FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[smedindy]

Please don't turn this into a political discussion Bad things can happen....

[nike]

Yes, indeed.  I was really starting to like Wabash posters.
Started making plans this morning for....

[cave2bens]

Back to football - Monon Bell Classic Release... if anyone really cares?? ;

http://sports.wabash.edu/documents/2012/11/7/ReleaseNov72012.pdf?id=111

WABASH ALWAYS FIGHTS
DePAUW NEVER QUITS SWALLOWING

[GRIZ_BACKER]

Back to football - Monon Bell Classic Release... if anyone really cares?? ;

http://sports.wabash.edu/documents/2012/11/7/ReleaseNov72012.pdf?id=111

WABASH ALWAYS FIGHTS
DePAUW NEVER QUITS SWALLOWING

We can discuss the GRIZ!?   The HCAC tiebreaker is simple this year.  Win or go home!!   

[wabashcpa]

RR's are out:

http://www.d3blogs.com/d3football/2012/11/07/second-2012-ncaa-regional-rankings/

Witt 5th, OWU 6th, Wabash banished.

Can't argue with this.  Lose at home to Allegheny and Oberlin, you get what you deserve.  Hopefully they can finish strong for the seniors and keep the Bell home for another year.

[The_Bishop]

While it sincerely and truly pains me to say this, but GO BIG RED.  Denison beating Kenyon this Saturday may simplify although not altogether clarify the AQ analysis this year.

OWU hanging 60 on Wooster would be the sprinkle on the Sunday as well. 

[K-Mack]

Quick take on Witt and OWU and their shot at the playoffs...I think they either both go or the both stay home.  Depends entirely on how much weight the committee puts on win percentage, because all of the teams that they will be compared with will have (much) stronger SOS's and more favorable results vs RROs.  The good news there is that the North region committee apparently loves them some win percentage and kept Witt and OWU in front of the 2-loss CCIW teams which I don't think was necessarily a given.  If that pattern, and these rankings, hold to Sunday, they should both get in.  If the national committee likes to see stronger schedules and quality wins, then I think it'll be a disappointing Sunday for Witt and OWU. 

In any case, it really does feel like an all in or all out situation here, unless the committee changes their groupthink midstream.

One thing I was told today was that the regional committees do what they do, but the national committee isn't obligated to abide by it. So while the two national reps from each of the four regions also appear on the regional calls and help do the rankings, the national committee has enough influence to where it could value SoS that wasn't necessarily evident in the regional rankings, because only the regional committee touches those.

Wally can you translate for the layperson?

That would explain what seems like a change in groupthink, but really is the same data evaluated by a different group. And as Wally and I have seen in our examinations so far, the North, and to a lesser degree the West and other regions, you can look at the data and get more than one conclusion.

This might end up being the hardest at-large selection a committee has ever had to do, and with more educated people watching, the most scrutiny they'll be under.

[wally_wabash]

Quick take on Witt and OWU and their shot at the playoffs...I think they either both go or the both stay home.  Depends entirely on how much weight the committee puts on win percentage, because all of the teams that they will be compared with will have (much) stronger SOS's and more favorable results vs RROs.  The good news there is that the North region committee apparently loves them some win percentage and kept Witt and OWU in front of the 2-loss CCIW teams which I don't think was necessarily a given.  If that pattern, and these rankings, hold to Sunday, they should both get in.  If the national committee likes to see stronger schedules and quality wins, then I think it'll be a disappointing Sunday for Witt and OWU. 

In any case, it really does feel like an all in or all out situation here, unless the committee changes their groupthink midstream.

One thing I was told today was that the regional committees do what they do, but the national committee isn't obligated to abide by it. So while the two national reps from each of the four regions also appear on the regional calls and help do the rankings, the national committee has enough influence to where it could value SoS that wasn't necessarily evident in the regional rankings, because only the regional committee touches those.

Wally can you translate for the layperson?

That would explain what seems like a change in groupthink, but really is the same data evaluated by a different group. And as Wally and I have seen in our examinations so far, the North, and to a lesser degree the West and other regions, you can look at the data and get more than one conclusion.

This might end up being the hardest at-large selection a committee has ever had to do, and with more educated people watching, the most scrutiny they'll be under.

I guess what I was getting at here is that if the four on the table are Wittenberg, Huntingdon, Lycoming, and Pacific Lutheran, the committee has a choice to make.  Reward the win percentage and pick Wittenberg, or reward the SOS and RRO results and pick Huntingdon or PLU.  So let's say hypothetically that at this step, they pick Wittenberg.  Now OWU comes to the board with the same three teams that Witt was picked over.  Witt and OWU, for selection purposes, are basically the same team (OWU is actually slightly better thanks to SOS).  Unless the way the committee evaluates these teams changes in the period of minutes between choices, I would think that OWU gets picked as well.  OR, the committee favors the big SOSs and RRO results and starts plucking the 2-loss teams in front of Wittenberg, which I think gets Witt stuck on the board for the duration and left out (along with OWU and Wheaton who are trapped behind Witt). 

I hope that example clears up my thought process there. 

Now when you say that the national committee has the freedom to evaluate the rankings differently than the RACs do, can they go as far as to reshuffle those rankings if they want?  I believe last year's chairperson said pointedly that they didn't mess with the regional rankings once they got them.  I'm fine with whatever the national committee wants to do as long as it's reasonably transparent (I would say totally transparent, but that's a bit of a pipe dream). 

[sigma one]

I could post this on the Monon Bell board, but that location doesn't seem attract much actual game analysis.  At this point in the week, maybe it's time to continue thinking about the two teams in an analytic way.
     One curiosity I've noticed, if curiosity is the right word, is that Wabash has not recovered a fumble since Wittenberg.  In fact, there have been very few fumbles for them to recover.  Wash U. fumbled twice, but got them both back.  Wooster fumbled once; recovered it.  OWU and Oberlin did not fumble at all.  4 games, 3 fumbles, no Wabash fumble take aways.  That's with all those teams having no success on the ground, and with them throwing the ball frequently.  Even receivers have not fumbled after catches. 
     At the same time Wabash has 6 ints. in those 4 games. 
     I just think that the lack of fumbles and fumble recoveries is odd, even though we know things go in stretches.  We consider the Wabash defense physical, yet no fumbles/recoveries resulting.  Not even QBs losing the ball, let alone running backs and receivers.
     What does this mean for Saturday:  absolutely nothing.
     Knowing the history of the rivalry, I do think that this game willl be closer than a lot of people, fans--on both sides--are projecting.   I don't see anything like the scores of the last two years.  DePauw will come to play (cliche), of course, and salivating at the chance to salvage their season.  Wabash recognizes that to make the playoffs is a dim, dim possiblity.  Hard to fathom whether this will work in favor of Wabash focus or not. (In years when Wabash was certain to play the next week, tragic results have sometimes happened.  In 2010, when DPU was going on, there was a 47-0 shocker.)) 
     As has been noticed, DePauw appears to be slowly improving, and Wabash is, well, unpredictable week to week, and v. teams most of us thought they should handle.   
     This year's rivalry game has a chance of being close at halftime.  Wabash has not been scintillating in the first half lately.  If, indeed, DPU can keep it close and their confidence soars, and Wabash gets a bit nervous, the second half could go either way.  DePauw has played some good teams tough. 
     So, will Wabash come out fired up, angry about their season and last week, intent on proving their worth, and giving the seniors a 4peat , or will they somewhere in the deep recesses, no matter the importance of history and importance of the game, be flat.  This is not a situation Wabash is used to being in.  Too bad the crowd is going to be down; I think the game will be better than most think
     By the way, everyone knows I am a FANatic about Wabash football.  Wabash should win:  easily, not what my head tells me given this year;  in a close game, less than two TDs, that's my uncomfortable prediction.  I hope I'm right about the victory and wrong about the margin.

[wabashcpa]

Maybe we can bring in Charles Tillman to help the defense create some fumble opportunities.

I also concur that the margin will be closer than anyone would have believed in September.  Feel free to prove me wrong, LG's.

[TitanPride]

Quick take on Witt and OWU and their shot at the playoffs...I think they either both go or the both stay home.  Depends entirely on how much weight the committee puts on win percentage, because all of the teams that they will be compared with will have (much) stronger SOS's and more favorable results vs RROs.  The good news there is that the North region committee apparently loves them some win percentage and kept Witt and OWU in front of the 2-loss CCIW teams which I don't think was necessarily a given.  If that pattern, and these rankings, hold to Sunday, they should both get in.  If the national committee likes to see stronger schedules and quality wins, then I think it'll be a disappointing Sunday for Witt and OWU. 

In any case, it really does feel like an all in or all out situation here, unless the committee changes their groupthink midstream.

One thing I was told today was that the regional committees do what they do, but the national committee isn't obligated to abide by it. So while the two national reps from each of the four regions also appear on the regional calls and help do the rankings, the national committee has enough influence to where it could value SoS that wasn't necessarily evident in the regional rankings, because only the regional committee touches those.

Wally can you translate for the layperson?

That would explain what seems like a change in groupthink, but really is the same data evaluated by a different group. And as Wally and I have seen in our examinations so far, the North, and to a lesser degree the West and other regions, you can look at the data and get more than one conclusion.

This might end up being the hardest at-large selection a committee has ever had to do, and with more educated people watching, the most scrutiny they'll be under.

I guess what I was getting at here is that if the four on the table are Wittenberg, Huntingdon, Lycoming, and Pacific Lutheran, the committee has a choice to make.  Reward the win percentage and pick Wittenberg, or reward the SOS and RRO results and pick Huntingdon or PLU.  So let's say hypothetically that at this step, they pick Wittenberg.  Now OWU comes to the board with the same three teams that Witt was picked over.  Witt and OWU, for selection purposes, are basically the same team (OWU is actually slightly better thanks to SOS).  Unless the way the committee evaluates these teams changes in the period of minutes between choices, I would think that OWU gets picked as well.  OR, the committee favors the big SOSs and RRO results and starts plucking the 2-loss teams in front of Wittenberg, which I think gets Witt stuck on the board for the duration and left out (along with OWU and Wheaton who are trapped behind Witt). 

I hope that example clears up my thought process there. 

Now when you say that the national committee has the freedom to evaluate the rankings differently than the RACs do, can they go as far as to reshuffle those rankings if they want?  I believe last year's chairperson said pointedly that they didn't mess with the regional rankings once they got them.  I'm fine with whatever the national committee wants to do as long as it's reasonably transparent (I would say totally transparent, but that's a bit of a pipe dream).

I know you were just presenting a hypothetical, but if the National Committee is unwilling to reshuffle the regional rankings, I'm not sure how they could justify selecting Witt over Pacific Lutheran (or possibly Huntingdon).  If you look at the profiles, Wittenberg and Illinois College are nearly identical:  1 loss in region to a RRO, no real wins of substance, SOS in the 200's.  IC isn't even sniffing the top 10 out west while PLU is sitting comfortably at 6.  If the National Committee doesn't reshuffle, they would be saying that they value a 2 loss team with a great SOS (PLU) over win % (IC).  Thereby, I don't think there is anyway they could then justifying selecting Witt in that scenario.   

[wally_wabash]

Quick take on Witt and OWU and their shot at the playoffs...I think they either both go or the both stay home.  Depends entirely on how much weight the committee puts on win percentage, because all of the teams that they will be compared with will have (much) stronger SOS's and more favorable results vs RROs.  The good news there is that the North region committee apparently loves them some win percentage and kept Witt and OWU in front of the 2-loss CCIW teams which I don't think was necessarily a given.  If that pattern, and these rankings, hold to Sunday, they should both get in.  If the national committee likes to see stronger schedules and quality wins, then I think it'll be a disappointing Sunday for Witt and OWU. 

In any case, it really does feel like an all in or all out situation here, unless the committee changes their groupthink midstream.

One thing I was told today was that the regional committees do what they do, but the national committee isn't obligated to abide by it. So while the two national reps from each of the four regions also appear on the regional calls and help do the rankings, the national committee has enough influence to where it could value SoS that wasn't necessarily evident in the regional rankings, because only the regional committee touches those.

Wally can you translate for the layperson?

That would explain what seems like a change in groupthink, but really is the same data evaluated by a different group. And as Wally and I have seen in our examinations so far, the North, and to a lesser degree the West and other regions, you can look at the data and get more than one conclusion.

This might end up being the hardest at-large selection a committee has ever had to do, and with more educated people watching, the most scrutiny they'll be under.

I guess what I was getting at here is that if the four on the table are Wittenberg, Huntingdon, Lycoming, and Pacific Lutheran, the committee has a choice to make.  Reward the win percentage and pick Wittenberg, or reward the SOS and RRO results and pick Huntingdon or PLU.  So let's say hypothetically that at this step, they pick Wittenberg.  Now OWU comes to the board with the same three teams that Witt was picked over.  Witt and OWU, for selection purposes, are basically the same team (OWU is actually slightly better thanks to SOS).  Unless the way the committee evaluates these teams changes in the period of minutes between choices, I would think that OWU gets picked as well.  OR, the committee favors the big SOSs and RRO results and starts plucking the 2-loss teams in front of Wittenberg, which I think gets Witt stuck on the board for the duration and left out (along with OWU and Wheaton who are trapped behind Witt). 

I hope that example clears up my thought process there. 

Now when you say that the national committee has the freedom to evaluate the rankings differently than the RACs do, can they go as far as to reshuffle those rankings if they want?  I believe last year's chairperson said pointedly that they didn't mess with the regional rankings once they got them.  I'm fine with whatever the national committee wants to do as long as it's reasonably transparent (I would say totally transparent, but that's a bit of a pipe dream).

I know you were just presenting a hypothetical, but if the National Committee is unwilling to reshuffle the regional rankings, I'm not sure how they could justify selecting Witt over Pacific Lutheran (or possibly Huntingdon).  If you look at the profiles, Wittenberg and Illinois College are nearly identical:  1 loss in region to a RRO, no real wins of substance, SOS in the 200's.  IC isn't even sniffing the top 10 out west while PLU is sitting comfortably at 6.  If the National Committee doesn't reshuffle, they would be saying that they value a 2 loss team with a great SOS (PLU) over win % (IC).  Thereby, I don't think there is anyway they could then justifying selecting Witt in that scenario.

I think it's important to remember that the group of people that rank and order the North region are different than the group of people who rank and order the West region.  And then, the group of people that compare the tops of those lists against one another are yet another group of people.  It may be that the North RAC values win percentage over anything else (seems evident by the list they provided today) while the West RAC puts a greater emphasis on SOS and RRO results (which seems to be the case by the list they produced today, although the exclusion of Willamette is curious, but we're getting way off topic for this forum now). 

Anyway, I'm inclined to agree with you.  I think PLU is a better at-large choice than Wittenberg.  I went with the 2-loss teams out West over Wittenberg in my projection.  I just couldn't get past the 0.420 SOS and 0-1 vs RRO compared to teams with 0.600 SOS numbers and/or a win vs. a RRO. 

[short]

Maybe just maybe the commitee uses common sense and says Witt is the BEST team in the NCAC and one of the 32 best in D3 and that is the team that should be picked.  Witt has played well in past playoffs as have other NCAC teams (Wabash mostly).  The commitee is doing this samething for Heidelberg as the OAC runner up. Why Not for Witt and the NCAC.

[wally_wabash]

Maybe just maybe the commitee uses common sense and says Witt is the BEST team in the NCAC and one of the 32 best in D3 and that is the team that should be picked.  Witt has played well in past playoffs as have other NCAC teams (Wabash mostly).  The commitee is doing this samething for Heidelberg as the OAC runner up. Why Not for Witt and the NCAC.

Do we know that Witt is the best team in the league?  I'm not sure we do.

[smedindy]

If you take a deep dive into Heidelberg's season, they've really left no doubt, and the only questionable result was that they only beat Muskingum 28-14 in the ultimate trap game (between a big win over surging Otterbein and Mt. Union).

Wittenberg struggled to put Wooster and CWRU away, and allowed Denison to hang around until the 4th. OWU's had their struggles too against some mediocre teams. I don't think it's crystal clear as to who the best team is this year between the two. Of course, I think the best team in the NCAC has two head-scratching losses. Sports, you know.

I'd love to see an OWU / Witt game this season. Alas. We do have next year but they'll be different teams, of course.