FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[emma17]

UW-P IS a good team. Since when did we say they were not? They also lost three games. C-M is an excellent team that lost twice. I had C-M in my rankings most of the season. And they lost to Bethel and St. Thomas. C-M lost to St. Thomas in week 10. Can't really plop C-M on top of them. I think we all had C-M in the final RRs.

But a three-loss team in the playoffs? Not going to happen.

Bethel is the team that screwed them all sideways. Bethel lost to Augsburg. Had Bethel won, they would probably have stayed ranked, and gotten in. Bethel lost to AUGSBURG, who the week before lost to HAMLINE, of all teams. That's...not good.

You know who can beat a top tier team? Another top-tier team. No close calls. There should be no talk of 'raising the bar' until they beat 'em. I think many NCC denizens are disappointed in their season.

Did you actually just type "Since when did we say they were not"?  I'm moving from the word embellishment to what this stuff really is- lies.  Nowhere did I say that you said UWP wasn't good.   I used UWP as an example of why the RR's are a joke.   


Yep, NCC was down this year.  Normally they wouldn't have lost to an undefeated team in the last seconds- the same team that just took JCU to the wire.
I agree they were down, which is why it's all the more impressive that they can still raise the bar. 

a 3 loss team can happen in my world.  Lose to UWW, NCC and oh, let's say UMHB in the same season, all in respectable games, and a 3 loss team is definitely a candidate for a Pool C raise the bar team.   

[Pat Coleman]

Alright, enough. I don't want to have to ban emma from trolling this board, so I'm shutting this room for 30 minutes, asking you to go back to your corners and stay there.

[BashDad]

FTW.

[jknezek]

FTW.

Hilarious. +K

[SaintsFAN]

FTW.

Loved his Subway Commercials

[sigma one]

Thanks, Pat.

[Pat Coleman]

FTW.

Loved his Subway Commercials

I need to go through another set of Subway commercials. Just 45 pounds to go to get back to that 2010-era photo.

[SaintsFAN]

FTW.

Loved his Subway Commercials

I need to go through another set of Subway commercials. Just 45 pounds to go to get back to that 2010-era photo.

You and me both -- my wife unfurled a "you've gained ALOT of weight" comment on me the other day 

I guess we're both a LONG way from the night at the bar in Northern Kentucky when we couldn't get people to leave us alone so we could talk about your experience at the Monon Bell game.

[The_Bishop]

FTW.

Loved his Subway Commercials

I need to go through another set of Subway commercials. Just 45 pounds to go to get back to that 2010-era photo.

Bro, you still have a single chin so I wouldn't sweat it.  Gravity and my late 30s have been very, very cruel to me.

[mr_mom]

Emma  -- more than a few of us gave spreads you asked for. None of us think NCC blows out Muhlenberg or Del Val, although we shaded toward NCC being marginally better given circumstances. What would your spreads have been? That might help people understand why you think it's such a big deal they they get in over Muhlenberg or Del Val.

Good question.
I admit I'm very surprised with Mom's spreads.  I thought he'd have picked NCC as bigger favorites in both.  I'm not a spread maker, I'll simply say I think NCC would beat both teams without much trouble.

Emma --

My spreads are not always what I calculate or what I personally believe in.  I try to balance reality with trying to get as close to a 50-50 split of votes from the playas.  [Something which I've been failing lately] 

This isn't Vegas ... this is for entertainment purposes.   

[mr_mom]

FTW.

Loved his Subway Commercials

+K!  This goes on my computer at work tomorrow!   

[Pat Coleman]

FTW.

Loved his Subway Commercials

I need to go through another set of Subway commercials. Just 45 pounds to go to get back to that 2010-era photo.

Bro, you still have a single chin so I wouldn't sweat it.  Gravity and my late 30s have been very, very cruel to me.

That's not a current photo.

[USee]

I was reading the criteria for the new NCAA D1 Football playoff. It seems like they have put together a committee with parameters that give them a mix of objective and subjective criteria to pick the 4 playoff participants. In addition to the listed criteria they allow for the ability to rank teams based on injuries they have sustained during the season, etc. I am not advocating for or against, simply adding it to the recent discussion. Pasted below for comments:

Proposed Selection Process:
Establish a committee that will be instructed to place an emphasis on winning conference championships, strength of schedule and head-to-head competition when comparing teams with similar records and pedigree (treat final determination like a tie-breaker; apply specific guidelines).

The criteria to be provided to the selection committee must be aligned with the ideals of the commissioners, Presidents, athletic directors and coaches to honor regular season success while at the same time providing enough flexibility and discretion to select a non-champion or independent under circumstances where that particular non-champion or independent is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country.

When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered:

Championships won
Strength of schedule
Head-to-head competition (if it occurred)
Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)
We believe that a committee of experts properly instructed (based on beliefs that the regular season is unique and must be preserved; and that championships won on the field and strength of schedule are important values that must be incorporated into the selection process) has very strong support throughout the college football community.

Under the current construct, polls (although well-intended) have not expressed these values; particularly at the margins where teams that have won head-to-head competition and championships are sometimes ranked behind non-champions and teams that have lost in head-to-head competition. Nuanced mathematical formulas ignore some teams who "deserve" to be selected.

As we expand from two teams to four teams we want to establish a human selection committee that: (1) will be provided a clear set of guidelines; (2) will be expected to take the facts of each case and specifically apply the guidelines; and (3) will be led by a Chairperson who will be expected to explain publicly the committee's decisions.

Some of the guidelines and protocols expected to be established to guide the committee would include, but not be limited to, the following:

While it is understood that committee members will take into consideration all kinds of data including polls, committee members will be required to discredit polls wherein initial rankings are established before competition has occurred;
Any polls that are taken into consideration by the selection committee must be completely open and transparent to the public;
Strength of schedule, head-to-head competition and championships won must be specifically applied as tie-breakers between teams that look similar;
Committee members associated with any team under consideration during the selection process will be required to recuse themselves from any deliberations associated with that team;
We would expect this same set of principles to be applied, particularly at the margins (teams 10-11-12).

College Football Playoff Selection Committee Protocol

Mission. The committee's task will be to select the best teams, rank the teams for inclusion in the playoff and selected other bowl games and, then assign the teams to sites.

Principles. The committee will select the teams using a process that distinguishes among otherwise comparable teams by considering:

Conference championships won,
Strength of schedule,
Head-to-head competition,
Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory), and,
Other relevant factors such as key injuries that may have affected a team's performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance.

Voting Process. The voting process will include seven rounds of ballots through which the committee members first will select a pool of teams to be considered, then will rank those teams. Individual ballots will be compiled into a composite ranking. Each committee member will independently evaluate an immense amount of information during the process. This evaluation will lead to individual qualitative and quantitative opinions that will inform each member's votes.

Number of Teams to Be Ranked. The committee will rank 25 teams. If no champion of a non-contract conference is among that group, then the committee will compare the five conference champions against each other. The highest ranked of those five teams will be the representative.

[D3MAFAN]

I was reading the criteria for the new NCAA D1 Football playoff. It seems like they have put together a committee with parameters that give them a mix of objective and subjective criteria to pick the 4 playoff participants. In addition to the listed criteria they allow for the ability to rank teams based on injuries they have sustained during the season, etc. I am not advocating for or against, simply adding it to the recent discussion. Pasted below for comments:

Proposed Selection Process:
Establish a committee that will be instructed to place an emphasis on winning conference championships, strength of schedule and head-to-head competition when comparing teams with similar records and pedigree (treat final determination like a tie-breaker; apply specific guidelines).

The criteria to be provided to the selection committee must be aligned with the ideals of the commissioners, Presidents, athletic directors and coaches to honor regular season success while at the same time providing enough flexibility and discretion to select a non-champion or independent under circumstances where that particular non-champion or independent is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country.

When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered:

Championships won
Strength of schedule
Head-to-head competition (if it occurred)
Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)
We believe that a committee of experts properly instructed (based on beliefs that the regular season is unique and must be preserved; and that championships won on the field and strength of schedule are important values that must be incorporated into the selection process) has very strong support throughout the college football community.

Under the current construct, polls (although well-intended) have not expressed these values; particularly at the margins where teams that have won head-to-head competition and championships are sometimes ranked behind non-champions and teams that have lost in head-to-head competition. Nuanced mathematical formulas ignore some teams who "deserve" to be selected.

As we expand from two teams to four teams we want to establish a human selection committee that: (1) will be provided a clear set of guidelines; (2) will be expected to take the facts of each case and specifically apply the guidelines; and (3) will be led by a Chairperson who will be expected to explain publicly the committee's decisions.

Some of the guidelines and protocols expected to be established to guide the committee would include, but not be limited to, the following:

While it is understood that committee members will take into consideration all kinds of data including polls, committee members will be required to discredit polls wherein initial rankings are established before competition has occurred;
Any polls that are taken into consideration by the selection committee must be completely open and transparent to the public;
Strength of schedule, head-to-head competition and championships won must be specifically applied as tie-breakers between teams that look similar;
Committee members associated with any team under consideration during the selection process will be required to recuse themselves from any deliberations associated with that team;
We would expect this same set of principles to be applied, particularly at the margins (teams 10-11-12).

College Football Playoff Selection Committee Protocol

Mission. The committee's task will be to select the best teams, rank the teams for inclusion in the playoff and selected other bowl games and, then assign the teams to sites.

Principles. The committee will select the teams using a process that distinguishes among otherwise comparable teams by considering:

Conference championships won,
Strength of schedule,
Head-to-head competition,
Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory), and,
Other relevant factors such as key injuries that may have affected a team's performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance.

Voting Process. The voting process will include seven rounds of ballots through which the committee members first will select a pool of teams to be considered, then will rank those teams. Individual ballots will be compiled into a composite ranking. Each committee member will independently evaluate an immense amount of information during the process. This evaluation will lead to individual qualitative and quantitative opinions that will inform each member's votes.

Number of Teams to Be Ranked. The committee will rank 25 teams. If no champion of a non-contract conference is among that group, then the committee will compare the five conference champions against each other. The highest ranked of those five teams will be the representative.

It is all subjective in my book, especially regarding Baylor and TCU, their playoff system is year's apart from ours. I'll take the Division III model any day.

[HCAlum86]

Holy crap do I love you guys. Just read through the last two pages and gut-laughed about 90% of the time.