Pool B

[Ralph Turner]

Speaking of which, I have one for you. Check out Husson's slate and tell me if you like their chances.

I think that an undefeated season gives a team the best chance in Pool B.

Beyond that, a team needs help in the schedule.  Simpson or Tommies winning the conference (or UWRF for that matter) really help Northwestern at one loss.

Husson's running the table would be an interesting challenge for us Pool B watchers.  The NAC needs to figure out how to get a Pool A bid.  Otherwise, I think that Wesley, then Salisbury and the UAA schools will feast off the Pool B bids at the expense of the NAC teams.

Please remember that the SLIAC takes a bid from Pool B when it goes to Pool A in 2010..

[K-Mack]

Northwestern can have a chance with anywhere from unbeaten to two losses, but you really need to pay nearly as much attention to the Pool B competition as you do what Northwestern does. Since the NWC gets its automatic bid this year and the PAC has long since moved on, it's as ralph mentioned: The ACFC and UAA teams who are going to take first crack at them.

If Northwestern has one fewer loss than the best UAA team, for instance, then the schedule strength and which ones you beat really come in to play.

This year I'd pencil Wesley, Salisbury and Case in, but you of course never know which way things will go. Maybe four candidates will be so impressive that one of the Bs will get in over a C.

[Ralph Turner]

Okay!  Fourth weekend!

The Pool B teams will come from the UAA, the Independents, the SLIAC, the ACFC and the UMAC.

UAA

Wash St Louis -- Bears are off to a good start at 3-0 and with a quality (non-in-region) win over Witt. Still have games versus the NCAC (non-in-region), Rhodes (in-region) and the UAA.  Plays Case on Nov 15th.

CWRU --  3-0 and 7 more in-region games, including Wooster

SLIAC

Huntingdon -- 3-0.  It won't surprise me if they run the SLIAC table in the next five games.  A good game versus HSC in on Nov 8th, and they catch LaGrange on Nov 15th.  That LaGrange game might be a lot of fun, especially if some Alabama versus Georgia rivalry spills over into that game and the game is for the SLIAC crown.

LaGrange (4-0 3-1/2-0 in-region) might be undefeated in the SLIAC play as well.  (Correction. Thanks to Ron Boerger.)

ACFC

Del Valley has hurt both Salisbury and Wesley.  Wesley also took a big hit from Hanna.       Let's see what happens with Salisbury Wesley.

UMAC

Northwestern has a loss versus Simpson and play the Tommies on Nov 15th.  They are a real remote darkhorse at this time.

Independents

Chapman gave up a TD in the last minute to lose to Whitworth...too bad!


Taking a stab at this point (and projecting that there will be three bids in the Handbook)...

Wash StL
Salisbury/Wesley winner
CWRU (great chance to post a strong in-region record and OWP and OOWP.  (Opponents' winning percentage and opponents' opponents' winning percentage)

On the radar screen...
Huntingdon/LaGrange winner.
Northwestern MN

[Ron Boerger]

LaGrange is 3-1/(2-0 IR) but the loss was to NAIA Shorter.

[Pat Coleman]

Shorter is a second-year program so I'm not as likely to give LaGrange a pass on that one.

[Ralph Turner]

2008 Football Handbook is out!

Bid allocation:

Pool A -- 23 bids
Pool B -- 2 bids
Pool C -- 7 bids

[Ralph Turner]

Pool B contains 27 schools this year.

North Region -- 8 teams

The SLIAC-6  (Pool A in 2011)
UAA members: UChicago and CWRU

West Region -- 7 teams

The UMAC-5  (Crown*, MN-Morris, Martin Luther, Northwestern MN, St Scholastica)
Chapman
Neb Wesleyan
Macalester


South Region -- 8 teams

ACFC 3 (Frostburg St. Salisbury, Wesley)
SLIAC affiliates -- Huntingdon and LaGrange
UAA 2 -- Washington MO, Carnegie Mellon
Gallaudet -- (will affiliate with the non-Pool-eligible North Atlantic Conference in 2009.)

East Region -- 4 teams

Becker, Husson, Mount Ida and SUNY-Maritime  (These four teams will compete in the non-Pool-eligible North Atlantic Conference in 2009.)


*Crown is in the fourth year of provisional status.

[Ralph Turner]

Copied from the Around the Nation board...

I cannot figure out how they got to 2 bids.   

I have not seen a bid calculation method that has been used in any other Handbook that can give 2 bids.

I think that they got it wrong by anything other than fiat.

I can get it to 2 Pool B bids by doing it this way.

23 participating Pool A conferences that have 197 eligible teams that compete in the playoffs, plus 10 more teams that compete in a Pool A eligible conference (the NESCAC) equals 207 teams that comprise Pool A.  (The NESCAC has not taken its authorized bid.)

23 conferences divided into 207 teams will give an access ratio of 1:9.00.
If Neb Wesleyan has declared for the NAIA playoffs, that gives only 26 Pool B teams.

26 divided by 9 = 2.89 which truncates to 2 bids.

I don't know!  I give up. 

[@d3jason]

They still still have Brockport liisted as a Pool B team. Didn't they have some editing problems in this book in the past? First time they haven't been able to divide correctly though.

[Ralph Turner]

They still still have Brockport liisted as a Pool B team. Didn't they have some editing problems in this book in the past? First time they haven't been able to divide correctly though.

Yes, but they also have correctly listed Brockport in the NJAC!

[redswarm81]

Handbook is out!

Pool B gets 2 bids this year!

I have looked at the numbers for the Pool B bids, and I cannot calculate how they got there!

There are 23 conferences with 199 participating members.  That gives an access ratio of 1:8.30.

There are 27 Pool B teams.  That should give 3 Pool B bids, if we use the usual calculations that are in the other Handbooks.

Well, what happens if we use the calculation that's in the DIII handbook?

• The number of berths available for Pool B institutions is determined by dividing the
  number of institutions eligible in Pool B by the access ratio for Pool A (total number
  of institutions in conferences with automatic qualification divided by the number of
  Division III conferences with automatic qualification).
  Pool B = (number of independents and non-qualifying conference members) divided
  by (the access ratio for Pool A) - with the result truncated to the nearest whole number
  (e.g., 5.61 truncates to 5).

So, 27 divided by 8.3^* = 3 (truncated).

By golly, you're right!

^* My calculation produces a 1:8.65 ratio, but the truncated outcome is the same.

I cannot figure out how they got to 2 bids.   

I have not seen a bid calculation method that has been used in any other Handbook that can give 2 bids.

I think that they got it wrong by anything other than fiat.

SCANDAL!
Although, I suppose it's possible that the entire NCAA staff is arithmetically illiterate.  Don't laugh, I've seen some amazing stoopitude in some amazing places.  Okay, go ahead and laugh, if it keeps you from going insane.

Still, it's hard not to suspect that anti-Pool B sentiment could be a motivation.   I imagine that if anti-Pool B sentiment were the reason, the defense might be that Pool C bids may be used for Pool B:

Seven berths (Pool C) will be reserved for institutions from
automatic-qualifying conferences that are not their conference champions,
and the remaining teams in Pool B.

However, that defense overlooks the issue of access, that is supposed to be the overarching philosophy in designing the championship.   There are 199 Pool A teams, guaranteed 23 Pool A bids.  Equity demands that the 27 Pool B teams be guaranteed 3 Pool B bids.

[@d3jason]

It didn't appear that many Pool B schools had representation on these committees. Plus I'm assuming that Pool B schools are not eligible for Pool C bids (witness NWC champ last season.)

[Ralph Turner]

redswarm81,

I recalculated Pool B with an access ratio of 1:9 (23 conferences of 197 teams plus the 10 NESCAC teams, even tho' the conference does not take the bid.  207 divided by 23 = 9.00)

If Neb Wesleyan has declared for the NAIA, then that gives 26 teams and 2 bids.

If that is the way that the calculation has been done in previous years, then no one "in the know" would complain.

[Ralph Turner]

It didn't appear that many Pool B schools had representation on these committees. Plus I'm assuming that Pool B schools are not eligible for Pool C bids (witness NWC champ last season.)

Pool B schools are eligible for Pool C bids.  Some of us fans just lost that argument for Whitworth and the NWC with the committee in 2007.      

[redswarm81]

redswarm81,

I recalculated Pool B with an access ratio of 1:9 (23 conferences of 197 team plus the 10 NESCAC teams, even tho' the conference does not take the bid.  207 divided by 23 = 9.00)

If Neb Wesleyan has declared for the NAIA, then that gives 26 teams and 2 bids.

If that is the way that the calculation has been done in previous years, then no one "in the know" would complain.

• It would be pretty squirrelly to calculate Pool A using the 10 teams in the NESCAC in the numerator (207) but not their conference in the denominator (23);
• If Neb Wesleyan has declared for the NAIA, wouldn't they have to tell somebody?
  
  . . . anybody?
  
  . . . Bueller?
• What does the NCAA gain by shrouding its bid calculation process in secrecy?  I can understand the desire to keep the selection committee's negotiations private, but teams really ought to know how their path to selection is defined.