University Athletic Association

[WashUDad]

24 20 Chicago
Wash u won in ot 20 13

[bashbrother]

Thanks.... Keep winning Wash U!!!!!

[formerd3db]

ExTartanPlayer:

You called it (a possible Case upset today) the other day when you pointed out that the Case/Chicago game was at Chicago's home field and that this was Chicago's best team since its 2005 title team.  Throws things in a bit of disarray it appears.

[WashUDad]

Congrats Chicago!!!

[ADL70]

Props to Oium and Chicago for ultimately handling the wind better than CWRU.  Windy City is big home field advantage, although the crowd sounded like there were plenty of Spartan supporters (Homyk family and friends).

Props to the Spartans D for holding as often as they did with all of the spots that the offense and special teams put them in.  That final touchdown reminded me way too much of Wabash two years ago.

For as many mistakes as the commentators on the CWRU webcast make, and their limited knowledge of the rules of football, they really should quit carping about the officials.

[PoppaN]

Congratulations to Chicago on a great game.

That being said ... I also listened to the broadcast by Maroons .. I did not appreciate the foul language used when Case scored ... you could hear all the background talk and a lot of it was rude and profane.   


I also listened to the audiocast of the Case announcers and they remain professional as always ... well done Gentlemen ... looking forward to next week.

[Pat Coleman]

I would say that secondary criteria come into account in almost every football decision because of the relatively small number of games.

If so, then why break the criteria down into primary and secondary?  Just to make sure that everyone knows that D-III is all about regional competition?  When I read "primary" and "secondary" my instinct is to say that primary criteria are to be used exclusively to make decisions, and then the secondary criteria should be used if the primary criteria do not produce a clear choice.  In fact, I think there is some verbiage in the handbook...

The criteria are the same for all sports across Division III. In sports that have more than 10 games, I suspect that there is a greater difference between the two. In fact, you could definitely argue that you cannot make a clear choice on primary criteria in football if you're only considering seven contests.

[Pat Coleman]

Congratulations to Chicago on a great game.

That being said ... I also listened to the broadcast by Maroons .. I did not appreciate the foul language used when Case scored ... you could hear all the background talk and a lot of it was rude and profane.   

By the broadcasters or by other people in the press box?

[PoppaN]

someone in background .... you would think the announcers booth would be sound proof ... but still no excuse for language like that ( F word) ... after hearing that I shut off their commentaries and turned up Case's audio .... did not like the delay of video ... Ustream usually runs very well .... but am Thankful Chicago aired the game.

[ADL70]

I would say that secondary criteria come into account in almost every football decision because of the relatively small number of games.

If so, then why break the criteria down into primary and secondary?  Just to make sure that everyone knows that D-III is all about regional competition?  When I read "primary" and "secondary" my instinct is to say that primary criteria are to be used exclusively to make decisions, and then the secondary criteria should be used if the primary criteria do not produce a clear choice.  In fact, I think there is some verbiage in the handbook...

The criteria are the same for all sports across Division III. In sports that have more than 10 games, I suspect that there is a greater difference between the two. In fact, you could definitely argue that you cannot make a clear choice on primary criteria in football if you're only considering seven contests.

All the more reason to abandon the special treatment given to "in-region" games.

[WashUDad]

Amen!

[Pat Coleman]

someone in background .... you would think the announcers booth would be sound proof ...

Not every press box has that luxury. Actually, I would say it's about 50-50 in Division III.

[wally_wabash]

I would say that secondary criteria come into account in almost every football decision because of the relatively small number of games.

If so, then why break the criteria down into primary and secondary?  Just to make sure that everyone knows that D-III is all about regional competition?  When I read "primary" and "secondary" my instinct is to say that primary criteria are to be used exclusively to make decisions, and then the secondary criteria should be used if the primary criteria do not produce a clear choice.  In fact, I think there is some verbiage in the handbook...

The criteria are the same for all sports across Division III. In sports that have more than 10 games, I suspect that there is a greater difference between the two. In fact, you could definitely argue that you cannot make a clear choice on primary criteria in football if you're only considering seven contests.

All the more reason to abandon the special treatment given to "in-region" games.

I think Pat is suggesting that, in practice, the committee already does abandon the special treatment of in-region games. 

I guess I don't see the point of publishing the criteria in this fashion if the criteria are going to be actively ignored.  Or at least if the instruction on how to apply those criteria are going to be actively ignored.  Where's the crime in acknowledging that football is inherently different, and then writing selection criteria that fit.  Does D-III soccer or baseball or volleyball care what the selection criteria used for football are?  Would writing a slightly different set of selection criteria somehow make D-III less D-III?  I wouldn't think so. 

[Pat Coleman]

Would writing a slightly different set of selection criteria somehow make D-III less D-III?  I wouldn't think so. 

I wouldn't think so, either, but I think that the Division III leadership would definitely think so.

[ExTartanPlayer]

After this week, I have zero confidence in predicting the outcome of any UAA game remaining.  I think all four teams are nearly equal, and can't say with any confidence that team X is better than team Y.  CMU is probably the "weakest" on paper but has taken Wittenberg and WashU to overtime in consecutive weeks - I don't think CWRU or Chicago can dismiss CMU, and certainly neither of them is overlooking WashU after defeating Wabash amidst a nice winning streak.

The interesting question for me is what happens if Case and Chicago run the table (not sure this will happen, actually hoping it won't because that would mean CMU's first losing season in 30-some years).   On paper, 9-1 CWRU is a strong Pool B candidate (and probably by the criteria should get in), but how can you justify that to 8-2 Chicago who defeated CWRU head-to-head and won the conference?

Not going to go into all the specifics now, I'll wait and see if it actually unfolds, but it's an interesting hypothetical situation.