FB: American Southwest Conference

[crudaddy]

All very interesting, but I cannot for any reason understand why UMHB fans would like to see a rematch of last week, unless it means we made it to the Stagg Bowl.
Last years game was a defensive affair, with the winner sealing the game on the opening kickoff.  This year, UWW looked like they had learned how to play that "big game" after the second trip to the Stagg Bowl against MUC.  They played UMHB like the Purple Raiders played them last year, got the lead, and then went for the kill.
With recent history, I really don't see why any fan wants another round with Wesley either, they certainly did not seem intimidated by the Cru, at our place or theirs.
Hopefully, the Cru learned last weekend that to be a champion, you have to play the whole 60 minutes, and realize that the other team is just as talented, just as well coached, and not intimidated by you.  At a championship level, you cannot make mistakes that turn the course of a game, let alone 3 of them.
I think, in some ways, the cake walk that has been the ASC for the Cru this year (witness the lopsided scores, lack of complete games for the starters) has not served them well.  Hopefully, they have had their eyes opened to what it means to be playing at the next level of intensity.
I would hate to be ETBU this weekend, the Cru has more than a little frustration to take out on them.
Go CRU!!

[jaypeter]

I think, in some ways, the cake walk that has been the ASC for the Cru this year (witness the lopsided scores, lack of complete games for the starters) has not served them well.  Hopefully, they have had their eyes opened to what it means to be playing at the next level of intensity.

Crudaddy,

As a Mount Union fan, I share your concern about an easier conference schedule.  The OAC doesn't seem to be quite as strong this year as in years past and it could come up and bite the Raiders if they're not careful.  Hopefully, they'll be able to rely on the experience of past success and remember just how hard you need to play in the playoffs. 

A few years ago Mount had a stellar team and breezed through the regular season.  Then, they met up with a tough team in the playoffs and their dreams of another Stagg bounced away.  Then, another year, they lost to ONU in the regular season, and had their ears pinned back the rest of the way.  We'll see this weekend how UMHB responds, but y'all are a great team to start with.  I'd hate to have to be the team to knock the chip off your shoulders!  But, we'll take our shot at it if given the chance!

jaypeter

[Bill McCabe]

Thanks Ralph.  I didn't count very well on the seeding.  A #3 would get 1 home game in the region.

[Bill McCabe]

W&J is undefeated and UMHB has not fared well against Wesley.  I think a #3, based on records, is the right spot for UMHB. 

[crufootball]

Not to disagree with the seeding of UMHB at #3, but should their past history against Wesley affect their seeding this year? If so then shouldn't their history against W&J boost their ranking?

[yessir]

Crudaddy,

A few years ago Mount had a stellar team and breezed through the regular season.  Then, they met up with a tough team in the playoffs and their dreams of another Stagg bounced away.  Then, another year, they lost to ONU in the regular season, and had their ears pinned back the rest of the way.  We'll see this weekend how UMHB responds, but y'all are a great team to start with.  I'd hate to have to be the team to knock the chip off your shoulders!  But, we'll take our shot at it if given the chance!

jaypeter

Ironically that team that beat Mount in Alliance during the 2004 playoffs was our very own Crusaders. Both the Cru and Mount had an extremely talented team that year. I think a rematch in the Semi's this year would be a good one to watch.

[Ralph Turner]

Not to disagree with the seeding of UMHB at #3, but should their past history against Wesley affect their seeding this year? If so then shouldn't their history against W&J boost their ranking?

Cru, several years ago, past history was eliminated from the criteria. 

The 2007 team, for any school, gets a fresh start.

[Pat Coleman]

But if it is considered, even informally, it's only considered between teams tied in record.

Wesley's opponents winning percentage: .745
UMHB's OWP: .591 (still really good, just not as good)
http://www.d3football.com/strength-of-schedule/2007

[crufootball]

I understand that past history no longer has an impact in the criteria. I was just commenting on Bill McCabe post when he said he understood UMHB seeding due to their history with Wesley. Good luck to the Cru this weekend, lets take care of the ASC so we can get ready for the playoffs in a couple of weeks.

[Bill McCabe]

crufootball,  Wesley has 1 loss and UMHB has 1 loss.  Being ranked #3 doesn't seem unreasonable to me.  While history may not be a consideration in the rankings, we haven't beaten Wesley the past 2 years.

[jaypeter]

[



Ironically that team that beat Mount in Alliance during the 2004 playoffs was our very own Crusaders. Both the Cru and Mount had an extremely talented team that year. I think a rematch in the Semi's this year would be a good one to watch.

It's not ironic at all...it's exactly what I was referring to.

[Josh Bowerman]

Thanks Ralph.  I didn't count very well on the seeding.  A #3 would get 1 home game in the region.

Possibly more than that, Bill--remember the AA historically hasn't (and probably won't) scheduled the South based on seeding.  The mileage always comes into play.

UMHB would likely host the first two rounds of the playoffs, assuming everyone that's supposed to win does, in fact, win.  I could easily see the bracket as:

Muhlenberg at Wesley
Salisbury/Waynesburg at Washington & Jefferson

North Carolina Wesleyan at Randolph Macon
Trinity at Mary Hardin-Baylor

Those pairings would mean two flights for the AA, max.

[@d3jason]

Thanks Ralph.  I didn't count very well on the seeding.  A #3 would get 1 home game in the region.

Possibly more than that, Bill--remember the AA historically hasn't (and probably won't) scheduled the South based on seeding.  The mileage always comes into play.

UMHB would likely host the first two rounds of the playoffs, assuming everyone that's supposed to win does, in fact, win.  I could easily see the bracket as:

Muhlenberg at Wesley
Salisbury/Waynesburg at Washington & Jefferson

North Carolina Wesleyan at Randolph Macon
Trinity at Mary Hardin-Baylor

Those pairings would mean two flights for the AA, max.

I don't see how this bracket reduces flights. All it does is is put the possible seven and eight seeds in the the possible three seed's bracket.

[Bill McCabe]

Ralph is pretty good at figuring out the mileage and how the NCAA will use it against the Texas schools. 

[fatboy]

Bottom Line I just want UMHB in the Playoff's but i dont why they are not the number 1 seed.  It might be a homer choice but i can't belielve that UMHB is 3rd best in South.