Bumblin' B's

[Mr. Ypsi]

I think Ralph's analogy is right on - think of Pool B as a giant conference.  Already they not only get their champion in, but also their #2 (and this year, at least, #3).  If there are more worthy teams, they can go for Pool C, just like the 'runners-up' in any other conference.

But, historically, the last Pool B in the tourney would probably not have been within 20 slots of Pool C - so Pool B access (by that analogy) is already easier than for 'good' conference teams.

Many Pool A teams are 'unworthy' in a strict competitiveness sense, but d3 (AND d1, for that matter) has chosen to go with an 'access' model (which I applaud, or there would be no George Masons).  The tourney consists of ONE per conference (PLUS 2 or more from the Pool B 'conference'); beyond that, it's 'merit'.

[magicman]

I think Ralph's analogy is right on - think of Pool B as a giant conference.  Already they not only get their champion in, but also their #2 (and this year, at least, #3).  If there are more worthy teams, they can go for Pool C, just like the 'runners-up' in any other conference.

But, historically, the last Pool B in the tourney would probably not have been within 20 slots of Pool C - so Pool B access (by that analogy) is already easier than for 'good' conference teams.

Many Pool A teams are 'unworthy' in a strict competitiveness sense, but d3 (AND d1, for that matter) has chosen to go with an 'access' model (which I applaud, or there would be no George Masons).  The tourney consists of ONE per conference (PLUS 2 or more from the Pool B 'conference'); beyond that, it's 'merit'.

And that really should be the final word on this discussion, but I fear it won't be.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

I have no problem with it since any truly worthy Pool B team can always compete for a Pool C bid. And if you weren't good enough to get in the field that way, you weren't good enough.

If you have to be good enough for a pool C, many of the teams making it in pool a would not have made it.  it looks like the pool c teams have won like 80% of the games against pool A teams.  If you want to have fair access for the pool b, take the top 4 or 8 from pool b and have a pool b regional tournaments instead of the pool b teams playing in conference tournament games which don't result in bids.  Seemed to make plenty of sense in NAIA when Northwestern an independent qualifier a couple years back.

AO - remember that Pool B exists for schools that are in conferences that do not have automatic qualifers, i.e. the Landmark, NECC, and UMAC, but will have AQs in the near future. Those conferences have put into place their conference tournaments that will be used to eventually determine thier AQs. Next year the Landmark and UMAC will become Pool A eligiable and the NECC will follow suit the following season. I am quite sure they are not going to be interested in playing in Pool B regional tournaments instead of their own. Also , playing in a Pool B tournament will mean nothing after two seasons, so I suspect they rather test out their conference tournament and make sure it works for them. For example, with travel considerations in the Landmark Conference, they spent the last two seasons making sure their tournament made sense before they used it as an AQ. If these conferences then have to add a Pool B regional, that is an additional game on their schedule - thus one less game they can play out of region.

Finally, the rest of the Pool B teams (some like Maryville who are in conferences that don't have enough teams for an AQ) do play in regional tournaments... but it sometimes doesn't actually help teams.

[AO]

I have no problem with it since any truly worthy Pool B team can always compete for a Pool C bid. And if you weren't good enough to get in the field that way, you weren't good enough.

If you have to be good enough for a pool C, many of the teams making it in pool a would not have made it.  it looks like the pool c teams have won like 80% of the games against pool A teams.  If you want to have fair access for the pool b, take the top 4 or 8 from pool b and have a pool b regional tournaments instead of the pool b teams playing in conference tournament games which don't result in bids.  Seemed to make plenty of sense in NAIA when Northwestern an independent qualifier a couple years back.

AO - remember that Pool B exists for schools that are in conferences that do not have automatic qualifers, i.e. the Landmark, NECC, and UMAC, but will have AQs in the near future. Those conferences have put into place their conference tournaments that will be used to eventually determine thier AQs. Next year the Landmark and UMAC will become Pool A eligiable and the NECC will follow suit the following season. I am quite sure they are not going to be interested in playing in Pool B regional tournaments instead of their own. Also , playing in a Pool B tournament will mean nothing after two seasons, so I suspect they rather test out their conference tournament and make sure it works for them. For example, with travel considerations in the Landmark Conference, they spent the last two seasons making sure their tournament made sense before they used it as an AQ. If these conferences then have to add a Pool B regional, that is an additional game on their schedule - thus one less game they can play out of region.

Finally, the rest of the Pool B teams (some like Maryville who are in conferences that don't have enough teams for an AQ) do play in regional tournaments... but it sometimes doesn't actually help teams.

The landmark or NECC needs another year to test-drive their conference tournament?  Perhaps they should just stay home and remain pool b indefinitely if they're that worried about travel considerations.  The UMAC has been hosting great conference tournaments for many years and is ready for the AQ .   If the UMAC has to stay in pool B another year, why not have a real national tournament qualifier for one year?  I haven't looked at the schedules, but I've got a feeling the NECC and umac (or the other pool b's) are not going to have a lot of common opponents next year to be able to determine bids from. 

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

AO - that is NOT what I said at all. I said they are probably more inclined to test-drive their conference tournaments than participate in a Pool B tourney for two years which takes an additional game away from their respective schedules. I also didn't say they still needed more time. Both conferences will be Pool A eligiable next year, but I know there is always talk about tweeking things like schedules and tournaments as they participate more and more.

Also, the Landmark schools completely changed how they typically play conference games. They all came from conferences with relatively short travel arrangements meaning games on Wednesdays and Saturdays for the most part. Now they have far more distance to travel and changed to a weekend games schedule (Friday/Saturday or Saturday/Sunday) and decided the conference tournament would be just four teams instead of maybe six or eight. That is COMPLETELY different than what these teams were doing in their old conferences... so they spent the last two years ironing things.

Not a big deal and heck, conferences are still ironing things out. The CCIW only added their tournament a couple of seasons ago and thought about revamping it this season... should they be put into Pool B because of it?!

[AO]

there's nothing wrong with having a conference tournament (even though it doesn't result in a bid), or revamping the format of the tournament.   I was just throwing out the suggestion that the pool b conferences forego skip their tourney, in favor of a pool b playoff. 

if the NCAA could use some common sense the UMAC would have the AQ already,...or am I missing something?  the conference has been around for 30 years (though the schools have changed around a bit), great administration and good schools with a solid academic/athletic reputation. 

[Pat Coleman]

there's nothing wrong with having a conference tournament (even though it doesn't result in a bid), or revamping the format of the tournament.   I was just throwing out the suggestion that the pool b conferences forego skip their tourney, in favor of a pool b playoff. 

if the NCAA could use some common sense the UMAC would have the AQ already,...or am I missing something?  the conference has been around for 30 years (though the schools have changed around a bit), great administration and good schools with a solid academic/athletic reputation. 

And once we can confirm that they are all following NCAA rules and have been a member conference in good standing for two years, they will get an AQ like everyone else.

[AO]

there's nothing wrong with having a conference tournament (even though it doesn't result in a bid), or revamping the format of the tournament.   I was just throwing out the suggestion that the pool b conferences forego skip their tourney, in favor of a pool b playoff. 

if the NCAA could use some common sense the UMAC would have the AQ already,...or am I missing something?  the conference has been around for 30 years (though the schools have changed around a bit), great administration and good schools with a solid academic/athletic reputation. 

And once we can confirm that they are all following NCAA rules and have been a member conference in good standing for two years, they will get an AQ like everyone else.

some schools/conferences were ready during their 1st year of provisional membership.   

[Pat Coleman]

That's great. Some schools had to repeat a year of provisional membership, too.

[AO]

Ladies and gentlemen, I'll be brief. The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took a few liberties with our interpretation of ncaa policy- we did.
But you can't hold a whole conference responsible for the behavior of a few, sick twisted individuals. For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the whole conference system? And if the whole conference system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, Pat- isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America! Gentlemen!

[Pat Coleman]

Spare me.

[AO]

Spare me.

apparently, quoting Animal House doesn't deter you from defending ncaa policies.  I give up.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Spare me.

apparently, quoting Animal House doesn't deter you from defending ncaa policies.  I give up.

Thank God!

[Pat Coleman]

That's a ruse, Dave. AO never gives up.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Damn!