FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[emma17]

Although I understand why Bleed feels reasonable committee members would select UWW over UWL in a Pool C scenario, I'm reluctant to agree to the 90% conference level. If I/we were on the UWL side of this discussion, we'd scream holy heck that the first and most important criteria is head to head- and on top of it, UWL won at UWW. In addition, the non conference UWL loss was at the hands of HSU- a team that handled UMHB easier than UWW did- and HSU was without their starting QB (and I think LB) when they suffered their only loss of the season.

This weekend I'm all in on the UWL Eagles (and I am a big fan of UWRF).

[bleedpurple]

Although I understand why Bleed feels reasonable committee members would select UWW over UWL in a Pool C scenario, I'm reluctant to agree to the 90% conference level. If I/we were on the UWL side of this discussion, we'd scream holy heck that the first and most important criteria is head to head- and on top of it, UWL won at UWW. In addition, the non conference UWL loss was at the hands of HSU- a team that handled UMHB easier than UWW did- and HSU was without their starting QB (and I think LB) when they suffered their only loss of the season.

This weekend I'm all in on the UWL Eagles (and I am a big fan of UWRF).

Totally get it. And it's all good that we want different teams to win.  The only time it would trouble me if we were on opposite sides is if the Hawks are playing!

My response to the UW-L side of the argument is that the premise is flawed. Head to Head is not the "most important criteria". Coach Moore made it pretty clear in the podcast that he wanted the committees not to "drill down" on one of the primary criterion at the expense of the others. He wants them looking at the total picture. Even when you weigh in the human perspective (which, I concede, is probably important to consider in this process), I can see head to head being very important when the teams have the same record. But it's hard to imagine that it is enough to supplant ALL of the other criterion. Overall win percentage gives UW-W a huge edge. A likely 3-1 record against RRO gives them another significant edge. SOS likely gives UW-W at least another small edge. It's possible 90% is a little strong. It's very possible I'm being greedy. But at the same time, in this one instance, I find great solace in the fact that who I root for has nothing to do with who wins the game.

And I should probably add on a disclaimer for anyone who actually reads what I post. I've never rooted for La Crosse in my life.  So there's that.

[timmyturtle]

90% is low...100% is more accurate...if you can rank a two loss team ahead of a one loss team because they gave that team their loss then you should be able to rank a 3 loss team ahead of a 1 loss if they beat them...you would start down such a rabbit hole you'd be hard pressed to claw your way back to common sense. 
And you would have to believe that media panel at D3 would have WW ahead of LaCrosse if they lose and the coaches poll would have UWW ahead but the ranking committee would flip them?  No chance...here's my prediction, the loser of LaCrosse River Falls doesn't make the tournament, they aren't taking 3 WIAC teams is my guess

[bleedpurple]

90% is low...100% is more accurate...if you can rank a two loss team ahead of a one loss team because they gave that team their loss then you should be able to rank a 3 loss team ahead of a 1 loss if they beat them...you would start down such a rabbit hole you'd be hard pressed to claw your way back to common sense. 
And you would have to believe that media panel at D3 would have WW ahead of LaCrosse if they lose and the coaches poll would have UWW ahead but the ranking committee would flip them?  No chance...here's my prediction, the loser of LaCrosse River Falls doesn't make the tournament, they aren't taking 3 WIAC teams is my guess

Maybe another interesting question would be who would be ranked higher in the Regional Rankings, a Two-Loss St. John's or a Two loss UW-L?

[timmyturtle]

Now that's a discussion with some teeth, lots to pour over there...ST Johns SOS has to be higher I would guess and I'm thinking LaCrosse's winning % takes a hit from those D2 game's...but LaCrosse has a big feather with common opponent win over Whitewater, but that Trinity win for St Johns probably gives them more wins against regionally ranked teams...interesting question Bleed, interesting

[emma17]

90% is low...100% is more accurate...if you can rank a two loss team ahead of a one loss team because they gave that team their loss then you should be able to rank a 3 loss team ahead of a 1 loss if they beat them...you would start down such a rabbit hole you'd be hard pressed to claw your way back to common sense. 
And you would have to believe that media panel at D3 would have WW ahead of LaCrosse if they lose and the coaches poll would have UWW ahead but the ranking committee would flip them?  No chance...here's my prediction, the loser of LaCrosse River Falls doesn't make the tournament, they aren't taking 3 WIAC teams is my guess

Wow- 100%. That's like... well, that's like something very certain. I can't go there when you're dealing with human beings.
I admit I'm likely more worried about the head to head viewpoint I believe many hold. If I put myself in the head to head camp, I can easily justify picking a 2- loss team over a 1- loss team if the -2 beat the -1. I think the next logical step for a head to head person is to ask- did both teams play the same schedule? UWW did not play HSU, but both played UMHB. Would a head to head voter consider the HSU margin of victory over UMHB as support for UWL?
Currently the D3 poll has UWL ahead of UWW, with equal records. This at least tells me 100% and 90% and even 70% are a bit over confident.

[Pat Coleman]

The committee doesn't generally distinguish between teams which are 7-1, 8-1 and 9-1.

[cubs]

And I should probably add on a disclaimer for anyone who actually reads what I post. I've never rooted for La Crosse in my life.  So there's that.

So just out of curiosity, when La Crosse plays UWO, who do you "root" for? 

[bleedpurple]

And I should probably add on a disclaimer for anyone who actually reads what I post. I've never rooted for La Crosse in my life.  So there's that.

So just out of curiosity, when La Crosse plays UWO, who do you "root" for? 

I root for Coach Jennings and the mighty Titans!   

[USee]

And I should probably add on a disclaimer for anyone who actually reads what I post. I've never rooted for La Crosse in my life.  So there's that.

So just out of curiosity, when La Crosse plays UWO, who do you "root" for? 

I root for Coach Jennings and the mighty Titans!   

Me too!!

[bleedpurple]

And I should probably add on a disclaimer for anyone who actually reads what I post. I've never rooted for La Crosse in my life.  So there's that.

So just out of curiosity, when La Crosse plays UWO, who do you "root" for? 

I root for Coach Jennings and the mighty Titans!   

Me too!!

I'm sure big fan next two weeks!!

[timmyturtle]

90% is low...100% is more accurate...if you can rank a two loss team ahead of a one loss team because they gave that team their loss then you should be able to rank a 3 loss team ahead of a 1 loss if they beat them...you would start down such a rabbit hole you'd be hard pressed to claw your way back to common sense. 
And you would have to believe that media panel at D3 would have WW ahead of LaCrosse if they lose and the coaches poll would have UWW ahead but the ranking committee would flip them?  No chance...here's my prediction, the loser of LaCrosse River Falls doesn't make the tournament, they aren't taking 3 WIAC teams is my guess

Wow- 100%. That's like... well, that's like something very certain. I can't go there when you're dealing with human beings.
I admit I'm likely more worried about the head to head viewpoint I believe many hold. If I put myself in the head to head camp, I can easily justify picking a 2- loss team over a 1- loss team if the -2 beat the -1. I think the next logical step for a head to head person is to ask- did both teams play the same schedule? UWW did not play HSU, but both played UMHB. Would a head to head voter consider the HSU margin of victory over UMHB as support for UWL?
Currently the D3 poll has UWL ahead of UWW, with equal records. This at least tells me 100% and 90% and even 70% are a bit over confident.

It's entirely possible I'm wrong, certainly wouldn't be the first time, but IF UWL loses to UWRF I just don't see how they could be ranked ahead of UWW in the regional rankings using the criteria set forth by the committee.  The committee chair is on record saying he basically wants all criteria to be given significant consideration (not the exact words I'm sure, but close enough to the spirit of the process). SOS (favors UWW), wins over regionally ranked teams UWW 3-1, UWL 1-2, head to head favors UWL, total record UWW 9-1 UWL 8-2 but as far as the committees concerned 6-2...all this assumes UWL loses to UWRF and UWW wins out.  That's 4 criteria....3 for UWW and 1 for UWL.  I just don't believe you can have a weaker SOS, lose more games, have a losing record against ranked opponents but beat someone head to head and argue head to head trumps ALL that other stuff.  We will see soon enough:)

[emma17]

Turtle- I hope you're right. In the meantime I'll go back to my intimidation tactics of sending Falcon players videos of UWL NFL players like Newberry, Schroeder and Maslowski.

[colinsteinke]

90% is low...100% is more accurate...if you can rank a two loss team ahead of a one loss team because they gave that team their loss then you should be able to rank a 3 loss team ahead of a 1 loss if they beat them...you would start down such a rabbit hole you'd be hard pressed to claw your way back to common sense. 
And you would have to believe that media panel at D3 would have WW ahead of LaCrosse if they lose and the coaches poll would have UWW ahead but the ranking committee would flip them?  No chance...here's my prediction, the loser of LaCrosse River Falls doesn't make the tournament, they aren't taking 3 WIAC teams is my guess

Wow- 100%. That's like... well, that's like something very certain. I can't go there when you're dealing with human beings.
I admit I'm likely more worried about the head to head viewpoint I believe many hold. If I put myself in the head to head camp, I can easily justify picking a 2- loss team over a 1- loss team if the -2 beat the -1. I think the next logical step for a head to head person is to ask- did both teams play the same schedule? UWW did not play HSU, but both played UMHB. Would a head to head voter consider the HSU margin of victory over UMHB as support for UWL?
Currently the D3 poll has UWL ahead of UWW, with equal records. This at least tells me 100% and 90% and even 70% are a bit over confident.

It's entirely possible I'm wrong, certainly wouldn't be the first time, but IF UWL loses to UWRF I just don't see how they could be ranked ahead of UWW in the regional rankings using the criteria set forth by the committee.  The committee chair is on record saying he basically wants all criteria to be given significant consideration (not the exact words I'm sure, but close enough to the spirit of the process). SOS (favors UWW), wins over regionally ranked teams UWW 3-1, UWL 1-2, head to head favors UWL, total record UWW 9-1 UWL 8-2 but as far as the committees concerned 6-2...all this assumes UWL loses to UWRF and UWW wins out.  That's 4 criteria....3 for UWW and 1 for UWL.  I just don't believe you can have a weaker SOS, lose more games, have a losing record against ranked opponents but beat someone head to head and argue head to head trumps ALL that other stuff.  We will see soon enough:)

I agree on this. In a vacuum, the H2H matters and UWL gets the nod over UWW for that, but in every other category, I just don't see how UWW is ranked below UWL in the regional rankings. If they were tied with overall record, sure, but a 2 loss UWL team still gets slotted below UWW.

[colinsteinke]

But, UWL winning makes all of this easier and UWW is the first team off the board in Pool C.

A quarterfinal rematch might be fun.