Interesting point.  I suppose it depends on the objective of pool c.  Is it to get the best 12 "at-large" teams or to represent as many conferences as possible?  An almost impossible task with so little out of conference reference points.

Kind of a mess with no real solution.  Some conferences play zero non-conference games, others 3, and others play each other twice!  No perfect solution other than.....don't lose games! 

Would like to see the same setting used for all sports.  Why 40/60 for football?  I hope that does not lead to top teams not scheduling tough non-conference opponents, there have been some really good games in the past few years, be a shame to lose those. 

Believe that the Isthmus Bowl tie-breaker is just for determining who goes to Isthmus Bowl.  It would take place after the playoff teams are selected if there were teams tied.

Was looking at that and the only thing that makes sense is the league standings, I think??

Updated tie-breaker rules for WIAC.  Can't get the link to work, but this is what it is from conference.

1.  Head-to-head results between all tied teams.  **

2.  Cumulative Won-Loss record vs. team higher in the standings.

3.  Record vs. teams in the standings in the descending order (i.e. #1 seed,, #2 seed, #3 seed).

4.  Tied teams are to be eliminated in reverse order of their last NCAA appearance beginning with the 1991 season ( AQ tiebreaker) / Isthmus Bowl appearance (Isthmus Bowl tiebreaker)

**  If two teams remain after a third or more teams are eliminated, the tie-breaker reverts back to criteria #1.

I would guess that Isthmus Bowl has their own criteria and is not following NCAA regional rankings criteria??

The 3 way tie breaker is a different one according to what has been communicated to the teams.

First tie breaker is overall record.  UWP would be 5-5, UWO and UWRF would be 6-4.  Then head to head and UWRF would go. 

Not sure I like that but I guess there has to be some way with all three 1-1 against each other.