FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[WW]

The Six RAC knows what they are doing. They know 2 Wiac teams are in and no chance of a third.  So they are positioning for the chance that 2 MIAC teams will get the nod with potential home games in the mix

So you're saying they have an anti-WIAC bias, criteria be damned?

On the contrary,  the national committee is made up of RAC members from every region. I don't remember a time in history that 3 teams from one region got at large bids. If that's a reality (and maybe it isn't) the RAC's job is to position their region for the most success and a second MIAC team is a stronger bet than a third WIAC. The criteria are not a bible, they are a blueprint. And the bottom of the regional rankings isn't necessarily about merit, it's much more about what can be done to strengthen the resume of the top teams.

Plenty of examples of RAC's ranking the bottom teams based on merit to give team XXX a prayer and all it does is hurt their better teams by weakening resume for seeding and Pool C.

I'm talking about a third MIAC team, not a second MIAC team. IMO a second WIAC team is in immediately. A second MIAC team (Bethel, presumably, if they put up a scrap) has to survive a couple scrums but then they're in. If you're saying they advanced GA specifically to prop up the second MIAC's team's chances over an arguably better UWO team, well, I return to my original statement: If I'm Oshkosh, I'm pissed. In any case it's a R5 argument. But they'd have a chance to throw a punch vs Birmingham-Southern, Baldwin-Wallace, Wheaton

[USee]

I can't remember exactly but I remember a few years back the National Chair stating on the post selection podcast that no region is getting 3 teams. Oshkosh can be pissed all they want but I believe the committees believe these rankings aren't for the teams at the bottom, they are for the teams at the top.

[thunderdog]

WW, you really think a 7-2 UWO squad, with 2 losses to UWW and UWL, and a very narrow 28-24 win over Huntingdon... the same Huntingdon that lost the very next week 9-48 to Birmingham Southern... deserves one of 5 at large spots? Please explain.

[02 Warhawk]

UW-0 is listed as the 4th at-large team in their region. No chance they're one of the five teams selected overall.

If they're mad they don't get in, then don't lose as many games next time. Could they beat some of the Pool C teams that do get in? It's very possible, but it doesn't work that way unfortunately.

For the record, I think Wheaton beats UWO by a couple of scores if they played this year.

[bleedpurple]

Warhawk fans, who would be the toughest match ups for UW-W in the upcoming NCAA Playoffs? What long shots could pull a surprise if the Hawks don't bring our best?

"National Broadbrush"

www.warhawkfootball.com

[WW]

WW, you really think a 7-2 UWO squad, with 2 losses to UWW and UWL, and a very narrow 28-24 win over Huntingdon... the same Huntingdon that lost the very next week 9-48 to Birmingham Southern... deserves one of 5 at large spots? Please explain.

My answer is... definitely maybe. I think they might deserve a puncher's chance in Round 5 should they beat River Falls. Now, there may be prejudices that are impossible to overcome, such as the unstated, unwritten but real prohibition of a third team from any region in pool C, as has been suggested. Huntingdon is regionally ranked, by the way, and Birmingham Southern will likely be in the field. And I had some hopes that River Falls would rise to regionally ranked status instead of the Gusties, which would have elevated the value of Saturday's game should UWO win. So 7-2, 2-2 vs. RRO, and SOS well over .600? Once the obvious suspects come off the list for Pool C (which admittedly would almost be certain to include two other Region 6 candidates in UWL and SJU-Bethel loser), I think that would have to merit consideration by the committee.

But it appears they won't get that chance. Of course — as the fourth team listed in the region, they have no shot at all. I'm simply confused by what happened between this week and last, when Oshkosh was the third team in the region, ranked ahead of Gustavus Adolphus. Committee apparently has more respect for GA's win against the perennial doormat Oleys than you'd think.

02, there's a good chance we find out how many scores Wheaton would beat UWO by in the Battle for Butter Burgers. I hope it happens. It would likely be the best game on opening weekend of the playoffs. UWRF vs WUSTL doesn't have the same juice.

[02 Warhawk]

How does that game work? Best two teams in the CCIW and WIAC, that don't make the playoffs, square off?

If so, I don't understand why Wheaton would be involved in that game then.

[USee]

They won't be. He just likes throwing digs in at a team he believes is inferior to his preferred team(s).

[emma17]

I'm going w UWRF over UWO, which apparently guarantees only two teams from the WIAC.

If Wheaton doesn't make the playoffs, the 2021 season should have an asterisk in the record books.

[WW]

I'm going w UWRF over UWO, which apparently guarantees only two teams from the WIAC.

If Wheaton doesn't make the playoffs, the 2021 season should have an asterisk in the record books.

They won't be. He just likes throwing digs in at a team he believes is inferior to his preferred team(s).

How does that game work? Best two teams in the CCIW and WIAC, that don't make the playoffs, square off?

If so, I don't understand why Wheaton would be involved in that game then.

Field projections I've seen either do not include Wheaton, or include them as the fifth (final) pool C selection. Like it or not, they are a coin flip, and even then one that depends on a few dominoes tumbling properly (such as SJU beating Bethel). My discussion points have never been about them being "inferior" to anybody. I believe they likely are a top 10 team in the nation, even if their competition level has not been up to usual standards this season. Their criteria, inarguably, has holes in it. Their SOS is gonna suck. They played one regionally ranked opponent and yes, it's the defending champion (from two years ago, and that's another point worth considering). They lost that game by 13.

So there's a solid chance Wheaton has nothing better to do that weekend, despite likely being one of the best teams in the nation. If y'all are saying Wheaton wouldn't participate as some sort of protest, or disinterest, or has an aversion to butter burgers, that's another conversation.

[USee]

From what I've heard, NCC was the 5th pick in 2019 but I don't think there was ever a doubt they were getting in. The committee, made up of football minds that know D3, weren't letting that happen. So while the criteria favored other teams, there was considerable distance between NCC and the next team in. In advance of that, the criteria would have said "coin flip".

I (and others I know) think Wheaton is in similar position this year. The committee is looking for a reason to include them, not to exclude them. So while you think there "is a solid chance" Wheaton is playing in the Isthmus Bowl next week, I would say there is a "slim chance" that happens. It may be a coin flip but I would bet the coin is weighted 60/40 in Wheaton's favor. As a Wheaton fan I am definitely nervous because there is a chance we get left at the altar and if St Johns loses and a second LL team and BW all are at the table, I'll be a lot more nervous and the weighted coin starts to look like a true coin flip.

As Wally rightly points out in his projections (which have been eerily accurate historically) Wheaton's result vs NCC was more than just a 13 pt loss. This was a one score game. NCC scored with 1:36 left when Wheaton was blitzing and taking chances to get the ball back. Diving into NCC's SOS and result vs Aurora to compare to HSU's opponent UMHB and their RRO and SOS, is the detail you would expect at the Pool C table. As I have said, the criteria are a blueprint, not a bible. We have seen that in Region 5's rankings where Coe is above Chicago and Wheaton is above Lake Forest.

[DuffMan]

...or has an aversion to butter burgers...

That's plain absurd! 

[WW]

From what I've heard, NCC was the 5th pick in 2019 but I don't think there was ever a doubt they were getting in. The committee, made up of football minds that know D3, weren't letting that happen. So while the criteria favored other teams, there was considerable distance between NCC and the next team in. In advance of that, the criteria would have said "coin flip".

I (and others I know) think Wheaton is in similar position this year. The committee is looking for a reason to include them, not to exclude them. So while you think there "is a solid chance" Wheaton is playing in the Isthmus Bowl next week, I would say there is a "slim chance" that happens. It may be a coin flip but I would bet the coin is weighted 60/40 in Wheaton's favor. As a Wheaton fan I am definitely nervous because there is a chance we get left at the altar and if St Johns loses and a second LL team and BW all are at the table, I'll be a lot more nervous and the weighted coin starts to look like a true coin flip.

As Wally rightly points out in his projections (which have been eerily accurate historically) Wheaton's result vs NCC was more than just a 13 pt loss. This was a one score game. NCC scored with 1:36 left when Wheaton was blitzing and taking chances to get the ball back. Diving into NCC's SOS and result vs Aurora to compare to HSU's opponent UMHB and their RRO and SOS, is the detail you would expect at the Pool C table. As I have said, the criteria are a blueprint, not a bible. We have seen that in Region 5's rankings where Coe is above Chicago and Wheaton is above Lake Forest.

Why have criteria then if the committee has license to ignore it when it's inconvenient to their agenda?

[57Johnnie]

...or has an aversion to butter burgers...

That's plain absurd! 

Amen to that. We recently got them here in western CO and I rank them up there with catfish. 

[USee]

From what I've heard, NCC was the 5th pick in 2019 but I don't think there was ever a doubt they were getting in. The committee, made up of football minds that know D3, weren't letting that happen. So while the criteria favored other teams, there was considerable distance between NCC and the next team in. In advance of that, the criteria would have said "coin flip".

I (and others I know) think Wheaton is in similar position this year. The committee is looking for a reason to include them, not to exclude them. So while you think there "is a solid chance" Wheaton is playing in the Isthmus Bowl next week, I would say there is a "slim chance" that happens. It may be a coin flip but I would bet the coin is weighted 60/40 in Wheaton's favor. As a Wheaton fan I am definitely nervous because there is a chance we get left at the altar and if St Johns loses and a second LL team and BW all are at the table, I'll be a lot more nervous and the weighted coin starts to look like a true coin flip.

As Wally rightly points out in his projections (which have been eerily accurate historically) Wheaton's result vs NCC was more than just a 13 pt loss. This was a one score game. NCC scored with 1:36 left when Wheaton was blitzing and taking chances to get the ball back. Diving into NCC's SOS and result vs Aurora to compare to HSU's opponent UMHB and their RRO and SOS, is the detail you would expect at the Pool C table. As I have said, the criteria are a blueprint, not a bible. We have seen that in Region 5's rankings where Coe is above Chicago and Wheaton is above Lake Forest.

Why have criteria then if the committee has license to ignore it when it's inconvenient to their agenda?

People who don't understand the process always like to go to extremes. As many have said the criteria are meant to guide smart football people, not rule over them.