I think CWRU is headed for 6-4 and the have-nots really are THAT bad this year.

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?

Quote from: jam40jeff on November 03, 2024, 11:51:50 AMI think CWRU is headed for 6-4 and the have-nots really are THAT bad this year.

Too soon to really know for sure but it does seem to be trending in that direction for Case.

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.

It appears that Fromberg's CWRU career, like that of Saxton before him, will end with an injury in what otherwise would have been his penultimate game. Filips, who potentially has two season of eligibility remaining after this because he missed all of 2023 due to injury, threw for 3 TD's against GCC in four series. His line was 11-13-1-3 178.

Pat Coleman picked CMU most likely top 25 team to be upset.

Patrick's take: No. 13 Carnegie Mellon. All throughout my trip to western Pennsylvania last month, people were telling me Case Western Reserve was for real, and this is their last chance to prove it. Case also has the Academic Bowl rivalry to play for, which has been played every year since 1986 and might not survive Carnegie Mellon's move to the Centennial Conference.

That's too bad for Fromberg, but I'm also excited to see what Filips can do against CMU.  However, the way CMU has been playing has me skeptical that CWRU will even keep it within a couple scores.

WOW...that Academic Bowl was a thriller.  There were several key plays in the fourth quarter that could have flipped the game one way or the other.  That was a battle...

Good luck to CMU and the PAC in the playoffs.

Luckily, Pat knows more about football than I do.  Hopefully we see many more performances like that from Filips next year.

3 PAC teams in the playoffs.   Good luck to W&J, GCC, and CMU.  Show the D3 world how strong the  PAC really is.

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.

Only 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.

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?

ExTartan, I was, in no way, asking for the 'AA to consider the PAC's tie-breaker.  It's simply a joke that this formula could put 6 spots in a ranking between three teams that beat each other and won every game against the exact same 8 other teams.  My point was not sour grapes, merely pointing out that it's flawed to not see 9-1 records against the exact same opponents as identical, especially given that the three head-to-head match-ups were ALL within one score. Not sour grapes, but not accepting of a formula that so drastically views nearly identical results as not nearly identically.

Regarding the "vs. Westminster" point, I'll grant that the Presidents performed the worst in that match-up than the other two.  W&J came into that game immediately following the loss to Carnegie-Mellon. Your alma mater played St. Vincent following the loss to Grove City, St. Vincent who just relieved their head coach (and others) of their responsibilities. Grove City followed up its loss to W&J by playing Thiel and Waynesburg before facing real competition again.

In further consideration, I guess the Federal Government has concocted such ridiculousness in the past so I really gave the 'AA fools more credit for uniqueness than I should have.

If the PAC teams had played anybody outside the League, and these rankings came out, I get it. But these three teams should be in a coin flip type situation in any formula.

CMU's NPI was 69.33 W&J's 68.28 The 6 spots difference is out of 240 teams. Their NPI and rankings are nearly identical. The difference certainly isn't a drastic difference. The teams between them are also 9-1. Their results also have to be considered in ranking.

FWIW, the week 10 d3 poll has GCC and CMU above W&J.


From Westminster's site: "Westminster will wait to hear about potential postseason opportunities Sunday night." Guess they're not counting their chickens yet.

Westminster is an ECAC member, CWRU is not. IF (big) Westminster accepted an ECAC Bowl bid, then CWRU could get the Extra Point Bowl and five PAC teams get post-season play. Just wishin'.

Their NPI numbers and rankings are NOT nearly identical. 1.05 difference between teams that played the exact same teams. And, when comparing the three tied teams in the PAC, OTHER schools results do not have to be considered. Those results have nothing to do with CMU/Grove/W&J NPI numbers. THAT'S my point. In my opinion, a formula that looks at those three tied teams' results and doesn't produce a statistical draw isn't accurate.

And, in this discussion, the d3football poll isn't worth anything.