This is more of a question for Pat, but i'd also like some input from you guys as well...What is stopping the ARC from putting in a bid to host the National Championship game at the UNI-Dome?  I have heard a few objections, but I think that the venue is honestly better than the places we've played the game recently (Texas and Maryland)

Here are reasons why I think its a great place to host...
1.  Indoor facility that isn't too big.  Let's be honest, this year's game could draw the biggest crowd in Championship history and Hall of Fame Stadium (seats 22,000) would still be half full.  It's so hard to play with energy in a 1/3 full stadium, and it's not the best look on TV.  UNI-Dome seats a little over 16,000 and if you watch the Iowa High School Playoffs, even a crowd of 5000-6000 can look pretty full and get really loud in the stadium.  One of the best parts of playing at D3 is the intimate stadiums, with crowds that are loud and a part of the game.  When you play in an over-sized stadium, you lose the crowd involvement and also it looks bad to see a (relatively) small number of fans surrounded by a sea of empty seats.

2. Waterloo/Cedar Falls has a local airport which can handle large aircraft and is also only 45 minutes from the Cedar Rapids Airport and metro area.  Fans and teams should be able to get affordable flights and plenty of hotels and food/entertainment within an 15-60 min drive of the UNI-Dome. 

3. UNI-Dome is an FCS facility, so they already have the media/pressbox/power and multimedia set-up to accommodate the needs of D3 football.

4. UNI-Dome is easily drive-able for ARC, Midwest, WIAC, MIAA and CCIW fan bases.  I think there would be a great crowd of people who would attend an indoor game, within a 4-5 hr drive around xmas break from all those conferences, along with the fact that there would be a pretty good chance that a team from one or more of those conferences could be playing in the game.  I know that even if Johns Hopkins was playing UMU, or Cortland was playing Berry, fans from the midwest conferences listed above and the ARC in particular, would love to see a high level football game, and see how these teams "from out east" look compared to the teams around here.

The only reason I can think of for UNI to not want to host it would be if there would be a possible scheduling issue with an FCS playoff game, or if they don't want to cover-up/change the midfield logo (which runs from 35 yard line-35 yard line).

I just think it's a good sized field, indoors and has access to all the other outside things you need to host a big game like that and would draw a larger (local) crowd than the recent games in Texas and Maryland and make for a more impressive final game experience for players, fans and TV viewers.

PS...I still like the old Salem stadium for the historic aspect, but I also like that the UNI-Dome is indoors and weather would not be a factor.

Thoughts...?

Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 13, 2025, 09:17:43 AM

Quote from: MediaGuy on November 12, 2025, 10:07:50 PMThe NCAA just announced that home teams will have the discretion to implement video replay review in the playoffs up until the semi finals...I'd like to point out that  having the equipment to do replay doesn't mean anything if the camera operators aren't professional and disciplined.  I've watched hundreds of hours of d3 video feeds over the last few years and well over 90% of them have not had either cameras in position or operators disciplined enough to capture video that gives me any more insight to what happened on the field than the trusted real time view of an official who is in position.
Also officials call the game differently when they know there is replay because they dont want an inadvertent whistle to call a play dead when they shouldn't...and when the replay cameras aren't in position or dont capture the play correctly, there will be plays that are extended when they shouldn't be.
Long post short...the replays we see on ESPN in the semifinals and finals are captured by professional camera operators who do this for a living...and most d3 games, even at top schools are produced by student workers...In my opinion this will result in more inaccurate officiating unless professional camera crews are implemented...I'd rather the NCAA spend money on more flights and a true seeded bracket.

Why would it result in more inaccurate officiating? If the angle doesn't show anything, then it doesn't show anything -- it doesn't make officiating less accurate if the replay is unusable.

SJU fans should understand, if nothing else, the benefit of having immediate replay review of a targeting call. And that's something we talked about in our interview with the NCAA committee chair when we chatted about this very issue a couple of weeks ago.

https://www.d3blogs.com/d3football/2025/10/29/atn-podcast-393-a-chat-with-the-chair-2025-style/

First of all, I have no problem with using replay to review targeting, as that is something that can be game changing and unfairly punish a kid for a call where the official isn't in a great position to make the call in real time.  But that can be done already with the ipads on the sideline the coaches have to review gametape in real time.

My concern is that officials start to rely on replay when there isn't a reliable replay to see.  I hope I'm wrong, I hope that the games are continued to be officiated just like we have seen in the semi's and finals for the last 10 years.  But if the officiating starts to look more like the NFL or FBS football, where officials don't call a runner down on close plays...or don't whistle a questionable pass incomplete or don't call a touchdown or first down because they think they have a reliable replay to check then I'm skeptical that this is a good option.

I'd like to have seen the data from the conferences who have been using replay all year and see how they have been making it work, what problems there are, how they fix them before just announcing 10 days before playoff games that it is an option...It just feels rushed and not thought through.  Kind of like cancelling a game in the 3rd due to weather and then making up a score not thinking about how it will affect NPI or tiebreakers later.

Like I said, I hope I'm wrong.  I wish there was replay in the Alma/Hope game earlier this year, I hope there is the ability to review targeting in real time to make sure they get the call right, I hope there is a system in place to make sure there aren't egregious, obvious errors in playoff games. 

All I'm saying is that as long as the officials don't change the way they are currently officiating and we use replay to double check important, game changing plays, then great.  But if officials start relying on replay, i'm not convinced that the kid running a camera for class credit a few times every year can be counted on to get a better angle to see a play than an official in position and looking at what he is supposed to be looking at.

The NCAA just announced that home teams will have the discretion to implement video replay review in the playoffs up until the semi finals...I'd like to point out that  having the equipment to do replay doesn't mean anything if the camera operators aren't professional and disciplined.  I've watched hundreds of hours of d3 video feeds over the last few years and well over 90% of them have not had either cameras in position or operators disciplined enough to capture video that gives me any more insight to what happened on the field than the trusted real time view of an official who is in position.
Also officials call the game differently when they know there is replay because they dont want an inadvertent whistle to call a play dead when they shouldn't...and when the replay cameras aren't in position or dont capture the play correctly, there will be plays that are extended when they shouldn't be.
Long post short...the replays we see on ESPN in the semifinals and finals are captured by professional camera operators who do this for a living...and most d3 games, even at top schools are produced by student workers...In my opinion this will result in more inaccurate officiating unless professional camera crews are implemented...I'd rather the NCAA spend money on more flights and a true seeded bracket.

I was hoping the Coe/Central game would be a defacto play-in game for the playoffs...but if Frank Rossi's NPI simulator is correct...a Coe win on Saturday will leave both teams on the outside looking in...https://x.com/FrankRossi/status/1987572394035147049?s=19

Quote from: HansenRatings on November 05, 2025, 10:59:54 AM

Quote from: MediaGuy on November 04, 2025, 07:43:38 PMhttps://share.google/images/K3B1Wrrp0ZpePoIAE

This is the generally accepted chart that most coaches follow.

Man... I have some major issues with that chart. Other than the obvious ones - going for 2 if you're down by 5 or 2 (to either go down by a FG or to tie) or going for 2 if you're up by 1 or 5 (to go up by 3 or 7), going for 2 if you're down by 8 late is the clearest positive value decision you can make.

You don't need fancy math for this to make sense. Assume field goals are a 100% proposition, 2pt tries are 50-50, and winning in overtime is 50-50 (close enough to accurate for this to work, but it doesn't really matter). Assuming you score 2 TDs (otherwise none of this matters):

PAT + PAT = 50% to win, pending OT
PAT + 2PT = 50% to win, pending 2pt try
In either scenario, you have a 50% chance to win

2PT(convert) + PAT = 100% to win
2PT(fail) + 2PT(convert) = 50% to win, pending OT
2PT(fail) + 2PT(fail) = 0% to win
(50% convert x 100% win) + {50% fail x [(50% convert x 50% win) + (50% fail x 0% win)]} = 62.5% win

In the latter option, where you go for 2 first, you have the information advantage of knowing if you convert your 2 pt try earlier. If you only have time for 2 possessions, you want to get that information as soon as possible. You're playing with the goal of winning the game. Not with the goal of going to OT.

Here's a comparison of that chart from Tennessee and two charts made by fivethirtyeight and ESPN analytics. The latter two used different methodologies to come up with extremely similar results:



Here's the full chart and link to the 538 analysis:



Here's the chart and link for ESPN's analysis:

I didn't realize there were that many of these charts floating around, ive only seen charts from 2 teams in person and they were identical...I just grabbed the first one I saw on a Google search and assumed it was the same.

And anything you typed after "fancy math" was too fancy for me...I'm still mad at whoever started mixing letters into my math problems.

https://share.google/images/K3B1Wrrp0ZpePoIAE

This is the generally accepted chart that most coaches follow.  Most staffs will have a non-play calling assistant coach take a look at this once they cross midfield during a drive and let the OC & HC know what the chart suggests.  It allows for a quick decision and the math is already done to give you the best win probability.

Also to the point about special teams...im not sure any team in the ARC has a dedicated Special Teams Coach and one of the reasons Wartburg in particular has had success in special teams is that they put more emphasis on it in practice, keep it relatively simple and make it a priority.  I've never seen a Wartburg practice where they dont spend at least 20 minutes on special teams and if you're tired or a little banged up, Wartburg will take a starter out for a play or 2 on offense or defense but they will stay on special teams.  A lot of teams use 4th down reps to give an O/D starter a breather.

Quote from: doolittledog on October 20, 2025, 05:00:23 PMSort of off topic for the current season.  But...any new rumors or news for potential new conference members in the near future?

Around the time that Luther announced their departure, I saw somewhere that Monmouth and Northwestern St Paul were names mentioned, but not in any official capacity...from a travel perspective, possibly Augustana would be an interesting invite

Watching some tape for the Loras game this weekend and I think a 1-4 record is pretty deceiving.  Hope is a legitimate playoff team, Benedictine still has a shot to win the NACC and the Dubuque and Central games were way closer than the final scores would indicate.  Loras is a team who looks like they've gotten better each week and Wartburg cant just sleepwalk through this game.  Loras has some weapons on offense and an unpredictable defense...and a Wartburg alum running the offense, so they'll have some new wrinkles for Wartburg to deal with.

And to answer the question about what's in the water...Nitrates...look it up...Bremer county also has one of the highest cancer rates in the state so maybe that's the price we pay.

If someone wants to do a deep dive into the last 10 years of schedules to confirm this, it might open some interesting NPI opportunities for us.  In an ideal world, we could pick up the non-con games that the other 9 MWC teams can't play now.  For an ARC team to now get to schedule a bottom half MIAC, CCIW, WIAC or NACC team with a good SOS and a .500 record, might make for a better NPI than Luther.

Quote from: HansenRatings on May 20, 2025, 03:05:08 PM

Quote from: DriftlessDuhawk on May 20, 2025, 11:49:10 AMThanks for the charts Logan! I do think that the trend is something to note, as the top of the conference is separating itself from the bottom of the league. I would assume that I am one of the younger people on this board, as I have only followed the conference for about 8 years now. But in those 8 years, it has felt like the haves (Central/Wartburg/Coe/ud) and the have-nots (the rest) have not done much flip-flopping. Now I think this is pretty normal for most football conferences, as we typically don't see teams going from worst to first in this particular sport. But it does beg the question, how much longer will this go on for, and what does one of the teams in the have-nots group need to do to break through? I would love someone to hear the opinions of those who are a bit more seasoned on this board on the matter, as they have probably seen and know more about the history of the league.

I would say that there are definitely some leagues where there are pretty stark differences in institutional priorities that drives a lot of the stratification (the MIAC and former makeup of the ASC immediately come to mind), but that's not really the case in the ARC. Wartburg as an institution definitely puts a premium on athletic success, but if you look at federally-reported revenue/spending numbers, the whole conference is basically on the same playing field. Some institutions have other issues (general financial health of the college, dwindling nearby population), but there's nothing on the scale of St. Scholastica vs. St. John's to overcome.

This is anecdoctal, but for me coming out of high school (class of '08), I had barely functional dial-up internet at home, and I was only going to hear about a school from in-person visits or mailers, and then everything I knew about them was essentially learned from my on campus visits. Now a kid from Arizona can meet a coach from Iowa at a recruiting fair, and then in the next fifteen minutes they'll know who the best teams are in their conference and send a DM to their coaches on Twitter. That can make it more difficult to climb the ladder, but not insurmountable.

I also look at success in other sports. There's abosultely no reason for a school like Luther to be struggling as much as they have been in football. If you exclude football from the All-Sports Trophy last year, Luther finishes first in the conference, and they're regularly finishing in the Top 3 in the All Sports Trophy even including football, and have the third-most outright All Sports Trophy wins all time, behind Wartburg and Central.

The stasis right now can feel entrenched, and I do think the availability of information for recruits can make that entrenchment more "real," but I think pretty much every school in the ARC is only 1 great coaching hire away from moving into the upper half of the conference.

This has been an interesting dynamic in the 20+ years I've been around the conference and I've seen some teams fall and almost get over the hump.  In the late 90s, Simpson was the conference power, then fell slowly down to where they are now.  As a Wartburg guy, I think Coach Hoskins will get them on the right track if the administration gives him the tools to be successful.  Luther had a good thing going for a while with the triple option coach and I thought they would be the next team to get to the next level, but he left.  Which bring me to my point.  You said a team is 1 good coaching hire away from moving up in the world, but in my time, it has taken more than a good coach to turn a program around. 
1. Coach...obviously it takes a dynamic, motivated coach who is committed to winning but also changing the culture of a program.
2. Administration support...if a coach doesn't have the bosses who are willing to change and let the coach create the culture, it might get good for a year or two, but you can't build on a poor foundation.  I think that's what we saw at Luther and Simpson.  Good young coaches who tryed to build something, but didn't get the support or "buy in" from their bosses to craft a culture of success.
3. Local recruiting...Wartburg and Central without question, built a fence around their local recruiting territory.  That's not to say they get everyone in a 50 mile radius, but they are definitely in the top 3 for every good high school player in their local area.  Coe and Dubuque have done a decent job as well, but haven't really locked the gate of their territory quite yet, but they've done a much better job than everyone else at getting local kids.  That comes from having a culture kids and parents want to be a part of.
4. Local Support...Once you have steps 1-3, it's much easier to get local support, boosters and fans to build your program.  Its much easier to have businesses and fans continuously fund and support your program when they see the kids from their hometown on your team.  It might seem like a shortcut to just recruit texas, florida or Arizona, but it's hard to get fans and businesses to support a team full of "outsiders".

Long post, but my point is that the "haves" are playing by that playback and the "have-nots" seem to be trying different recipes that haven't panned out yet in my humble opinion

Went down a rabbit hole with only 8 games to watch and thought I'd put together a "Daddy Warbucks" bracket with all teams seeded and unlimited flights.
 Got some interesting matchups but also had 7 flights in the first round and 12 in the second assuming highest seed won in first round.

(can't figure out how to share a pdf or jpeg so if someone wants to let me know how, I'll share it)

Quote from: DriftlessDuhawk on November 12, 2024, 10:53:22 PMWith regards to the looming playoffs, I think it is going to be very interesting to see how ARC teams schedule teams in the nonconference moving forward. Logan Hansen has long been ringing the bell that NPI simply favors win percentage (for this season and next) over scheduling good teams. I wonder if a team like Wartburg looks at their nonconference scheduling of St. Johns as a detriment due to that loss having potentially disastrous effects on their NPI number (yes I know they have locked up the conference AQ and thus it doesn't matter but if they did not it would). But for other teams in the conference (UD playing UWP and Aurora/Loras playing Hope) what good do these games do if these teams ever dream of getting into the tournament? I know Coe plays Cornell due to the history of that game but it is actually going to be the reason they get into the playoff field this year. Had they played a stronger opponent and lost it most likely would have kept them on the outside looking in.

I would like to think that following the next season the NPI dials would be reset but there are a number of conferences that are going to benefit from the current set-up and I would imagine they would push back against this idea. In the meantime, that sound you hear is Luther's phone ringing off the hook from every team in the country looking to take a trip to play in Decorah on the blue turf...

Scheduling is an art sometime and for solid top 15 teams, it can be difficult.  Wartburg only got 4 home games this year because we couldn't get anyone to sign a home/home agreement and other teams were asking for $ to come play a one season non-conference game in Waverly. 
The lower/mid level teams might be getting plenty of calls, but that just makes it more difficult for a Wartburg/SJU/NCC or WIAC team to get non-conference home games without cutting a check. 

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 22, 2024, 02:30:56 PM

Quote from: MediaGuy on October 22, 2024, 02:26:05 PMHopefully the new NPI system will cut through the BS and actually rank teams accordingly...if those numbers were public, I would think Coe and Wartburg would be much closer than they are. 

Those numbers are public:
https://stats.ncaa.org/selection_rankings/nitty_gritties/39608

Thanks, I've been looking for those all year, and it does in fact rank Coe higher than Wartburg, proving my point...any chance I can call you for backup the next time I'm arguing with the wife?...

Quote from: Schipper Strong on October 20, 2024, 10:55:46 PM

Quote from: DBQ1965 on October 20, 2024, 07:01:12 PMSerious question:  In Grand Rapids, MI, I live too far away from IIAC/ARC to make an informed decision,  but I wonder how a 1 loss Wartburg team is ranked ahead of an undefeated Coe team?  Was the St. John's game that big for the Knights?

Wartburg gets a lot of credit for the past two years' playoff runs and their only loss being to the current number 3 team. Each round of the playoffs tends to require a significantly stronger team and making in to the semifinals twice proved they had made those steps. I think Coe deserves to be rated right up there with  Wartburg honestly.

Central lost to both Coe and Wartburg by only 4 points in each game with Coe going to double OT. I came away from both games feeling that they were winnable for Central. In the Wartburg game we really shot ourselves in the foot. The only TD scored in regulation time against both teams was when a pass to the player along the sideline got blown backward by the strong wind. The receiver didn't comprehend that it wasn't a forward pass and didn't jump on the ball or attempt to stop the WB player who picked it up and ran it in for a TD. That was enough to cost us the game. I would have played Brady Ketchum at QB all season and last year. He got to start Saturday and only got two offensive series before he was benched because of the score, but he was 6 of 6 in passing with two TDS.

Oops, got off topic. Back to Coe and Wartburg. I would say that on the days we played each team, I thought Coe was the better of the two. That is subjective of course as we actually took Coe to double OT. Coe was able to run against our defense that has been tough on the run all season better than Wartburg. Defensively they were both strong. I think the  Wartburg vs Coe game will be a real showdown. I will have no real idea how to pick when they play each other. Wartburg found their offense against Luther and beat them worse than we did, though we substituted earlier than I have ever seen. Then Wartburg didn't do as well against Simpson as we did. Maybe they substituted earlier because the Simpson coach was a WB grad or maybe it was because the coach knew what to expect out of WB because he was a grad.

Couple of insights from a Wartburg Fan...

As to why Coe is ranked lower than Wartburg with a better record...it's a subjective poll with human inputs, so there is always a latency bias weighted on what a team has done the last few years vs just this season.  There are always 4 or 5 WIAC teams ranked in the middle of the season because nobody knows who will come out of that mess on top.  Then by the end of the year, there is always 1 team in the top 10, and a few others from 11-25.  But I've seen most of those teams the last few years, and if the top 25 was just the top 25 teams, the top 4 or 5 teams in the WIAC should be ranked...but humans have a hard time ranking a 3 or 4 loss team in the top 25.  Also, I've always thought that a team needs a road playoff win in the previous few years to get some extra love in the polls.  Wartburg got that at St John's 2 years ago and followed it up with a 2nd semi final run.  What the head to head results really give you when looking at the polls is it gives teams "floors and ceilings".  Wartburg will not get above St. Johns without SJU losing 2 times, and SJU wont fall below Wartburg with 1 loss.  Hopefully the new NPI system will cut through the BS and actually rank teams accordingly...if those numbers were public, I would think Coe and Wartburg would be much closer than they are. 

As to the Wartburg/Central Game...
That was the worst played game from both teams I've seen in the series in quite some time.  Wartburg's QB had lost a lot of confidence after the bad game at SJU, and Wartburg just got crippled with little injuries.  In the 4th quarter, we were playing our 1st, 5th, 6th, 8th and 10th best o-lineman, some out of position.  And both teams made some horrendous mistakes, we had waaaay to many penalties and didn't play well on 3rd down.  I wish that game was in week 10 or 11 instead of so early in the season.

As to the Wartburg/Simpson Game...
Central was able to get ahead of Simpson and on tape it looked like the Storm was broken spiritually pretty early in that game. Wartburg had one of those weeks were Wartburg was great on 1st and 2nd down, and just came up short on 3rd and 4th.  In this league, most of the teams are capable of beating anyone, but the Wartburg/Central/Coe's of the league have historically been able to make the other teams believe they can't win pretty early in the game, thus the success.  If you get to halftime and the "lesser" team still believes they can win, you're in for a dogfight until you prove otherwise. Having seen Wartburg play everyone from North Central and Mount Union, to Luther and Greenville, I'm a believer that pretty much any team receiving votes in the Top 25 is capable of beating anyone on any given day...it all comes down to poise and play-making.  Wartburg has had a nasty habit of falling behind in big games, and somehow winning at the end, and it's been because the coaches don't panic, the players trust each other and everyone believes they can win.

As for this week's Coe/Wartburg Game...
I think it's an interesting match-up between 2 teams who have a similar game strategy...run the ball, take a few shots, and wear down the defense so they can run the ball late.  I expect to see more of an old-school Big 10 game, low scoring, good defense, and field position, rather than a SEC or PAC-10 game shootout.  I think that Coe will still get a Pool C with a loss and Wartburg will need St. John's to win out to get a Pool C with a loss.

Quick question from your friends in the ARC Media...what is the correct pronunciation

(we-ack) or (y-ack)

having gone back to watch all the crazy games in the WIAC these last 2 weeks, there doesn't seem to be a consensus among the TV presenters.