan I think it's probably

Bethel / St. John's
JHU
HSU
UW - LAX
...

The last spot? Kings vs. Utica vs. Wheaton - if Albion loses they're probably in before those three. Maybe. Then if Mt. Union loses...who does that knock out.

Good luck.
.

Nice job.  :-*

nothing against Alma, but I don't want Albion to just beat them. I want them to blow them out. Leave that as the last impression, and hopefully John Carroll can be the first team on the board for region 4. I still feel like their chances would be slim, but maybe the longer a team is in discussion the better they begin to look.
I'll be monitoring all those games for sure

As nebulous as Results against Ranked Opponents seems to be this year,

I have a hard time keeping 2-loss Wheaton, having narrow losses to two #1 teams in respective regions, from getting a bid.

Quote from: bluestreak66 on November 11, 2022, 08:52:39 AM
nothing against Alma, but I don't want Albion to just beat them. I want them to blow them out. Leave that as the last impression, and hopefully John Carroll can be the first team on the board for region 4. I still feel like their chances would be slim, but maybe the longer a team is in discussion the better they begin to look.
I'll be monitoring all those games for sure

As a fan of the MIAA, I can fully empathize with this sentiment. Over in the Region 4 Fan Poll, I was the lone voter this week to vote JCU as the number 2 team in the region. After watching both Albion and Alma, I believe both would lose to JCU on a neutral field, although I think Albion v. JCU would be a good game. I also expect Alma to get crushed this weekend by Albion.

If Albion beats Alma, I can't comprehend putting Alma in the playoffs with a non-conference schedule of ONU, Manchester, Anderson, and Martin Luther. I feel strongly that there are at least 5 teams in the WIAC that given Alma's schedule would be 9-0 right now. When only 5 at large teams make the field, IMO there has to be more emphasis on prioritizing strength of schedule and making sure the metrics we use to do so are robust. I don't understand how anyone could compare Alma to Wheaton and conclude that Alma is the better team unless they are emphasizing 1 loss > 2 losses and disregarding who those losses and wins were against.

In the case of JCU, I feel like wins against Baldwin Wallace and Heidelberg should trump Alma's wins against Hope and Trine.

Quote from: HOPEful on November 11, 2022, 11:48:09 AM

Quote from: bluestreak66 on November 11, 2022, 08:52:39 AM
nothing against Alma, but I don't want Albion to just beat them. I want them to blow them out. Leave that as the last impression, and hopefully John Carroll can be the first team on the board for region 4. I still feel like their chances would be slim, but maybe the longer a team is in discussion the better they begin to look.
I'll be monitoring all those games for sure

As a fan of the MIAA, I can fully empathize with this sentiment. Over in the Region 4 Fan Poll, I was the lone voter this week to vote JCU as the number 2 team in the region. After watching both Albion and Alma, I believe both would lose to JCU on a neutral field, although I think Albion v. JCU would be a good game. I also expect Alma to get crushed this weekend by Albion.

If Albion beats Alma, I can't comprehend putting Alma in the playoffs with a non-conference schedule of ONU, Manchester, Anderson, and Martin Luther. I feel strongly that there are at least 5 teams in the WIAC that given Alma's schedule would be 9-0 right now. When only 5 at large teams make the field, IMO there has to be more emphasis on prioritizing strength of schedule and making sure the metrics we use to do so are robust. I don't understand how anyone could compare Alma to Wheaton and conclude that Alma is the better team unless they are emphasizing 1 loss > 2 losses and disregarding who those losses and wins were against.

In the case of JCU, I feel like wins against Baldwin Wallace and Heidelberg should trump Alma's wins against Hope and Trine.

Their SOS isn't good, given, but they'll be on the board, maybe from the jump.

The profiles for the potential at large teams (with projected records and SOS post Sat¹) are:


UWLX (Region 6 #5) 9-1 (1-1).552 (Loss V Region 6 #4, presumed win over Region 6 #6)
Bethel (Region 6 #2)8-2 (1-2).618 (Win vs Region 6 #2, Loss @ Region 6 #6)
St. Johns (Region 6 #3) 8-2 (1-2) .642 (Win vs Region 6 #4, Loss @ Region 6 #2, Presumed loss vs Region 6 #2)
Wheaton (Region 5 #3) 8-2 (1-2) .550 (Loss @ Region 3 #1, @ Region 5#1, Win over Region 5 #7)
King's (Region 1 #2) 9-1(1-1) .519 (win vs Region 1 #4, Loss vs Region 1 #1)
Albion (Region 4 #2) 9-1 (0-1) .563 (Presumed loss @ Region 4 #3)
JHU (Region 2 #5) 9-1 (0-1) .507 (Loss @ Region 2 #2)
Utica (Region 2 #6) 9-1 (0-1) .532 (Loss vs Region 2 #1)
HSU Region 3 #5) 8-1 (1-1) .488 (win at Region 6 #6, Loss to Region 3 #3)
Alma (Region 4 #3) 9-1  (0-1) .503 (presumed loss to Region 4 #2)
John Carroll (Region 4 #6) 8-2 (1-1) .564 (Loss @ Region 4 #1, Win vs Region 4 #7)

Obviously the St Johns/Bethel and Albion/Alma options are either/or. Also,  the St Johns/Bethel loser  is blocking UWL. Whether the loser is dropped behind UWL or stays ahead, one is blocking the other until their selection. Same for JCU relative to Alma/Albion.

¹ source Logan Hansen https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1FqYgbc2ZAbF3m0sdzwLg6T6bjCF2AF7LoLBYnLiJqek/edit#gid=107744651

Quote from: HOPEful on November 11, 2022, 11:48:09 AM

Quote from: bluestreak66 on November 11, 2022, 08:52:39 AM
nothing against Alma, but I don't want Albion to just beat them. I want them to blow them out. Leave that as the last impression, and hopefully John Carroll can be the first team on the board for region 4. I still feel like their chances would be slim, but maybe the longer a team is in discussion the better they begin to look.
I'll be monitoring all those games for sure

As a fan of the MIAA, I can fully empathize with this sentiment. Over in the Region 4 Fan Poll, I was the lone voter this week to vote JCU as the number 2 team in the region. After watching both Albion and Alma, I believe both would lose to JCU on a neutral field, although I think Albion v. JCU would be a good game. I also expect Alma to get crushed this weekend by Albion.

If Albion beats Alma, I can't comprehend putting Alma in the playoffs with a non-conference schedule of ONU, Manchester, Anderson, and Martin Luther. I feel strongly that there are at least 5 teams in the WIAC that given Alma's schedule would be 9-0 right now. When only 5 at large teams make the field, IMO there has to be more emphasis on prioritizing strength of schedule and making sure the metrics we use to do so are robust. I don't understand how anyone could compare Alma to Wheaton and conclude that Alma is the better team unless they are emphasizing 1 loss > 2 losses and disregarding who those losses and wins were against.

In the case of JCU, I feel like wins against Baldwin Wallace and Heidelberg should trump Alma's wins against Hope and Trine.

JCU has a snowball's chance.  But let's assume Mount beats BW (of course), MSJ beats RHU and Albion beats Alma.  R4 would likely break down 1) Mount 2) Albion 3) MSJ as the top AQ's.  JCU likely slides in as the top Pool C R4 team.  The Depauw/Wabash winner will be the 5th team.  Now spots 6 and 7 are interesting.  Does Alma stick around at 9-1 with no RRO and a poor SOS? or do they keep BW in at 7-3 with "good losses"?  Berg slide in at 7-3 with a better common opponent win over Adrian than Alma?  The Alma 3 point win over ONU looks pretty weak compared to JCU +17 and Berg +34.  I'm definitely having a hard time splitting up Alma/BW/Berg in to just 2 spots, Region 4 should probably just let them have a 3 way tie for 6th.   Eight teams per region is no big deal

1. Mount
2. Albion
3. MSJ
4. Depauw/Wabash
5. JCU
6. Alma
6. BW
6. Berg

JCU has an uphill battle for sure, but I can see how the OAC gets a couple of regionally ranked teams which would help out the Streaks

Is there any precedent for a Pool C bid going to a team with a loss to a non-playoff team?

I got it like this...
A) St. Johns beats Bethel B) LAX beats UWP C) Albion beats Alma D) RH beast MSJ E) All the rest of the favorites win

First Round pool C
R1:  Kings
R2: Johns Hopkins
R3: Hardin Simmons ( I don't see them dropping in R3 even if UWP drops out of the RR)
R4: John Carroll ( I fully support the though of the loser of Alma/Albion dropping below JCU)
R5: Wheaton (Even if Wash U falls off)
R6:  LAX

I think LAX gets chosen

Round 2 Pool
R1:  Kings
R2: Johns Hopkins
R3: Hardin Simmons 
R4: John Carroll
R5: Wheaton
R6:  Bethel

Bethel gets chosen

Round 3 Pool
R1:  Kings
R2: Johns Hopkins
R3: Hardin Simmons 
R4: John Carroll
R5: Wheaton
R6: Unranked Pool C candidate?

Wheaton gets chosen

Round 4 Pool
R1:  Kings
R2: Johns Hopkins
R3: Hardin Simmons 
R4: John Carroll
R5: Monmouth (This doesn't matter, they're not getting picked 
R6:  Unranked Pool C ? 

Johns Hopkins get chosen

Round 5 Pool
R1:  Kings
R2: Utica
R3: Hardin Simmons 
R4: John Carroll
R5: Doesn't matter
R6:  Doesn't matter

Hardin Simmons get chosen.  (Despite a lower SOS, same record, and only loss to Conf champ, UMHB drags them in on their coattails)

Pool C field LAX , Bethel, Wheaton, Johns Hopkins, Hardin Simmons

So it's clear, I confirmed with Wally that anyone who is ranked this week OR after this Saturday will count as an RRO result. So LAX, Wheaton, etc all will have RRO results regardless of Saturday's games and even if WashU, UWP, etc fall out of the rankings. It's an important nuance that increases the number of RRO results and has, apparently, been in play since before last season.

Quote from: USee on November 11, 2022, 04:36:29 PM
So it's clear, I confirmed with Wally that anyone who is ranked this week OR after this Saturday will count as an RRO result. So LAX, Wheaton, etc all will have RRO results regardless of Saturday's games and even if WashU, UWP, etc fall out of the rankings. It's an important nuance that increases the number of RRO results and has, apparently, been in play since before last season.

Trinity gets an extra RRO for their hopes of being the #1 seed in the West island

From the Championship Manual, here are the primary criteria for selection of Pool C:

The primary criteria emphasize regional competition (all contests leading up to NCAA championships); all criteria listed
will be evaluated (not listed in priority order).
-Won-lost percentage against Division III opponents;
-Division III head-to-head competition;
-Results versus common Division III opponents;
-Results versus ranked Division III teams as established by the rankings at the time of selection. Conference
postseason contests are included;
-Division III strength of schedule.
-Should a committee find that evaluation of a team's won-lost percentage during the last 25% of the
season is applicable (i.e., end-of-season performance), it may adopt such criteria with approval of the
Championships Committee

I find it noteworthy that few people are mentioning the final bullet, end of season performance. The St Johns/Bethel loser will have a season ending loss, JCU will have a loss in the next to last week. Alma/Albion loser will have a loss in the last week. Not sure what it means, but it's listed as a primary criteria.

Quote from: USee on November 11, 2022, 05:20:22 PM

From the Championship Manual, here are the primary criteria for selection of Pool C:

The primary criteria emphasize regional competition (all contests leading up to NCAA championships); all criteria listed
will be evaluated (not listed in priority order).
-Won-lost percentage against Division III opponents;
-Division III head-to-head competition;
-Results versus common Division III opponents;
-Results versus ranked Division III teams as established by the rankings at the time of selection. Conference
postseason contests are included;
-Division III strength of schedule.
-Should a committee find that evaluation of a team's won-lost percentage during the last 25% of the
season is applicable (i.e., end-of-season performance), it may adopt such criteria with approval of the
Championships Committee

I find it noteworthy that few people are mentioning the final bullet, end of season performance. The St Johns/Bethel loser will have a season ending loss, JCU will have a loss in the next to last week. Alma/Albion loser will have a loss in the last week. Not sure what it means, but it's listed as a primary criteria.

That language is taken verbatim from the Division III manual, and I don't know that I'd say it means football has decided to adopt it. I checked other fall sports and men's and women's soccer have the exact language while volleyball and field hockey list "won-lost percentage during the last 25% of the season" as a criterion. Make of that what you will.

Twenty-five percent of a 10-game season is not the same as 25% of a 28-game basketball season with the loss in the conference tourney finals or a 43-47 game baseball season.

A lot of us have landed on at least four of the five teams with the fifth being a coin flip (I think the lowering of Wheaton's SOS by North Park will hurt, but hey).

You know what that means?

CHAOS Saturday!

Wheaton is gonna be about .550 after NPU game. Still stronger than most in Pool C

Quote from: Inkblot on November 11, 2022, 05:42:45 PM

Quote from: USee on November 11, 2022, 05:20:22 PM

From the Championship Manual, here are the primary criteria for selection of Pool C:

The primary criteria emphasize regional competition (all contests leading up to NCAA championships); all criteria listed
will be evaluated (not listed in priority order).
-Won-lost percentage against Division III opponents;
-Division III head-to-head competition;
-Results versus common Division III opponents;
-Results versus ranked Division III teams as established by the rankings at the time of selection. Conference
postseason contests are included;
-Division III strength of schedule.
-Should a committee find that evaluation of a team's won-lost percentage during the last 25% of the
season is applicable (i.e., end-of-season performance), it may adopt such criteria with approval of the
Championships Committee

I find it noteworthy that few people are mentioning the final bullet, end of season performance. The St Johns/Bethel loser will have a season ending loss, JCU will have a loss in the next to last week. Alma/Albion loser will have a loss in the last week. Not sure what it means, but it's listed as a primary criteria.

That language is taken verbatim from the Division III manual, and I don't know that I'd say it means football has decided to adopt it. I checked other fall sports and men's and women's soccer have the exact language while volleyball and field hockey list "won-lost percentage during the last 25% of the season" as a criterion. Make of that what you will.

It's in the Division III championship football manual as a primary criteria. I'd say if it's in there, it's been adopted. It's not an optional criteria

Quote from: USee on November 11, 2022, 10:16:30 PM

Quote from: Inkblot on November 11, 2022, 05:42:45 PM

Quote from: USee on November 11, 2022, 05:20:22 PM

From the Championship Manual, here are the primary criteria for selection of Pool C:

The primary criteria emphasize regional competition (all contests leading up to NCAA championships); all criteria listed
will be evaluated (not listed in priority order).
-Won-lost percentage against Division III opponents;
-Division III head-to-head competition;
-Results versus common Division III opponents;
-Results versus ranked Division III teams as established by the rankings at the time of selection. Conference
postseason contests are included;
-Division III strength of schedule.
-Should a committee find that evaluation of a team's won-lost percentage during the last 25% of the
season is applicable (i.e., end-of-season performance), it may adopt such criteria with approval of the
Championships Committee

I find it noteworthy that few people are mentioning the final bullet, end of season performance. The St Johns/Bethel loser will have a season ending loss, JCU will have a loss in the next to last week. Alma/Albion loser will have a loss in the last week. Not sure what it means, but it's listed as a primary criteria.

That language is taken verbatim from the Division III manual, and I don't know that I'd say it means football has decided to adopt it. I checked other fall sports and men's and women's soccer have the exact language while volleyball and field hockey list "won-lost percentage during the last 25% of the season" as a criterion. Make of that what you will.

It's in the Division III championship football manual as a primary criteria. I'd say if it's in there, it's been adopted. It's not an optional criteria

Doesn't it specifically say it's optional?

Whatever the case, it's not a change from previous years and I don't think there's been a noticeable lean in Pool C selections towards teams that lost earlier.

Quote from: USee on November 11, 2022, 09:35:41 PM
Wheaton is gonna be about .550 after NPU game. Still stronger than most in Pool C

A one loss Utica looks to be a better candidate, and a one loss King's may be as attractive as a two-loss Wheaton. But that's just my eyeball.

Quote from: smedindy on November 12, 2022, 12:32:46 AM

Quote from: USee on November 11, 2022, 09:35:41 PM
Wheaton is gonna be about .550 after NPU game. Still stronger than most in Pool C

A one loss Utica looks to be a better candidate, and a one loss King's may be as attractive as a two-loss Wheaton. But that's just my eyeball.

I don't know. Since we are talking about access to the National Championship...

If you take a step back, three factors has me thinking Wheaton is a stronger Pool C selection than Utica:

1.  If you play Utica's schedule, you can't have a loss and razor close wins against Morrisville State, Western New England, and Kean. 
2.  I think most reasonable people evaluating Utica playing Wheaton's schedule would project three losses and probably less competitive results against Trinity and NCC.
3. I think most reasonable people evaluating Utica playing Wheaton would project a Wheaton victory.

Part of the committee's job has to be to not get so caught up in minutia that they send a lesser team.  We have only five at-large bids.  If there is a plausible path to pick the better team, they need to take it.

Quote from: smedindy on November 12, 2022, 12:32:46 AM

Quote from: USee on November 11, 2022, 09:35:41 PM
Wheaton is gonna be about .550 after NPU game. Still stronger than most in Pool C

A one loss Utica looks to be a better candidate, and a one loss King's may be as attractive as a two-loss Wheaton. But that's just my eyeball.

Other eyeballs see it the same too. :-*

Quote from: smedindy on November 12, 2022, 12:32:46 AM

Quote from: USee on November 11, 2022, 09:35:41 PM
Wheaton is gonna be about .550 after NPU game. Still stronger than most in Pool C

A one loss Utica looks to be a better candidate, and a one loss King's may be as attractive as a two-loss Wheaton. But that's just my eyeball.

Putting aside Smed's decade long hatred of Wheaton, for the sake of analysis, this could be the conclusion the committee makes. Several problems with this. First, the Region 2 RAC thinks Johns Hopkins (R2 #5) is better than Utica (R2#6). And objectively, by the primary criteria, Utica is better than JHU  (same win %, better RRO result, stronger SOS). So the 2RAC has to be considering the fact that Utica's 20 pt loss at home to Region 1 #1 Delaware Valley is materially different than JHU's 2 pt loss on the road to Region 2 #2 Susquehanna. That's the only advantage JHU has over Utica (to the chagrin of the national chair).So Utica isn't going anywhere until JHU does.

Second, if you are going to come to the conclusion that JHU (and then Utica) are getting in ahead of Wheaton, then you have to believe JHU is getting in ahead of not just Wheaton, but also the STJ/Bethel loser (or any other 2 loss team). That's because according to the primary criteria that apply to these teams, objectively, Wheaton and STJ/Beth are statistically significantly better than JHU in 2 of the 3 (RR results, SOS) and worse in one (Winning %). The chair said all primary criteria are weighted equally. You could say Utica is tied with Wheaton in SOS (.547 to .550) and they split the winning % and RRO criteria, but the 2RAC is blocking you from thinking that with their placement of JHU. I wonder why? Could it be that they think JHU is a better team than Utica? ((Bleed--the 2RAC is listening). An added complication: If you throw in the "optional" final criteria of end of season loss, JHU/Utica fare better against  the STJ/Bethel loser.

A final consideration in all of this is the fact that StJ/Bethel are both ranked ahead of 1 loss LaCrosse and if that remains the case after today's games, the MIAC loser blocks UWL. That's probably unlikely given that UWL would probably be the first Pool C taken if they beat Platteville and finish with 1 loss.

So if you believe Utica is better than Wheaton, then you are a "1 loss" guy and all the 2 loss teams have to be considered later. Pool C then becomes UWLX, Kings, Utica, HSU and the Albion/Alma loser. Stj/Beth loser and Wheaton stay home.

The main thing that made this season so much fun is that coaches sought out really hard games. Those games gave real head-to-head measures of the relative strengths. Those games gave us an idea of who should be hosting deep into the playoffs. Look at all of the games that occurred between regionally ranked teams in other regions! That is what we need in football. In baseball, we have 8, 10, or even 12 games to consider over the 40+ game season, especially occurring when northern teams go south for spring break.

I do not want the committee to send the message that a 2-loss team like Wheaton should have scheduled Sewanee instead of Trinity TX.

Quote from: USee on November 12, 2022, 09:23:20 AM

Quote from: smedindy on November 12, 2022, 12:32:46 AM

Quote from: USee on November 11, 2022, 09:35:41 PM
Wheaton is gonna be about .550 after NPU game. Still stronger than most in Pool C

A one loss Utica looks to be a better candidate, and a one loss King's may be as attractive as a two-loss Wheaton. But that's just my eyeball.

Putting aside Smed's decade long hatred of Wheaton, for the sake of analysis, this could be the conclusion the committee makes. Several problems with this. First, the Region 2 RAC thinks Johns Hopkins (R2 #5) is better than Utica (R2#6). And objectively, by the primary criteria, Utica is better than JHU  (same win %, better RRO result, stronger SOS). So the 2RAC has to be considering the fact that Utica's 20 pt loss at home to Region 1 #1 Delaware Valley is materially different than JHU's 2 pt loss on the road to Region 2 #2 Susquehanna. That's the only advantage JHU has over Utica (to the chagrin of the national chair).So Utica isn't going anywhere until JHU does.

Second, if you are going to come to the conclusion that JHU (and then Utica) are getting in ahead of Wheaton, then you have to believe JHU is getting in ahead of not just Wheaton, but also the STJ/Bethel loser (or any other 2 loss team). That's because according to the primary criteria that apply to these teams, objectively, Wheaton and STJ/Beth are statistically significantly better than JHU in 2 of the 3 (RR results, SOS) and worse in one (Winning %). The chair said all primary criteria are weighted equally. You could say Utica is tied with Wheaton in SOS (.547 to .550) and they split the winning % and RRO criteria, but the 2RAC is blocking you from thinking that with their placement of JHU. I wonder why? Could it be that they think JHU is a better team than Utica? ((Bleed--the 2RAC is listening). An added complication: If you throw in the "optional" final criteria of end of season loss, JHU/Utica fare better against  the STJ/Bethel loser.

A final consideration in all of this is the fact that StJ/Bethel are both ranked ahead of 1 loss LaCrosse and if that remains the case after today's games, the MIAC loser blocks UWL. That's probably unlikely given that UWL would probably be the first Pool C taken if they beat Platteville and finish with 1 loss.

So if you believe Utica is better than Wheaton, then you are a "1 loss" guy and all the 2 loss teams have to be considered later. Pool C then becomes UWLX, Kings, Utica, HSU and the Albion/Alma loser. Stj/Beth loser and Wheaton stay home.

I think Wheaton should be the first 2 loss team selected. Heck maybe 2nd or 3rd team chosen. STJ/Bethel loser is a good choice too but the way the MIAC is, it's almost a given there will be a 2 loss team or split every year with those two going against each other. So subjectively it increases each teams SOS in the case of both of them getting to play one another twice. It would be as if Wheaton played NCC twice. Just my two cents. There are a lot of good 2 loss programs that would make a better case based on OCC and intraconfrences losses that I think these 2 loss teams should be considered over some of the 1 loss Pool C teams. 9-1 vs 8-2 team can be vastly different.  A ton of factors to sift through but I didn't quite agree on the podcast when he said it's  evaluated by a win or loss but not point margin or how they beat a team on common opponents, but then we are human so we look at some stuff with the RACs etc. kind of all over the place and makes you wonder what is the criteria. But enough with the nonsense, unless Wheaton loses today, they should be in. If UWL wins they should be In. So UWP may get booted and then I doubt HSU gets picked. Bethel/STJ loser should make it in my opinion based on who they played and results this yesr. JHU is a good candidate too. Last spot will be a flip of a coin based on who is left and who passed the "eye test."

Should be a fun Saturday today!

King's did their part to simplify matters.

Final:
Alma    34
Albion  31

Was just about to post if Mount Union would get a pool c until they scored a last second TD. Looked like he went for the pick and Ruby caught it in the end zone
:o :o :o
Wild season! Wow. Playoffs haven't even started yet.

The final profiles for the potential at large teams (with final records and SOS post Sat) are:


UWLX (Region 6 #5) 9-1 (1-1).556 (Loss V Region 6 #4,  win over Region 6 #6)
Bethel (Region 6 #2)8-2 (1-2).612 (Win vs Region 6 #2, Loss @ Region 6 #6, Loss at Region 6 #2)
Wheaton (Region 5 #3) 8-2 (1-2) .551 (Loss @ Region 3 #1, @ Region 5#1, Win over Region 5 #7)
Albion (Region 4 #2) 9-1 (0-1) .544 ( loss @ Region 4 #3)
JHU (Region 2 #5) 9-1 (0-1) .505 (Loss @ Region 2 #2)
Utica (Region 2 #6) 9-1 (0-1) .528 (Loss vs Region 2 #1)
HSU (Region 3 #5) 8-1 (1-1) .485 (win at Region 6 #6, Loss to Region 3 #3)
John Carroll (Region 4 #6) 8-2 (1-1) .540 (Loss @ Region 4 #1, Win vs Region 4 #7)

Albion will slide from #2 in Region 4, Bethel will slide from #2 in Region 6, probably getting passed by UWL as #3 and St Johns moves up to #2. Only other spot is JHU at #5, but I suspect Cortland and Ithaca switch spots and Susquehanna moves up to #1 with Ithaca ahead of Cortland at #2/3 or 3/4 depending on the Carnegie Mellon/CWRU game tonight, but if JHU moves up a spot that could marginally help their resume. All others held serve.

There is some work at the bottom of some of the regions that could affect the RR results of playoff and at large teams. the 8 team Region 3 sorted itself with Belhaven losing. Region 4 could lose BW which hurts JCU and the inclusion of someone else is unknown. Lake Forest won the AQ (I believe) beating Chicago so they could reappear in the 5 at another teams expense (all of whom won), The 6 has to decide what to do with Platteville and if Gustavus sneaks in Bethel gets an RRO win, bolstering their Pool C case.

Crazy thing about the Mt Union finish is that apparantly, in a 3 way tie the tiebreaker is a secret vote among the head coaches. In that case they could easily have voted in JCU or BW so the OAC would get 2 as Mt Union would have been a pool C lock. In the MWC the tiebreaker among Lake Forest, Ripon and Monmouth is which team has led for the most quarters of games during the season. Looks like Lake Forest will get the AQ there. Crazy stuff these tiebreakers.

Quote from: USee on November 12, 2022, 05:35:45 PM
Crazy thing about the Mt Union finish is that apparantly, in a 3 way tie the tiebreaker is a secret vote among the head coaches. In that case they could easily have voted in JCU or BW so the OAC would get 2 as Mt Union would have been a pool C lock. In the MWC the tiebreaker among Lake Forest, Ripon and Monmouth is which team has led for the most quarters of games during the season. Looks like Lake Forest will get the AQ there. Crazy stuff these tiebreakers.

Had they not gotten a fortuitous bounce today, Mount would have had a sub-.500 SOS and a 1-1 vRRO.  There is zero question in my mind they would have been selected, but it would have been based on factors outside the official criteria.

Quote from: USee on November 12, 2022, 05:13:01 PM
The final profiles for the potential at large teams (with final records and SOS post Sat) are:


UWLX (Region 6 #5) 9-1 (1-1).556 (Loss V Region 6 #4, presumed win over Region 6 #6)
Bethel (Region 6 #2)8-2 (1-2).612 (Win vs Region 6 #2, Loss @ Region 6 #6, Loss at Region 6 #2)
Wheaton (Region 5 #3) 8-2 (1-2) .551 (Loss @ Region 3 #1, @ Region 5#1, Win over Region 5 #7)
Albion (Region 4 #2) 9-1 (0-1) .544 ( loss @ Region 4 #3)
JHU (Region 2 #5) 9-1 (0-1) .505 (Loss @ Region 2 #2)
Utica (Region 2 #6) 9-1 (0-1) .528 (Loss vs Region 2 #1)
HSU (Region 3 #5) 8-1 (1-1) .485 (win at Region 6 #6, Loss to Region 3 #3)
John Carroll (Region 4 #6) 8-2 (1-1) .540 (Loss @ Region 4 #1, Win vs Region 4 #7)

Albion will slide from #2 in Region 4, Bethel will slide from #2 in Region 6, probably getting passed by UWL as #3 and St Johns moves up to #2. Only other spot is JHU at #5, but I suspect Cortland and Ithaca switch spots and Susquehanna moves up to #1 with Ithaca ahead of Cortland at #2/3 or 3/4 depending on the Carnegie Mellon/CWRU game tonight, but if JHU moves up a spot that could marginally help their resume. All others held serve.

There is some work at the bottom of some of the regions that could affect the RR results of playoff and at large teams. the 8 team Region 3 sorted itself with Belhaven losing. Region 4 could lose BW which hurts JCU and the inclusion of someone else is unknown. Lake Forest won the AQ (I believe) beating Chicago so they could reappear in the 5 at another teams expense (all of whom won), The 6 has to decide what to do with Platteville and if Gustavus sneaks in Bethel gets an RRO win, bolstering their Pool C case.

Region 4 doesn't really have many option to fill out the rankings. There are only 10 teams with 3 or fewer losses. Six of them are the top 6 and should stay there in some order. The choice including all 3 loss teams in the region is: current #7 BW (7-3, 0-3 vRRO, .546 SoS), Denison (8-2, 0-1 vRRO, .440 SoS), Trine (7-3, 0-2 vRRO, .572 SoS), and Wabash (7-3, 0-2 vRRO), .536 SoS)
Honestly, if I'm the region 4 committee and want to try to get a pool C team I stick Trine in at #7 to give Albion a RRO win. That would give Albion a (9-1, 1-1 vRRO, .544 SoS) resume which is pretty strong.

Quote from: USee on November 12, 2022, 05:13:01 PM
The final profiles for the potential at large teams (with final records and SOS post Sat) are:

[...]

There is some work at the bottom of some of the regions that could affect the RR results of playoff and at large teams. the 8 team Region 3 sorted itself with Belhaven losing. Region 4 could lose BW which hurts JCU and the inclusion of someone else is unknown. Lake Forest won the AQ (I believe) beating Chicago so they could reappear in the 5 at another teams expense (all of whom won), The 6 has to decide what to do with Platteville and if Gustavus sneaks in Bethel gets an RRO win, bolstering their Pool C case.

It *really* sorted itself out because Birmingham-Southern managed to do everything but lay a goose egg in losing 20-3 at Rhodes.  So remember, regional committees, trying to game the system is the kiss of death for your teams!

So who moves into #7 in R3 with both BSC and Belhaven losing today? Shenandoah? HPU?

Almost certainly move Howard Payne in as that gives HSU another RRO Win and all but assures them as a lock for pool C.

I'll be interested if the committee takes into account the MIAC championship game, which effectively gives Bethel a .040 pt lift or more in SOS by playing StJ again. Even without it they would have the highest SOS in the field of Pool C candidates so it likely doesn't matter. The bottom of these regional rankings are really going to make or break a few teams chances.

I think the last spot comes down to Albion vs JHU but who knows. I think it will be: UWL, Bethel, Wheaton, HSU, and then JHU or Albion. I think Albion sneaks in if Trine gets ranked in the final RR.

Quote from: Hawks88 on November 12, 2022, 09:01:14 PM
So who moves into #7 in R3 with both BSC and Belhaven losing today? Shenandoah? HPU?

By basics I'd say SHENANDOAH (8-2)...loss respectable games to RMC (10-0) and Bridgewater (9-1).

HPU (7-3) has one less win. That close game to George Fox (8-2) hurts. Heck if GF didn't lose a 1 point game to PLU they would be (9-1) only losing to Linfield - R6 #1 possibly.

HPU had HSU and UMHB beat and lost both. If they finish all three of those games they're 10-0 and possibly #1 in R3. But instead they're 7-8-9-10 discussion. BSC/Berry/HPU are all 7-3 (0-2)

Based on criteria the look at W/L record the RRO... so basically HPU is  7-3 (0-2) vs SHENANDOAH who  is 8-2 (0-2).

Congrats to those who stepped up their schedule this year and were rewarded. I gave Wheaton longer odds because I didn't know if this committee would reward them for playing Trinity instead of beating up on MIAA and MWC schools like in the past. I like the direction this is taking.

I see on twitter a lot of grousing by JHU people. But...Albion has a bigger gripe with their SOS. And Utica had better criteria numbers than JHU. (Say what you will about that.)

Quote from: smedindy on November 13, 2022, 06:37:43 PM
Congrats to those who stepped up their schedule this year and were rewarded. I gave Wheaton longer odds because I didn't know if this committee would reward them for playing Trinity instead of beating up on MIAA and MWC schools like in the past. I like the direction this is taking.

I see on twitter a lot of grousing by JHU people. But...Albion has a bigger gripe with their SOS. And Utica had better criteria numbers than JHU. (Say what you will about that.)

How many members will JHU's conference have next year? (I don't remember all of the details of the Landmark move.)

JHU, Ursinus, Muhlenberg, F&M, Dickinson, McDaniel, Gettysburg. That's what I see.

Quote from: smedindy on November 13, 2022, 07:52:40 PM
JHU, Ursinus, Muhlenberg, F&M, Dickinson, McDaniel, Gettysburg. That's what I see.

Thanks. That gives JHU 4 OOC games to boost their SOS!

Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 13, 2022, 08:05:58 PM

Quote from: smedindy on November 13, 2022, 07:52:40 PM
JHU, Ursinus, Muhlenberg, F&M, Dickinson, McDaniel, Gettysburg. That's what I see.

Thanks. That gives JHU 4 OOC games to boost their SOS!

Two of those will be NJAC teams, due to a scheduling alliance.

Quote from: HOPEful on November 11, 2022, 11:48:09 AM
As a fan of the MIAA, I can fully empathize with this sentiment. Over in the Region 4 Fan Poll, I was the lone voter this week to vote JCU as the number 2 team in the region. After watching both Albion and Alma, I believe both would lose to JCU on a neutral field, although I think Albion v. JCU would be a good game. I also expect Alma to get crushed this weekend by Albion...

Between this and the Mount Union/BW game, I'm not sure I know anything D3 football anymore :)

Quote from: smedindy on November 13, 2022, 06:37:43 PM
Congrats to those who stepped up their schedule this year and were rewarded. I gave Wheaton longer odds because I didn't know if this committee would reward them for playing Trinity instead of beating up on MIAA and MWC schools like in the past. I like the direction this is taking.

One of the things the guys said on this morning podcast is that unfortunately there is no guarantee this *is* a direction the national committee will continue to take due to the turnover in membership and the lack of anything in the criteria saying that establishing this as being something teams will be rewarded for.  Certainly teams *should* be rewarded for such, and I'm glad Wheaton's blocked PAT OT loss to Trinity did not cost them a chance at the playoffs.

Pool C summary for 2022 Playoffs:

Utica 17, at #11 Susquehanna 10
at #6 Trinity TX 14, #9 HSU 7
at #12 Wartburg 14, #7 UW-Lacrosse 6
#13 Bethel 34, at #15 Wheaton 32

at #2 UMU 45, Utica 7
#13 Bethel 30, at #5 Linfield 13

at 3 UMHB 41, #13 Bethel 28

Final record for Pool C teams, 3-5

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 23, 2022, 11:30:52 PM
Pool C summary for 2022 Playoffs:

Utica 17, at #11 Susquehanna 10
at #6 Trinity TX 14, #9 HSU 7
at #12 Wartburg 14, #7 UW-Lacrosse 6
#13 Bethel 34, at #15 Wheaton 32

at #2 UMU 45, Utica 7
#13 Bethel 30, at #5 Linfield 13

at 3 UMHB 41, #13 Bethel 28

Final record for Pool C teams, 3-5

Considering there was 3 of the 5 in one quad, and two of them met right out of the gates, 3-5 doesn't look too bad.