Quote from: gordonmann on November 25, 2018, 09:01:39 PM
I don't know if academic standards are the reason that the East can't produce an elite Division III football team. But considering that Johns Hopkins is one win away from winning the "East" bracket, this is not a good time to raise that question.

Considering JHU is a South region team only helps that the East does not have a "powerhouse" but the committee is tasked to create the best bracket that doesn't break the NCAA budget. But what's the point of playing on Saturday if upsets aren't possible; if that was the fact then UMU should just be crowned the National Champ since they have been #1 all year. Give credit when it's due; JHU, RPI, Muhlenburg all played and won to be in the QF

When will first Regional Rankings come out?

So much disdain for JHU, a team that has been on top of a conference for 8+ years. Next weeks game has a lot on the line for who will represent the CC come NCAA. Wesley still has to play Salisbury as well. Pending the winner I could see NJAC getting 2 teams in. The MAC and PAC both in a good fight for the AQ as well

Quote from: wally_wabash on November 08, 2017, 10:39:15 PM

Quote from: RtSLl3100 on November 08, 2017, 10:17:58 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on November 08, 2017, 03:34:50 PM
Quick reactions...

- East rankings are totally sensible.  I've got nothing here. 
- The North remains a mystery.  Not sure how you can justify DePauw ahead of IWU still when DPU has no RRO wins, a 52-6 RRO loss, and just got done trailing Kenyon in the 4th quarter of a non-exhibition game.  0.015 points of SOS doesn't cover that stuff up. 
- I thought the South might keep CWRU back another week, but they went ahead and pushed them up into playoff position today.  The optics are a little better for CWRU this week, but the game is the same- they need to win to be in. 
- Linfield went from t2 to 4 which probably sets them up to either host Chapman or go back to H-SU next week depending on whether or not the committee can talk their way out of a Texas rematch in round 1.  Wartburg stays at #2 and maybe in position for a top seed.  Interesting that La Crosse stayed ahead of Concordia-Moorhead.  Maybe the North region folks aren't the only ones ignoring Whitewater. 

Projection coming later!

I don't understand the South; you move CWRU up 2 spots. I see the argument they are still undefeated, but such a weak SOS compared to centre and JHU. I think the committee is trying to cover themselves by hoping CWRU gets to the table before Centre, bc if they don't then they would be potentially leaving a 10-0 team out of the tournament(assuming they beat CMU). Also what would that do to a JHU team;hopefully a pool A selection but being 6S does that hurt their chances to potential to host a 1st round game? It seems like they are doing what everyone else feels the north has failed to do by keeping IWU behind DPU.

Being undefeated is a big deal.  I think there are 12 such teams left in the entire division.  Bad SOS or no, being undefeated matters. 

The committee isn't covering anything really.  The South RAC is setting the order here- CWRU and Centre will never be considered at the same time nationally. 

Hopkins is not hopefully a Pool A team, they're it.  Waaaait.  Nope- they have to win this week.  I need to fix that in my table.  But, if they do win this week, they qualify automatically.  No selection involved with Hopkins.  Now, Hopkins did lose to an unranked team and when you do that, you definitely open yourself up to playing on the road.  That's not games the committee is playing, that's just the razor thin margins for error that any team has when it comes to seeding.

I do think it is a fair and understandable argument, but what changed some much from the week 1 regional rankings to week 2 for them to move CWRU up to spots is more the question? If your saying being undefeated is more important than SOS, why not have them ranked higher in the first ranking?

Good to see JHU and F&M still regionally ranked.  Hopeing the CC can get in the win column this year with the MAC-CC bowls. 0-4 since the start 2yrs ago

Quote from: wally_wabash on November 08, 2017, 03:34:50 PM
Quick reactions...

- East rankings are totally sensible.  I've got nothing here. 
- The North remains a mystery.  Not sure how you can justify DePauw ahead of IWU still when DPU has no RRO wins, a 52-6 RRO loss, and just got done trailing Kenyon in the 4th quarter of a non-exhibition game.  0.015 points of SOS doesn't cover that stuff up. 
- I thought the South might keep CWRU back another week, but they went ahead and pushed them up into playoff position today.  The optics are a little better for CWRU this week, but the game is the same- they need to win to be in. 
- Linfield went from t2 to 4 which probably sets them up to either host Chapman or go back to H-SU next week depending on whether or not the committee can talk their way out of a Texas rematch in round 1.  Wartburg stays at #2 and maybe in position for a top seed.  Interesting that La Crosse stayed ahead of Concordia-Moorhead.  Maybe the North region folks aren't the only ones ignoring Whitewater. 

Projection coming later!

I don't understand the South; you move CWRU up 2 spots. I see the argument they are still undefeated, but such a weak SOS compared to centre and JHU. I think the committee is trying to cover themselves by hoping CWRU gets to the table before Centre, bc if they don't then they would be potentially leaving a 10-0 team out of the tournament(assuming they beat CMU). Also what would that do to a JHU team;hopefully a pool A selection but being 6S does that hurt their chances to potential to host a 1st round game? It seems like they are doing what everyone else feels the north has failed to do by keeping IWU behind DPU.

With DVC and Brockport playing so well, if the both finish 10-0 thoughts they get the #1 for the east,, leave mount in the north, uwo in the west and UMHB in the south?

But if you are trying to limit the flights; HSU probably will end up playing UMHB; unless as Keith said HSU losses on Saturday

So lower the percentage is kind of another of saying a harder SOS? Or lower the percentage is better saying only 40% could get the same record?

My fault, some reason thought they were left out

Quote from: bleedpurple on November 07, 2016, 09:48:48 PM

Quote from: Andy Jamison - Walla Walla Wildcat on November 07, 2016, 09:04:43 PM
So do we gripe this year about the AQ's for teams from non-competitive conferences who provide first round speed bumps (or in some cases 2nd round speed bumps when they are paired against each other in Round 1) or simply accept that is the nature of D3 and move on?

I will always be of the belief that an AQ should only count if a team is ranked in the Top 25 (from whatever polls are in use).  If a team isn't ranked then the AQ goes to pool C.  I'd be much happier with the AQ system if the teams were seeded 1-32 and the bracket was scheduled accordingly.  As it is right now we have a system that is set up for for many great early round matchups that should be in the quarters at worst (but that won't happen unless I win the Powerball and pay for it myself ).

Actually, the first half of your preferred system won't happen even if you DO pay for it. I think the value of access is strong. So much of this depends of viewpoint.  While it would be possible to put together a far more COMPETITIVE bracket than the current system produces, there is something really cool (to me) about every team in the country having a path to the national championship when the season begins.  Has there ever been an undefeated team that did not make the tournament? I hope not. No matter how non-competitive you and I may believe they will be against the big boys, if they have never been beaten on the football field, I want them to have their shot. Teams 33 and 34 and others will always be disappointed and may have a great case as to why they should have been in the playoffs. But complain as they may, they have at least one loss on the field to point to as to why they really didn't get in. 

On the other hand, obviously we all wish money were not a factor and the field would be bracketed appropriately.  Also, when it comes to Pool C teams, personally I would prefer a system that puts the best (most competitive) 6 teams in after the conference champions (although I guess my exception would be an undefeated non Pool A/B).  I think both the criteria and the process used to fill the Pool C spots is suspect at best.

Centre was 10-0 2 years ago and left on the table..FYI. But well said

Current system is not great but it works for the system. I think a better idea for your beloved uwp or JCU is expand the playoff field again. Not doubling it but maybe giving these "elite" teams a first round bye so we don't see a mhbu v hsu first round due to travel.
But to say uwp is deserving of a playoff bid bc they are in a tough conference(arguably the best in d3 this year) that's why they have 2 losses is what is ridiculous. Fact remains recruit better or have a better game plan and be the one to win the close games. I doubt anyone would argue saying they are not good enough to win a play off game compared to some of the other teams that make the field, still those other teams did what they were supposed to do to get into the tournament and not worry about what if situations or having a committee of people decide if they should make the tournament.
And your notion that mt union or a Hopkins would still get in but just as a pool c instead of a pool a bid just makes even less sense if your are saying the deserve to still get in, just not be a guarantee??

Most ridiculous idea I have ever heard. Why punish a team or conference based on ideals. Also take the CC or NJAC or OACwho have a 10 team conference therefore can only schedule 1 out of conference game. Now yes each team should try to schedule a respectable opponent for that 1 game but have to get other team to agree. Then comes the aspect of d3 budgets for travel, etc. one last point is then saying a team like Mount Union should not be able to qualify for an AQ because they are around .455. Nice try but teams EARN AQ's, some have a harder road than others but these kids still go out week after week with the same goal...playing for a chance at a national title

True they dont like too, but depends on the other 3 regions of the actual bracket not just regional rankings.  Look at Welsey v JHU in 2013 (granted 2 v 4 on 2nd RR of that year)

Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on November 07, 2016, 04:27:00 PM

Quote from: ITH radio on November 07, 2016, 01:45:10 PM
Harper's INT basically put the game away. He's had a strong end to the year.

I agree re the HOB OL and my favorite shot of that game was Koch with his jersey torn from battling in the trenches. It'll be interesting if UofR puts up a fight or gets rolled Saturday. Then it's basically a who knows scenario with the playoff selection. I could see Hobart hosting anyone from Bridgewater or Wesley. Hopefully they'll get a decent draw bc the 3 NE teams, especially Husson creates some travel issues and the Eagles have already played Alfred so they may get shipped out to avoid a rematch.

WNE will most likely host Husson with Bridgewater being sent to either Hobart or Wesley. I think Johns Hopkins gets either Stevenson or Wesley 1st round if they do not host. Hobart will get the at-large selection in St. John Fisher. This is not a projected bracket or quad, but just potential 1st round games. We can also have the ODAC team put in place of Fisher while Fisher goes to Mount Union.

Edit: Wesley may get sent with two losses to RM (don't think the outcome changes). This prevents Johns Hopkins yearly match up with Wesley.

I know the 500 mile rule really hurts the bracket bc of Husson, but I think Wesley v Stevenson, Hobart v SJF (assuming they win), JHU v Bridgewater to eliminate the WNE rematch from last year. But I could also see them just sending Husson to Mt Union first round although a flight would keep intergity of entire bracket together