FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[Schwami]

Put it this way, is the #2 team from the 20th ranked conference better than the #2 team from the fifth?

Oh boy.  You sure you want to light that fuse?  I have some "opinions" on what people can do with their "my league is better than your league" talk.  We can explore those opinions in depth if you want.

No, not really, was just kidding.  On a serious note, our interview with Duey did demonstrate how much weight SOS factored in and with SJFC having the sixth best in all D3, certainly had to be a big reason for their selection.

Interestingly enough, the real issue is it points to team's having 2-3 OOC games being in better position IF they schedule well.  Leagues that allow only 1 OOC game will hamstring their #2 team b/c SOS will always be around .500 (a point I notice Schwami already covers so I'll leave it at that). 

Basically points to its AQ or bust, especially when the 25th and 26th Pool A bids get in the next few years.

Yes, until this year the NCAC had a power-weighted schedule where teams only played 7 conference games.  That substantially contributed to Wabash's ability to have a strong SOS in 2010.  The downside was the real risk that someone (ahem, Kenyon) could go 7-0 without playing Witt or Wabash and get the AQ.

And yes, it really is basically AQ or bust now with so few Pool C bids available.  I think this reality is being driven home even harder this year.  Wabash and Witt were fortunate in the past to get Pool C bids when more were available, and at least they continue to be in the conversation most years, even if not selected.

[smedindy]

All in all, it's better to have a round robin. Again, the MWC almost had two undefeated champs (which, um, took care of themselves over the last couple of weeks) and ended up with tri-champs. At least they had a 'sensible' tie-breaker.

[Frank Rossi]

In order to provide a quick response, as Duey Naatz settles back into his day job as Athletics Director of UW-Stout, J.P. Williams, assistant director of Championships and Alliances for the NCAA -- a man who was involved in the entire selection process in Indianapolis, including the entirety of this past weekend -- wanted to help clarify the statement being scrutinized by several people concerning the potential for three teams to be selected for Pool C from a single region when only five slots are available:

"I'll take a moment to provide some clarity.

Three or more Pool C teams from one region could certainly be selected to compete in the championship. However, with only five Pool C slots in 2013, it would have been difficult due to the number quality teams in all regions.

Through the process, this topic was not discussed by the committee. They were focused on looking at all DIII Football criteria and putting the best Pool B and Pool C teams into the bracket. As Duey stated Sunday night, there were some very good football teams that did not make the field of 32.

Moving forward, lets continue to discuss upcoming games and teams in the tournament, as this will be an exciting championship."

As I suggested, Duey was apparently speaking plainly about the reality of the selection process from his experience, and not speaking of a new rule.  I hope this helps lay some things to rest.

[bashbrother]

If you don't think politics are one of the "criteria" you are naive...

If he wouldn't have said anything about that,  many of us could have lived with SJF getting in on their results against regionally ranked opponents...

That statement was amateurish.   Either way, it is another example of the wiggle room that the "Committee" leave in their back pocket... (Under the political cloth)  The stuff we don't have any visibility on.

Bottom line SJF earned it on the field... Not because their field is in the East...  Let's just leave it at that...

[wally_wabash]

I appreciate the follow up, Frank.  But there was a candid moment of honesty there on Sunday night where this issue could have been explored further and it was missed.  Two days later, a suit in the home office in Indianapolis telling us that no, everything was kosher and there's nothing to see here doesn't entirely remove the questions about what factors beyond the criteria may or may not have influenced the selections. 

[BashDad]

In order to provide a quick response, as Duey Naatz settles back into his day job as Athletics Director of UW-Stout, J.P. Williams, assistant director of Championships and Alliances for the NCAA -- a man who was involved in the entire selection process in Indianapolis, including the entirety of this past weekend -- wanted to help clarify the statement being scrutinized by several people concerning the potential for three teams to be selected for Pool C from a single region when only five slots are available:

"I'll take a moment to provide some clarity.

Three or more Pool C teams from one region could certainly be selected to compete in the championship. However, with only five Pool C slots in 2013, it would have been difficult due to the number quality teams in all regions.

Through the process, this topic was not discussed by the committee. They were focused on looking at all DIII Football criteria and putting the best Pool B and Pool C teams into the bracket. As Duey stated Sunday night, there were some very good football teams that did not make the field of 32.

Moving forward, lets continue to discuss upcoming games and teams in the tournament, as this will be an exciting championship."

As I suggested, Duey was apparently speaking plainly about the reality of the selection process from his experience, and not speaking of a new rule.  I hope this helps lay some things to rest.

I mean, c'mon. You hope what helps lay some things to rest. I'm loathe to be seen as some stubborn and snubbed homer, but that statement doesn't really do anything to mitigate anything. It's nothing. It's a paragraph of prepared nothing.

[Frank Rossi]

If you don't think politics are one of the "criteria" you are naive...

If he wouldn't have said anything about that,  many of us could have lived with SJF getting in on their results against regionally ranked opponents...

That statement was amateurish.   Either way, it is another example of the wiggle room that the "Committee" leave in their back pocket... (Under the political cloth)  The stuff we don't have any visibility on.

Bottom line SJF earned it on the field... Not because their field is in the East...  Let's just leave it at that...

OK, now that we're turning somewhat defamatory, I'm going to step up and challenge you.  Specifically, describe these "politics" involved when we know that two WEST Region teams were already selected, perhaps even earlier than the second North Region team.  And the third West Region team may have actually been a WIAC school -- you know, that conference in which the Committee Chair coached and is now an Athletics Director?  Now, explain how those "politics" would lead to the selection of an EAST Region team, let alone a North Region team...  Oh, and perhaps you can then explain why four members of the Committee out of eight total would have allowed a pick of an East Region team when they had their regions with the third Pool C potential teams on the board represented by two Committee members each.  If politics were involved, wouldn't they have been nepotistic in those later rounds? 

Again, it's sad to see that teams like Wabash had to miss the playoffs, but until you actually listen to the Committee Chair in full (like, all 35 minutes, not 5 seconds), listen to the common logic discussed here about the process itself from someone who has interviewed Committee Chairs for six years, and use your own common sense about how the process worked as set up by the NCAA, it all smells like a lot of sour grapes -- and defamatory ones at that.  I dare you to identify the supposed politics involved when a Committee Chair flat out tells you how impossible it might be that a region can't get three Pool C bids if, as J.P. Williams stated, there are indeed quality teams in other regions up for discussion still.  Midwesterners should all accept the idea that the man was a plain-speaking individual who was being pretty honest about the realistic chances of teams.  His major point of emphasis was strength of schedule (objective and subjective), and the Committee's picks suggest the other members had the same view.  That's not politics -- that's actually looking at the nature of why Pool C exists, and he does discuss that briefly in our discussion.

Everyone wondered whether the Chair was speaking of a new rule or of a practical/realistic standpoint, and we now have an answer.  Never do we get word like we did today of specific discussion points (or the lack thereof) during the confidential process.  They understood the concerns some of you have stated that I conveyed in my message this afternoon, and as such, they wanted to clear the air immediately once I indicated the potential issue for them.  This was a very unique response -- and anyone who doesn't understand that is an amateur in this process.  You act like they were sitting there reading these message boards for two days; it took three hours on a busy week to get a full response from someone who was there in the room and who helped coordinate the process. 

To continue to latch onto the idea that it was political undercuts your own case and legitimacy here.  And as I said, when Director Naatz first made the statement Sunday, I immediately understood what he meant -- that it wasn't a realistic expectation because of the pure uphill battle that third team faces when being compared with a first team from another region since very rarely does a top Pool C team in a region have a ranking of less than 5th -- and the voting system itself will rarely be conducive to such a hope.  I'm sorry your team wasn't picked, but going further now really will be taking away from the excitement of what's in front of us -- a great tournament in which anything can happen based on what we've seen already in 2013.  Let's look forward and not backward.

[old wabash]

bottom line for me...i get the no data points for cross-region rankings, but when your team is in the top 25 all year long and does not make the field of 32 playoff teams, you are disappointed for them. then you notice that a team consistently ranked (by coaches, media and ADs) as further down in two separate  rankings, i think wow, this makes even less sense!! so my conclusion what is the ncaa basing their no data points on in this culture of everybody gets a trophy??

[bashgiant]

SJF lost to a team with 4 losses and 2 losses and beat a team by 3 that had 1 win and all that counts for 0? Sure does seem like a little common sense might go a long way.

[bashgiant]

If SOS counts for so much how does Mount Union get a top seed? If I was any more wet behind the ears I would drown so this is a serious question lol

[bashbrother]

Have them publish formal rules for selection... Covering whether strength of schedule & record against regionally ranked opponents or winning percentage or too many teams from a certain region is more important. You will be waiting a while,  because they will not. They should publish so that there is no guessing on whether strength of schedule or winning % will carry the day.  My post said that I am good with SFJ getting in... If they are going to stay with SOS and record against regionally ranked opponents... That is fine with me ... Publish it and stick with it.

[Schwami]

As small consolation, Wabash still has not lost more than 2 games in a season during Coach Raeburn's time.  We should check to see how many other teams in dIII have this kind of result and consistency over the past 5 years.  My guess is fewer than 10 with fewer than 10 losses--averaging 2 losses or fewer per year.

I'm on this...will report shortly with my findings. 

Here's the list of teams that have finished with 2 or fewer losses in every season between 2008 and now:

Mary-Hardin Baylor
North Central
Wesley
Wabash
Mount Union
Cal Lutheran

End of list.  North Central's spot is pending a run to a national championship.  Anything less and they fall off.

Worth updating this . . . and Wesley's situation is the same as North Central's last year.

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

At this point in the discussion and hearing the back and forth as an independent observer, I've come to two conclusions. Both teams are worthy of being in (Wabash the better record, higher rankings [which obviously isn't a criteria] while SJF has better SoS) depending on what metric you value more. There just weren't enough spots for everyone.

The other is something I think we can all agree on and that is that the NCAA needs to be far more transparent. Why keep things secret and hidden unless you've got something to hide? I'm not saying there should be a peanut gallery in the room to yell at the committee, but in this day and age why are important rankings kept secret, seeds not given, etc? All they generate is negative feelings by doing it like this. That may have been adequate decades ago, but with the internet it can't be that difficult or costly to get the information out to those who want it.

I'm sure if everything was perfectly fair and was available for all to ensure that it was, then there wouldn't be such anger by the Wabash fans (disappointment obviously) or conspiracy talk or any of that. I can't wait to hear how the D1 folks react next year if (and probably when) there's something like this for that 4th spot.

[bashbrother]

Great post Grizz...

Bottom line for me is:  Select a method and stick with it.  Really no need for secrets.
This is the only part of my post that seemed political to me...again, didn't say that the selection of SJF was not the right one...

Last post on this issue...good luck to all the teams in this year's tourney.

[jettssss]

Not sure what happened with the Wabash selection...... But when you wake up Mr... Chairman from getting your nap in.... Maybe you can explain  to all of d3 fans how the number 1ranked defense in D3 football.. Also number 1in a few other defensive categories didn't get picked.... Ya I would say Wabash got the shaft.....Wabash clearly was a smart and clear choice for the playoffs... Mr chairman you all should be ashamed for that decision to hold Wabash out which clearly had better criteria than a 2 lose team. Wow really...... Some one should be fired or maybe time for a new leader.............. A true common sense football fan...... Remember 1 lose is better tha . 2........hmmmmmmmmmmm