Quote from: Dr. Acula on December 07, 2024, 01:13:39 PM

Quote from: BergAlum2 on December 07, 2024, 01:10:11 PMMan if that Carnegie player didnt drop that shovel pass, I think they would of gone in for a TD, Mount lucky the FG kicker kicked a soccer goal 

I can't believe they attempted a FG after how those two PAT attempts looked.

Agree. CMU kicker broke his non-kicking foot two weeks ago and it seems to really be affecting him. The FG attempt never got off the ground, just a total mis-hit. I'm kind of hoping we manage to pull ahead and it doesn't come down to a kick...

Quote from: BergAlum2 on December 07, 2024, 12:29:41 PMFirst time I've ever heard Carnegie pronounced Car-NAY-gee. 

Yes, this is how everyone from this area says it!

Agree that the PAC has nothing to be ashamed of. Three worthy playoff entrants played three worthy playoff opponents. CMU won one of those rope-a-dope kind of games where they got out to an early lead, then gave up lots of passing yards in the box score but only "broke" a few times defensively. No doubt it got very tense in the fourth quarter but they battled to a win, obviously benefiting from the tests in the regular season they got from Grove City, W&J, and Case.

I have to admit I'm disappointed that both Grove City and W&J lost. I'm not a total homer and I know there are good teams all across the division but I thought we had a real shot at two or three teams in the final 16, especially given that Grove City took Cortland right down to the wire last year. Congrats again to both teams on excellent seasons.

As for the Tartans...oh no big deal, just an away game at the division's most storied program!  This may not be the Machine of old, but it's still Mount Union. The formula for victory is something like this: play defense out of their minds, get a turnover or swing play on special teams to get out to a lead, and hang on for dear life.

Offensively, despite Mills' poor numbers on Saturday, I thought he played quite well - it was just so damn cold and windy that nobody could catch the ball - lotta drops that hit guys in the hands. If that's the case again, they'll need more from the run game than they got against Centre.

Defensively, I do think CMU has the guys to hang - but the offense has to do them some favors and move the ball a little more consistently than they did on Saturday.

Special teams has been a key advantage for the Tartans all year and it would be great if that keeps up.

Tall order. Let's see if the Tartans can get it done and be the PAC's first quarterfinalist since...I'm gonna have to look that one up and get back to you guys.

Good luck tomorrow/today everyone. Let's make the PAC proud.

Quote from: wally_wabash on November 18, 2024, 12:11:58 PMOver the years, much bemoaning has come from the lack of new teams getting deep in the playoffs and one reason why I believe that's the case is because teams that go deep in the playoffs get more practice time.  For years and years and years, Mount Union was earning five extra weeks of practice time while everyone else is getting ready for spring ball. Earning a spot in a bowl game this week is pretty invaluable.  All teams have a set number of practice opportunities- until now, where teams that played well enough to earn a spot in the playoffs or a bowl game get bonus opportunities to practice, get better, and be with their brothers for one more week.  My stance on postseason bowl games that aren't part of the playoffs has definitely shifted over the years, and I'm happy to see this come to the NCAC and happy to see Wabash get the chance to practice and play one more week.  I can't really see a downside to this. 

There is no downside, I guess other than your support staff needing to coordinate one more bus ride and/or hotel stay and/or team meal (depending on how far you're going for the bowl game).

I'm not sure how much difference one extra week of practice makes in a team's future, but as a Guy Who Was Once A Senior On A Team That Made A D3 Bowl Game The Year After Making The Playoffs, it's almost *inconceivable* to me that there's actual discussion on this board of whether seniors would choose to play in the game. Are you kidding me?!?!

I played football for 14 years. I had always (and to some extent still do!) identified myself as a football player before anything else. As my senior season hit a disappointing patch at midseason (meaning a repeat trip to the playoffs was off the table) and then picked up momentum towards the end with 4 straight wins, the chance to play one more game was awesome, a temporary reprieve from The End Of Being A Football Player. One more game that was basically a just-for-fun postseason game, but with a sense of finality KNOWING that it was the last game I would ever play (unlike the playoffs - where you never know for sure it's the last one unless it's the Stagg).

I mean, guys, this was the most fun week of practice I ever had by. A mile. There's no real pressure on the bowl game so you just get that one last week of Being A Football Player without much pressure on it. And then one more game to put on the pads? One last time to stand on the field after the game talking to your family before you go in and take off the pads forever? 

I'm honestly not sure how much I agree with Greg's point about one week of extra practice time meaningfully altering a future trajectory but I absolutely agree with the bowl games being a net positive thing. I think it's great for 7-3 and 8-2 teams to get one more chance to line up against a similar caliber opponent from a peer conference. In D3 where we all complain about limited OOC play in general and even more about limited chances for good teams to test each other, I welcome the chance for bowl games between the second/third/fourth place teams from conferences in a similar geographic footprint that otherwise don't play one another often. I know Pat has in the past questioned how much stock to put in bowl results when trying to stack conferences against one another because of concerns that not all D3 teams take bowl games equally seriously, but I do think they're still useful data and even if not they're a cool chance for you to play somebody decent that you don't play every year.

Quote from: mikefln on November 24, 2024, 02:52:54 AMCongratulations to Westminster for their win in the bowl game. 

Way to represent the PAC.

Seconded! Congrats Westminster!

I can't believe I forgot about the Hartwick year for the Empire 8. Team Boltus. Shame on me.

Quote from: mikefln on November 21, 2024, 09:35:37 AM

Quote from: DevilsAdvocate on November 20, 2024, 08:25:06 AMLong time listener, first time caller.... if they want to bracket us (PAC) this way, love to see a all PAC Semi-Final!  Let's show them what we bring!  They are all highly skilled team in their own ways.  They can all go toe to toe with the best.  Anything can happen on a Saturday!  Just need them all to stay healthy for 5 weeks!

I love the thought process and I do believe that each team is capable,  but that Mount Union draw is a tough one to overcome for sure.  But first thing first, they all have tough round of 32 games they need to win.

Yeah, for now let's get three into the round of 16 if we can. That would be very heady stuff - in fact, I suspect it's almost never happened because before this year the number of at larges severely limited the capability of any conference to get three teams in. Maybe I'll ask Pat or Logan on Twitter if it's happened in the d3football.com era...I'm guessing that maybe once or twice the WIAC or MIAC did it? But it can't have happened more than a very few times.

Also, I can't believe you guys keep saying that it's only a 30-minute trip from Oakland (CMU) to W&J. It's at *least* 35 minutes. Probably 40 on a bus!

Quote from: mikefln on November 19, 2024, 03:03:54 PM

Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 19, 2024, 02:02:34 PM

Quote from: WashJeff68 on November 17, 2024, 05:52:18 PMEx Tartan, How does the CC stack up vs the PAC this uear?

On a different note than the recent airing of grievances...

I guess we'll find out. Gotta hope the Wolverines do the PAC proud at Johns Hopkins!

Overall this looks like a pretty nice set of matchups for the PAC. I think all three have winnable games in the round of 32. I'll stop short of "picking all three to win" - everyone left standing by the round of 32 is dangerous and I think winning all three may be a stretch - but I think the PAC has a chance to validate the impression that the league's top teams are legit top-20 caliber teams right now.

Also, let's not forget to root on Westminster in the Extra Points Bowl! If I didn't have some other commitments (namely, little kids) I'd consider making the drive...but anyone who is nearby should totally go! The guy who writes Extra Points is a lot of fun and worth a follow, and he seems genuinely excited at his foray into sponsoring a bowl game.

Great post.  Out of the 3, who  do you see making it the furthest?

Oh man, tough question.

I really hope I'm not jinxing myself by saying this, but CMU appears to have drawn the most winnable game in the round of 32 (playing at home and against an opponent probably considered the least intimidating of the three). Randolph-Macon made a deep playoff run last year and Johns Hopkins is a perennial power. So while I think Grove City and W&J are both very strong contenders, I don't think I'm taking it for granted that any of the three are locks to win in round one - just saying that all three *can* IMO.

Beyond that...it gets tricky to prognosticate too far...CMU would have a hypothetical round of 16 matchup at Mount Union, and I don't even want to start talking about that until it's on the board.

I'll just say that I think there are very few teams in the field who are *so* dominant that they seem out of reach for the PAC trio. Grove City dang near beat the national champs last year (and *did* beat the one team who beat the national champs in the regular season). The year before CMU was the only team to lead North Central at any point in the playoffs and went into the fourth quarter down just 14-7. I think the PAC teams have been showing they're in that second tier of D3 powers and maybe knocking on the door of having someone break through to the quarters or semifinals. Let's make it happen, fellas.

Quote from: WashJeff68 on November 17, 2024, 05:52:18 PMEx Tartan, How does the CC stack up vs the PAC this uear?

On a different note than the recent airing of grievances...

I guess we'll find out. Gotta hope the Wolverines do the PAC proud at Johns Hopkins!

Overall this looks like a pretty nice set of matchups for the PAC. I think all three have winnable games in the round of 32. I'll stop short of "picking all three to win" - everyone left standing by the round of 32 is dangerous and I think winning all three may be a stretch - but I think the PAC has a chance to validate the impression that the league's top teams are legit top-20 caliber teams right now.

Also, let's not forget to root on Westminster in the Extra Points Bowl! If I didn't have some other commitments (namely, little kids) I'd consider making the drive...but anyone who is nearby should totally go! The guy who writes Extra Points is a lot of fun and worth a follow, and he seems genuinely excited at his foray into sponsoring a bowl game.

Quote from: Bob.Gregg on November 17, 2024, 09:38:09 AMOnly the 'AA could "craft' a formula to 'evaluate' three teams who beat each other in close games, beat eight other common opponents, and produce rankings from #17 (the team with the worst tie-breaker numbers in the three-way) to #23 (the team that won the tie-breaker in the league).  ONLY the NCAA.

1. Practically speaking, I think the three teams in the tie are very difficult (nigh impossible) to actually separate in rankings. W&J won the league tiebreaker with MOV and is deservedly the official league champion, but I think the games between the 3 tied teams pretty much work out to a wash given how close they all were. I'm mildly sympathetic to an argument that W&J really controlled the CMU game for a half and maybe it feels fluky that CMU clawed back to win that one in overtime, but maybe then don't give up three touchdown passes in the second half & overtime to one guy (who had one career touchdown entering the day) on your homecoming then, ya know?

2. Anyways, I do want to say that the NCAA is by no means required to consider the league's tiebreaker when ranking the teams nor should they be. That would be impossible given that all leagues can set their own tiebreakers. So that specific gripe strikes me somewhat as sour grapes. Buuuut...

3. That said, Bob, I agree that the NPI ranking is quite frustrating in this sense: by ignoring margin of victory entirely, all those games against common opponents become essentially useless for ranking purposes here because the three tied teams all beat the others, so the only minor differentiator is the home field adjustment. Otherwise the eight wins agains the shared opponents are just...the same thing, eight wins for all three.

But let's look a bit at the margin of victory against those other common opponents to make our own judgement then, shall we?

CMU and Grove City both had lopsided wins over 4th place Westminster. CMU led 31-0 at halftime and 45-7 at the end of three before winning 45-20. Grove City led 20-3 at halftime en route to a 36-9 win. W&J had to survive a final possession for the win. Point against the Presidents.

But then...CMU just barely survived Case Western yesterday while Grove City and W&J both won with somewhat more control. Neither was a blowout but nor did they come down to the final moments like CMU did. Point against the Tartans there.

Below those two teams, I think it's totally a wash. The three tied teams all completely wiped out everyone from Geneva on down and I don't think it matters much to try and split hairs between different variations of 58-7 and 41-0 wins to parse who's better.

So honestly...while I agree that the NPI totally discarding margin of victory is problematic because it reduces that information from all those games against eight common opponents to just "win" with the slight adjustment for home field...I'm still not sure how much it leads me to a different result? I think maybe Grove City ought to get the highest ranking as the one who (IMO) has the best combined results against #4 and #5 in the league?

Quote from: mikefln on November 17, 2024, 06:43:11 AM3 PAC teams in the playoffs.   Good luck to W&J, GCC, and CMU.  Show the D3 world how strong the  PAC really is.

Indeed! Excited to see the bracket.  Could be some fun matchups, lots of potential opponents in driving distance for everyone.

One of the most incredible stats I saw to make a statement about the gap between the top half and bottom half of the PAC - Case finished the year out scoring opponents by an average margin of 40-16...and ended up 6-4. Six massive blowout wins and four competitive losses. If I recall correctly there was only one game all year between the bottom-six and top-five that was even a little competitive (Westminster vs Waynesburg in the opener). Geneva wins the unofficial "best of the rest" crown by going 5-5 with a final margin of 18-33 ppg and their closest loss against the top 5 being a 41-7 defeat. Yikes.

Ok, but to close on a more positive note, this may be partially because the PAC actually has five genuine playoff-caliber squads at the top, given how Westminster and CWRU were both able to push at least one or two members of the top 3. Now it's left to the top 3 to show out in the playoffs.

But wait! That's not all...I think Westminster will get a bid to the Extra Points Bowl to play Marietta. The expansion of D3 "bowl games" beyond the couple of ECAC games has been an interesting trend...not sure if any other folks are subscribers to the Extra Points newsletter (our bowl game sponsor) but I'd suggest it! The guy is a fun writer who covers lots of interesting under-the-radar stuff about college supports.

Favorites all hold serve again today.

Assuming GCC and W&J do so again next week, the conference title / Pool A bid will come down to the result of the Academic Bowl.

CMU victory means a three-way tie at 9-1 which (if I've understood correctly) means the title goes to W&J based on combined margin in the games between tied teams (W&J has an 8 point win vs GCC and 3 point loss vs CMU so they're plus-5; GCC is minus-8 vs W&J and plus-7 vs CMU so they're minus-1; and CMU is plus-3 vs W&J and minus-7 vs GCC so they're minus-4).

CMU loss and it's even simpler - W&J and GCC tie at 9-1 and W&J gets the title with head to head win.

Again...Logan has assured us that any 9-1 PAC team is a near-lock to get in with the expanded playoff...

There's also a berth in the Extra Points bowl which may still be out there for the top team that doesn't get into the playoffs, which could still include Westminster or Case in that discussion too.

The race for the conference title is a bit clearer now.

W&J is a virtual lock to finish 9-1 so I think all the wild scenarios like a five-way tie at 8-2 are all off the table and it's down to W&J, GCC, and CMU. But the key games remaining that could still affect the races would be CWRU beating GCC or CMU, or Westminster beating GCC.

If the favorites (based on results to date) hold serve, we end up with a three-way tie at 9-1 (W&J, GCC, CMU). I believe W&J wins the tiebreaker in that scenario based on MOV in games between tied teams and would get the conference AQ.

If either Westminster or Case beat GCC and CMU wins out, then CMU gets the title by h2h over W&J.

If Case beats CMU and GCC wins out, then W&J wins the title by h2h over GCC.

However, Logan Hansen assures me that a 9-1 PAC team is a lock in the new playoff system. So this could actually mean *three* PAC playoff teams? With Westminster getting the Extra Points Bowl?