FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[jamtod]

So, I guess it took Divine intervention for SJU to beat U$T rather than a sound game plan and guys playing their asses off. 

If that's the case, pencil SJU in as 2018 National Champs because John certainly isn't going to let us down!

Why not all 3?

[OzJohnnie]

I like the debate we got going on here. Let me defend myself:

The WIAC seems way down right now correct? The issue from watching the league is that everyone is much improved. UWRF has a chance to beat bethel, Stout who is a bottom half team loses 28-0 to St. John's with a back up Qb. UWEC has beat Loras who is 4-3 and st Norbert's who is 7-1. UWL gave the north ranked #2 Illinois Wesleyan their only lose. From top to bottom this league is way deeper than it has ever been before. Stout beat gustie who is in fourth.

Go to the MIAC: you can be mad at me but it is the truth. From top to bottom, the league is much down. St. John's has been tested twice. Bethel and st Thomas. Whitewater is tested every week even though the scores don't look like it. UWW run game with Peete is the same if not better than st Thomas. This issue with the MIAC this year is the Concordia is down, and the bottom of the league can't even hang in games and none of them beat anyone in nonconferece.

Do I think it would be a heck of a game? It sure would. But the Warhawks have been battled tested every week. That is me taking my WIAC hat off and just looking at facts. Warhawks would win 24-14.

I don't think the committee cares about the 600 yards in a WIN. I think they care about who you have played and who you have beat. Just my 2 cents

I would say the bottom half of the WIAC is up this year. Last place UWEC is 2-1 in nonconference games...both wins against solid programs (Loras is 4-4 and St. Norbert is 7-1). Their only non-conference loss was at UST. The top team in the WIAC is undefeated which is what we usually see. How strong UWW actually is will be determined in the playoffs. Their defense is Stagg Bowl worthy (not a question)....statistically the best in the country. They've only given up 36 points, 5.1 ppg and surrendered only five touchdowns this year. All three stats are the fewest in DIII, all while playing in the best conference in the country. And their nonconference games weren't against scrubs either (Concordia and Dubuque)*. The offense has shown flashes of brilliance, but there's concerns there (consistency from the QB is the biggest).

However, the part of the WIAC that is down, in my opinion, is the 2nd tier teams. UWO and UWP were disappointing this year. Yes, UWO lost a lot from last year, but that's no excuse to lose to UWSP. Same goes for UWP getting blown out against UWEC at home. UWEC!!!! Only one team from the WIAC will be in the playoffs, and deservingly so.



*Yes they played a club team, but that game wasn't factored into their defensive stats. If it was their PPG would drop to 4.5.

Ha!  It's almost this pattern:

Years when UWW does poorly?  WIAC is down.

Years when UWW does well?  WIAC is up.

The lack of self-awareness is stunning.  Perhaps the cheeses hasn't finished curing and there's a little fungus in the WIAC noggins or something.

[WW]

My point was mostly that a de-construct of game stats shouldn't be on the committee's plate. Five interceptions?! Maybe they have the next Dion Sanders! We should rank them higher!!

Data points they consider should begin and end with reasonably-in-context game results.

[OzJohnnie]

That's cute that Eau Claire is better than Hamline, but if you want to have some more confidence in someone's ranking I think you've got to look to the toughest games that team has played, not the easiest.  St. John's has played and beat two teams ranked higher than any team Whitewater has played. 
Opponent rankings:
1) St. Thomas
2) Bethel
3) Oshkosh
4) LaCrosse
5) Thomas More

Rankings have nothing to do with any of this.

Certainly not the top 25, but the Regional Rankings might, which have #1 and #2 swapped but otherwise are the same as above. Although I'm not clear that the committee criterion really evaluates relative strength of RRO wins/losses (I assume they do) or how that is balanced with SOS and other factors (including the most important one: defensive yardage and YPC allowed in your top rivalry games).

After listening to this week's d3 podcast it turns out that week one of the rankings is essentially a pump primer.  They don't use RRO.  Pretty much personal preference and SSO are the only tools used in week one.  After that RRO and common opponents come into consideration.

I'm not worried.  I look forward to the Johnnies hosting UWW.

[MiacMan]

I'm not worried.  I look forward to the Johnnies hosting UWW.
[/quote]

I look forward to both of you hosting the Tommies and then UMHB or UMU followed by a nice trip to sunny Texas! On the field boys!

[wally_wabash]

That's cute that Eau Claire is better than Hamline, but if you want to have some more confidence in someone's ranking I think you've got to look to the toughest games that team has played, not the easiest.  St. John's has played and beat two teams ranked higher than any team Whitewater has played. 
Opponent rankings:
1) St. Thomas
2) Bethel
3) Oshkosh
4) LaCrosse
5) Thomas More

Rankings have nothing to do with any of this.

Certainly not the top 25, but the Regional Rankings might, which have #1 and #2 swapped but otherwise are the same as above. Although I'm not clear that the committee criterion really evaluates relative strength of RRO wins/losses (I assume they do) or how that is balanced with SOS and other factors (including the most important one: defensive yardage and YPC allowed in your top rivalry games).

After listening to this week's d3 podcast it turns out that week one of the rankings is essentially a pump primer.  They don't use RRO.  Pretty much personal preference and SSO are the only tools used in week one.  After that RRO and common opponents come into consideration.

I'm not worried.  I look forward to the Johnnies hosting UWW.

Thanks for listening! 

UWW is not ranked ahead of St. John's because of one or two team stats from one single game.  Stop it.

It's all about influence.
You're a member of the committee. You have two teams obviously in the running for the #1 spot. You know the regional rankings will influence the final national seedings. Thus, a responsible committee member would do what- Use less data or more data in making the decision? We all know there is a subjective component that enters in. Wally, I know you're a data guy. I cannot imagine you would intentionally ignore in-depth game analysis between RR opponents- especially when you realize the results of this regional ranking may greatly influence the #1 seed decision.

Let me ask another way- would you be disappointed if the committee publicly stated they didn't consider the details of such a high profile/rank impactful game between regionally ranked opponents?
I would be disgusted if they didn't.
And let's assume they did look into it- what would they see?
Yes, an incredible- and highly unusual offensive performance by St. John's.
They'd see individual records being set- which by definition are rare.
They'd see five interceptions- which to any reasonable person (ww), would be recognized as highly unusual and not likely repeatable- even if Dion Sanders was in uniform.
They'd see gobs of yardage given up, and I mean gobs.
And, they'd know this incredibly unexpected offensive performance occurred the same week the team's legendary coach passed away.
IMO opinion and perhaps only my opinion, the committee owes it to the student-athletes and the programs to utilize as much data as they can when setting these rankings- and especially the rankings that will impact the final four seeds.

Now- all that said, I'm not a believer that home field is much a factor in the outcome- see UWW 2010.  It is the university, fans and community that really feel the impact.

May the best team win.

I'm not saying stats aren't important or that the advisory committees aren't aware of them.  But you've latched on to this one stat from this one game and treating it as overwhelming evidence that UWW must be better than STJ because STJ gave up a bunch of yards- to a really, really good offense btw.  STT's YPC vs. the Johnnies is like one pixel on the 60" screen. 

And I'm not quite even sure what you're arguing here.  UWW is ranked first.  Who cares what the reason is, right?   

[02 Warhawk]

I like the debate we got going on here. Let me defend myself:

The WIAC seems way down right now correct? The issue from watching the league is that everyone is much improved. UWRF has a chance to beat bethel, Stout who is a bottom half team loses 28-0 to St. John's with a back up Qb. UWEC has beat Loras who is 4-3 and st Norbert's who is 7-1. UWL gave the north ranked #2 Illinois Wesleyan their only lose. From top to bottom this league is way deeper than it has ever been before. Stout beat gustie who is in fourth.

Go to the MIAC: you can be mad at me but it is the truth. From top to bottom, the league is much down. St. John's has been tested twice. Bethel and st Thomas. Whitewater is tested every week even though the scores don't look like it. UWW run game with Peete is the same if not better than st Thomas. This issue with the MIAC this year is the Concordia is down, and the bottom of the league can't even hang in games and none of them beat anyone in nonconferece.

Do I think it would be a heck of a game? It sure would. But the Warhawks have been battled tested every week. That is me taking my WIAC hat off and just looking at facts. Warhawks would win 24-14.

I don't think the committee cares about the 600 yards in a WIN. I think they care about who you have played and who you have beat. Just my 2 cents

I would say the bottom half of the WIAC is up this year. Last place UWEC is 2-1 in nonconference games...both wins against solid programs (Loras is 4-4 and St. Norbert is 7-1). Their only non-conference loss was at UST. The top team in the WIAC is undefeated which is what we usually see. How strong UWW actually is will be determined in the playoffs. Their defense is Stagg Bowl worthy (not a question)....statistically the best in the country. They've only given up 36 points, 5.1 ppg and surrendered only five touchdowns this year. All three stats are the fewest in DIII, all while playing in the best conference in the country. And their nonconference games weren't against scrubs either (Concordia and Dubuque)*. The offense has shown flashes of brilliance, but there's concerns there (consistency from the QB is the biggest).

However, the part of the WIAC that is down, in my opinion, is the 2nd tier teams. UWO and UWP were disappointing this year. Yes, UWO lost a lot from last year, but that's no excuse to lose to UWSP. Same goes for UWP getting blown out against UWEC at home. UWEC!!!! Only one team from the WIAC will be in the playoffs, and deservingly so.



*Yes they played a club team, but that game wasn't factored into their defensive stats. If it was their PPG would drop to 4.5.

Ha!  It's almost this pattern:

Years when UWW does poorly?  WIAC is down.

Years when UWW does well?  WIAC is up.

The lack of self-awareness is stunning.  Perhaps the cheeses hasn't finished curing and there's a little fungus in the WIAC noggins or something.

Way to misinterpret that. Well done.

[emma17]

Wally, I will answer your following comment/question:

I'm not saying stats aren't important or that the advisory committees aren't aware of them.  But you've latched on to this one stat from this one game and treating it as overwhelming evidence that UWW must be better than STJ because STJ gave up a bunch of yards- to a really, really good offense btw.  STT's YPC vs. the Johnnies is like one pixel on the 60" screen. 

And I'm not quite even sure what you're arguing here.  UWW is ranked first.  Who cares what the reason is, right?   

Sometimes I'm not either-but I'm not arguing in the least bit for UWW to be number 1. I'm suggesting a possible reason why St. John's isn't number 1 in the eyes of the committee- given all the other stats that seem to favor them.
It may appear I've "latched on to this one stat"- only because other posters continue to challenge the very idea that stats from a game would be used. In no way do I think it should be the committee's priority stat, rather it should supplement all the other data points they have.
The idea of the committee looking at stats from a game between regionally ranked opponents has led to one post suggesting I buy a vacation home in hades, and others stating it was "stupid" and "silly" and "not logical".

This isn't about UWW. It's only about the information the committee uses to rank teams. 
   

[wally_wabash]

Wally, I will answer your following comment/question:

I'm not saying stats aren't important or that the advisory committees aren't aware of them.  But you've latched on to this one stat from this one game and treating it as overwhelming evidence that UWW must be better than STJ because STJ gave up a bunch of yards- to a really, really good offense btw.  STT's YPC vs. the Johnnies is like one pixel on the 60" screen. 

And I'm not quite even sure what you're arguing here.  UWW is ranked first.  Who cares what the reason is, right?   

Sometimes I'm not either-but I'm not arguing in the least bit for UWW to be number 1. I'm suggesting a possible reason why St. John's isn't number 1 in the eyes of the committee- given all the other stats that seem to favor them.

I got you.  There's a lot of good arguments for either of these teams to be #1 in this region.  In the end, I think it comes down a qualitative judgement around whether a RAC member thinks dominating the WIAC is more impressive than dominating the MIAC.  The difficulty in choosing one or the other, and the consequences that come from that choice, are what make this pair so interesting to follow over the last two sets of rankings. 

[AO]

Wally, I will answer your following comment/question:

I'm not saying stats aren't important or that the advisory committees aren't aware of them.  But you've latched on to this one stat from this one game and treating it as overwhelming evidence that UWW must be better than STJ because STJ gave up a bunch of yards- to a really, really good offense btw.  STT's YPC vs. the Johnnies is like one pixel on the 60" screen. 

And I'm not quite even sure what you're arguing here.  UWW is ranked first.  Who cares what the reason is, right?   

Sometimes I'm not either-but I'm not arguing in the least bit for UWW to be number 1. I'm suggesting a possible reason why St. John's isn't number 1 in the eyes of the committee- given all the other stats that seem to favor them.

I got you.  There's a lot of good arguments for either of these teams to be #1 in this region.  In the end, I think it comes down a qualitative judgement around whether a RAC member thinks dominating the WIAC is more impressive than dominating the MIAC.  The difficulty in choosing one or the other, and the consequences that come from that choice, are what make this pair so interesting to follow over the last two sets of rankings.

That's pretty far outside of the criteria.  That might be in somebodies mind, but when you have differences in SoS and results  against RRO, I don't think you have to think too hard about it.  This week they took a simple look at Whitewater's higher SoS and next week they'll note St. John's better RRO results.

[wally_wabash]

Wally, I will answer your following comment/question:

I'm not saying stats aren't important or that the advisory committees aren't aware of them.  But you've latched on to this one stat from this one game and treating it as overwhelming evidence that UWW must be better than STJ because STJ gave up a bunch of yards- to a really, really good offense btw.  STT's YPC vs. the Johnnies is like one pixel on the 60" screen. 

And I'm not quite even sure what you're arguing here.  UWW is ranked first.  Who cares what the reason is, right?   

Sometimes I'm not either-but I'm not arguing in the least bit for UWW to be number 1. I'm suggesting a possible reason why St. John's isn't number 1 in the eyes of the committee- given all the other stats that seem to favor them.

I got you.  There's a lot of good arguments for either of these teams to be #1 in this region.  In the end, I think it comes down a qualitative judgement around whether a RAC member thinks dominating the WIAC is more impressive than dominating the MIAC.  The difficulty in choosing one or the other, and the consequences that come from that choice, are what make this pair so interesting to follow over the last two sets of rankings.

That's pretty far outside of the criteria.  That might be in somebodies mind, but when you have differences in SoS and results  against RRO, I don't think you have to think too hard about it. This week they took a simple look at Whitewater's higher SoS and next week they'll note St. John's better RRO results.

I really think this does the RAC a disservice.  I know it's easy to see the rankings and distill the decisions down to just one primary criteria difference, but I don't believe they had a 20-second conversation about UWW vs. St. John's and moved on.  They know what's at stake there and they want to get it right. 

[AO]

Wally, I will answer your following comment/question:

I'm not saying stats aren't important or that the advisory committees aren't aware of them.  But you've latched on to this one stat from this one game and treating it as overwhelming evidence that UWW must be better than STJ because STJ gave up a bunch of yards- to a really, really good offense btw.  STT's YPC vs. the Johnnies is like one pixel on the 60" screen. 

And I'm not quite even sure what you're arguing here.  UWW is ranked first.  Who cares what the reason is, right?   

Sometimes I'm not either-but I'm not arguing in the least bit for UWW to be number 1. I'm suggesting a possible reason why St. John's isn't number 1 in the eyes of the committee- given all the other stats that seem to favor them.

I got you.  There's a lot of good arguments for either of these teams to be #1 in this region.  In the end, I think it comes down a qualitative judgement around whether a RAC member thinks dominating the WIAC is more impressive than dominating the MIAC.  The difficulty in choosing one or the other, and the consequences that come from that choice, are what make this pair so interesting to follow over the last two sets of rankings.

That's pretty far outside of the criteria.  That might be in somebodies mind, but when you have differences in SoS and results  against RRO, I don't think you have to think too hard about it. This week they took a simple look at Whitewater's higher SoS and next week they'll note St. John's better RRO results.

I really think this does the RAC a disservice.  I know it's easy to see the rankings and distill the decisions down to just one primary criteria difference, but I don't believe they had a 20-second conversation about UWW vs. St. John's and moved on.  They know what's at stake there and they want to get it right.

I'm sure they can talk about it for a long while, but that's just my best guess of how people are voting.

[bleedpurple]

I'm not saying this is true of you, AO, because I have no idea. But it's something I had to double-check myself on, so it's possible that others are affected as well:

The D3football.com article regarding Regional Rankings, listed the SOS along with the orders of the rankings. 

West Region                SOS
UWW                            .611
St. J                             .600

That visual makes it easy to assume that the primary criteria used for this ranking decision was  SOS alone.  In other regions that clearly isn't the case.  Simply because UW-W's SOS is higher and simply because that is the criterion listed at D3football.com does not mean that was why the West RAC placed UW-W ahead of St. John's. It's possible it is more along the lines of what Wally just wrote. They could have thought the SOS was about even. Next week, they could also think the results vs regionally ranked opponents is about even. So they revert to stronger conference. I have no idea. Just throwing out another possibility.

[retagent]

Since the ranking doesn't really count until the final ranking, it's not that imperative that they look too long at this pair of deserving teams. I would hope that in the final ranking, the RAC will take into consideration all relevant factors.

We're trying to split hairs here. They will (I hope) split hairs later.

[jamtod]

I'm not saying this is true of you, AO, because I have no idea. But it's something I had to double-check myself on, so it's possible that others are affected as well:

The D3football.com article regarding Regional Rankings, listed the SOS along with the orders of the rankings. 

West Region                SOS
UWW                            .611
St. J                             .600

That visual makes it easy to assume that the primary criteria used for this ranking decision was  SOS alone.  In other regions that clearly isn't the case.  Simply because UW-W's SOS is higher and simply because that is the criterion listed at D3football.com does not mean that was why the West RAC placed UW-W ahead of St. John's. It's possible it is more along the lines of what Wally just wrote. They could have thought the SOS was about even. Next week, they could also think the results vs regionally ranked opponents is about even. So they revert to stronger conference. I have no idea. Just throwing out another possibility.

This will be an interesting case study as the next few weeks go, assuming both teams win handily. At some point, maybe I'll try to map out what the changes in SOS will be over the next 2 weeks. The interesting item I learned (if I understood it correctly) from the podcast about how the Regional Rankings work is that the RRO doesn't factor in heavily in the first ranking, since it would be a self-referencing feedback loop. So apparently next week they will look back at this week's RRO comparisons. For now St Thomas and Bethel are both ranked higher than the WIAC #2 and #3. I don't know if that is significant enough to sway anything. After SJU plays Thomas More, I think SJU's SOS could get a slight bump BUT one of St Thomas or Bethel will likely drop down the rankings also.