Top 25 rankings

[K-Mack]

Two of the most memorable Stagg stories since the creation of the Pool systems...

1999 Pacific Lutheran  National Championship team.  Beats Rowan
2004 UMHB  Loses 21-28 to Linfield, led by Brett Elliott.

If you look at the schedules, all four games to the Stagg Bowl were played on the road!

Don't forget the 2000 Johnnies falling 3 points short against Mount Union.  That would have made it back-to-back West #7's to hit the road and win the Stagg.

Yes!!  Thanks and +1!

That was my first "Stagg Bowl".  I remember listening over my 28K modem to the webcast of the game played in the rain!

That SJU No. 7 is frequently overlooked, including when I posted earlier today.

I thought I remembered another West 7 ...

[K-Mack]

Well, I'll admit it was the talk about "random" or coin-flip semifinal seedings that sucked me in  "because conference strengths vary years to year" and later detoured to one of my favorite subjects ... that all regions are not equal.

They are two separate arguments and need to be considered that way. One actually affects the teams and the other is purely a messaging board debating topic (... and one I'll enjoy at least until the numbers change )

There will alway be quibbles and sometimes be injustice but using data and human intervention when needed seems the best option IMHO. The Oxy situation is a great example.  A question, KMack: how much of the John Carroll move was in black & white and how much was human judgment/ interpretation?
----
Ralph,
I'm shocked such a wise man can be a relative "newbie!"

Well, repete, it's a plenty fun topic to discuss, we just have to remind people sometimes where the message board rhetoric fits in the big picture. Even if committee members were sitting around reading the site to get their information, there are controls in place to limit how much influence is based on "opinion."

As far as the John Carroll question, I'm not sure I can really answer that. I think in '01 (maybe '00), Hardin-Simmons was moved to the North and played at Wittenberg.

So at the time, I thought moving teams to balance the brackets was going to become a common thing. But even in subsequent years when moves seemed both logical and likely, they haven't often happened.

I would prefer they adopt the D1 basketball model of picking No. 1 seeds first, then building geographically-focused pods around them. (At least I think that's D1s model) ... in any case, for us, it would serve a purpose in a season, let's say, when St. John's, Central, Whitworth and UW-Whitewater all went 10-0 and there were few convincing cases for No. 1 overall seeds elsewhere.

I'd prefer not to see one of those teams relegated to a four seed while an 8-1 in, let's say, the East, was a 1 seed.

In years when a logical N, S, E, W No. 1 could be appointed, that would happen. When those options weren't as strong, there are usually North/West and North/East/South schools close enough to each other to use the 1-seed theory without inflating the budget unneccessarily.

Anyway, the question about Carroll going to the East.

My personal opinion is that that particular committee interpreted the rules differently than subsequent committees and chose to create was essentially was a more balanced set of brackets.

If there are situations where geography forces a game in a round earlier than it would normally happen if the teams were matched according to seed, and it could be avoided by moving a team, I would back that.

Does that make sense?

I have a feeling I didn't really answer the question.

[K-Mack]

Mount Union is not given a home game every year in the semis. They earn it by their regular-season performance and by lasting all the way to the semis where some 1s don't. I would like to see them play road games too, but when there are opportunities to make them travel, like in 2005, someone has to take advantage, or they'll have to shut their pie holes and play in Alliance.

Oh, you HAD to mention 2005. How many drops did we have that game against Capital, when we had hardly any drops all season. 

We coulda been a contender, and Purple nation would have had to come to C'ville.

Ah, well. One year they will be in my hometown, and I WILL be there. I may be 90, but I'll be there!

That would've been fun.

I too hope to still be alive when Mount Union is just another playoff team travelling and hoping to move on. 

[Schwami]

I seem to recall that in 2005, if the #1 in the North (Wabash) and the #1 in the East (Del Val) made it through to the semifinals,  Wabash would have travelled to Del Val for the semifinals.  So in fact the East region was bracketed ahead of the North region as recently as two years ago.  Mount Union (#2 in the North) needed both the #1 and #2 seeds in the East to lose for it to host the semifinal that year - which, of course, is what actually happened!

[repete]

Yeah, that makes sense.  There needs to be a place for interpretations and the Carroll is a good example of it working.

The Witt-HSU game, meanwhile, was a good game that went Witt's way in OT -- and Witt's run continued until the Tigers ran into Pugh and Moore. Still, another South power represented the region well that year in that 30-27 Stagg.

[smedindy]

Yes, we would have happily made that trip to Del Valley. In fact, I had already looked at a good route! Sigh...

[gordonmann]

Yeah.  And Del Val would've happily hosted. Double sigh.

[sjfcclimbing]

Even if committee members were sitting around reading the site to get their information, there are controls in place to limit how much influence is based on "opinion."

As far as the John Carroll question, I'm not sure I can really answer that. I think in '01 (maybe '00), Hardin-Simmons was moved to the North and played at Wittenberg.

So at the time, I thought moving teams to balance the brackets was going to become a common thing. But even in subsequent years when moves seemed both logical and likely, they haven't often happened.

I have a feeling I didn't really answer the question.

Been busy, all the posts on this have been fun to read. My last post on this is summed up by the above comments. Although there is a handbook, explicit statements describing the seeding between the regions is missing. I bow to K-Mack as an informed expert. That he can not answer some of the actions of the past seedings shows there is some latitude in the seeding process including moving teams from one region to another. My statement is where there is latitude, opinions come in to play. However, I could be wrong.

As far as the Div I seeding is concerned, I believe they have a much larger database to work from with the amount of regular season travel. Thanks for the information.

Neutral sites don't make sense. People are prone to biase. Random is worst. Rotating locations gives everyone a fair shake at least 2 out every four years. It could result in increasing fan base. Ok, I'm done.

[K-Mack]

Although there is a handbook, explicit statements describing the seeding between the regions is missing. I bow to K-Mack as an informed expert.

Actually, there are. It's been explained several times now, I'm not sure how, if you read the part Ralph asked you to read, you keep missing it.

The handbook says the criteria for regional seeding is the same as criteria for seeding teams overall.

Look it up. Please.

How do you think informed experts become informed?

That he can not answer some of the actions of the past seedings shows there is some latitude in the seeding process including moving teams from one region to another. My statement is where there is latitude, opinions come in to play.

Well, that's not really what you were implying, was it?

I realize that's your statement now. When this whole thing started, at the very top of p. 56 on this thread, you were implying a couple of things. 1) That D3football.com, indirectly or directly, influenced the seedings and 2) that Mount Union getting home games in the playoffs was a product of committee bias and not something that they earned by grading out best on predetermined criteria.

The implication that St. John Fisher is/was getting the shaft and the committee or the site favors other teams, or the system is somehow unfair, is something that I can't let slide because there are a lot more people reading these boards than posting on them, and I don't want them to get the wrong impression.

I don't mean to be a [jerk], but if you have your mind made up, please let me know so I can stop using my time to help you understand.

where there is latitude, opinions come in to play.

Taken without all the back context, this statement is fine. In fact, I don't even have a problem with there being some latitude. I think the committee should be able to determine that an 8-1/9-1 record vs. a tougher schedule deserves a higher seed than a 9-0/10-0 vs. a bunch of cupcakes.

I also thought the John Carroll thing was great for us to watch. That I can't explain why the committee hasn't done things like that more often when they've had opportunities (and if you see who's within a 500-mile radius of perennial playoff spots like Mount Union, St. John's, Bridgewater, etc., you could really get some interesting matchups) does mean there is latitude in the process, but it doesn't mean a process with latitude is inherently unfair.

[K-Mack]

One more small thing ...

Neutral sites don't make sense. People are prone to biase. Random is worst. Rotating locations gives everyone a fair shake at least 2 out every four years. It could result in increasing fan base. Ok, I'm done.

Agree about Neutral sites, really only because of the travel aspect (people have trouble getting less-than-7-day-advance fares to the Stagg Bowl when flying is necessary) and because games on campus would probably draw better anyway.

Agree about people being generally prone to bias.

Rotating locations, as discussed earlier, was the previous system. I don't recall the reasons for the switch, if I even ever knew, but one thing that rotating locations could do is produce more unfairness. If we determined the East was the semifinal host this year no matter what, and an 8-2 East champ advanced, why exactly would they deserve a home game over a 10-0 (or 13-0 by then) North champ?

We could use the same seed caveat again to help there. But that doesn't explain how predeterming a site would produce the most fair outcome more than it wouldn't.

Also, influencing one season over something expected to produce fairness over multiple seasons ("gives everyone a fair shake at least 2 out every four years") doesn't match up.

Are you also saying it could increase the fan base because having a semifinal at home might draw in a significant number of people who hadn't followed the team up until then?

Are you still done? I'd kind of like to hear your answers, and clearly I have not yet dropped the subject.

[DutchFan2004]

This may be a little off base K-Mack.  But this arguement seems more about politcal correctness (fairness) than about reality.  It isn't fair that MUC (the haves) and the East Region (the have nots) or the North or the West for that matter can be thrown into the have nots (the ones without the Walnut and Bronze) dont always get to host the semi finals.  I agree with you that MUC earns their spot with getting to host the home games.  UWW has earned that spot here in the West until someone can beat them.  That is a fact we in the West have to live with until the time comes that we can put up a team that can beat them.  I am sure that Hope College or some other North team would love to be able to host a game or get a shot at MUC at home, but that has to be earned.  The team here in the West that gets to travel every playoff has been ST Norberts of late.  Even at 10-0 they travel because they haven't overcome the first playoff game with a win.  To me it is kind of a moot point.  Central (my team) has to do the same thing.  Earn the respect with some playoff wins.  Then the tide will change until then we are just a playoff team.  Home field can help but it is not a part of winning.  Look at SJU last year.  They stumble with Bethel and then have to go on the road for two games and they come out with 2 wins and almost beat UWW last year.  If a team is truly a contender it does not matter where they play.  I think the past few years if MUC had all road games they still get the the Stagg.  If the committee was really bias as sjfcclimbing thinks they would have found a way to leave SJU at home to reap all that money from their fan base.  One thing I have found to be true that D3 is not money influenced like D1. 

[DutchFan2004]

On to the top 25

Not surprised that the Dutch fell but I was surprised that they fell two spots.  Having said that Capital must not have had the confidence until their win last week.  Understandable that that might give some voters clarity in their position on voting.  I was listening to a local radio show last night driving home from the grandkids home.  Jim Walden (former Iowa State coach) was ranting on how Ohio State was #1 and that an Arizona State team was #12 with a similar record from a similar conference as Ohio State and that how could there be that much difference in those two spots.  I have learned from Pat and you K-Mack that voters take many other things into their voting.  In ASU case they haven't played the meat of their schedule yet and the voters dont think they can beat USC, Cal, and Oregon.  So after pondering that I came to the conclusion that the voters had Capital to low last week and they deserved the bump past Central and Wheaton.  Polls should be taken with a grain of salt anyway cause the only thing that matters is the W's any way.  If a team keeps winning it all takes care of itself. 

[Pat Coleman]

"Gives everyone a fair shake ..." is just plain inaccurate. It gives the home field to someone who may not have deserved it and is absolutely not a fair shake to the better team who must play on the road.

[HScoach]

Dutchfan said it best.  You want the home field advantage in the playoffs?  Win all your regular season games and start winning playoff games. 

St John's Fisher made huge strides in that last year by making it to the Semi-Finals and playing Mount very tough.  If they would have finished this season at 10-0, they most assuredly would have been the #1 seed in the East.  I would have then expected them to carry the East Region to being the #3 seed nationally behind the winner of the Whitewater/Mary Hardin Baylor game.  And one could possibly make the arguement (though I wouldn't buy it) for the the #2 seed nationally.

But SJF slipped up a few weeks ago and therefore it looks like the regional seedings will go like this (assuming no upsets the rest of the way):

1.  North (Mount Union)
2.  West/South (winner of MHB at WWW or St John's)
3.  West/South (loser of MHB at WWW or St. John's)
4.  East (St John Fisher)

[TC]

1.  North (Mount Union)
2.  West/South (winner of MHB at WWW or St John's)
3.  West/South (loser of MHB at WWW or St. John's)
4.  East (St John Fisher)

I think your assessment is right on, and I totally agree that Mount Union should continue to be the overall #1 seed in the tournament as long as their play justifies it, but just once I'd like to see the Purple Raiders travel to Collegeville.