FB: Ohio Athletic Conference

[Mr. Ypsi]

Well said Wesleydad.  Spot on. And in a very real way, the AQ system adds to the legitimacy of the champion more than it detracts from it. It's beautiful that at the beginning of the season, every single team has a path to the National Championship. When a team wins a conference that has enough teams to be an AQ conference, they must be stopped by another football team rather than by the perceptions of other people, most of whom have never seen them play. Nothing wrong with allowing kids to pursue their dreams until they hit a wall. I would guess that for many kids from the "weaker conferences", among their top football memories will turn out to be those playoff opportunities, even the ones that didn't turn out very well.

A couple of responses happened after I typed the above. Jete2, kids can get hurt in any football game. I suppose if a school agrees with you, they could turn down an invitation to the tournament, right? Let's not turn D-III football into a liberal "We have to protect the kids for their own good" mentality.

Bleed, I guess we are just gonna have to agree to disagree. But, since you mentioned the "liberal mentality" of protecting kids for their own good...I say let's not turn D3 into the liberal "everybody gets a trophy" mentality by letting undeserving teams in the playoffs.  Is that truly the American way?  I think your conference brothers in Platteville would agree with me.  Would you still feel the same way if UWW was in the same situation as UW-Platteville?

And would you both please cut the liberal-bashing crap (there's a reason Pat shut down the politics board) - both of the things you guys are complaining about are 'helicopter parenting', which is NOT a liberal or conservative malady.

With the possible exception of one-year suspensions of AQ rights if a conference has no team in the regional rankings (or perhaps for AQ winners with 4+ losses), I fully support the AQ system as a means of giving every team a knowable route to the playoffs (unless you're a NESCAC football team, of course ).  A large part of the appeal of D3 playoffs on up (down?) to 'March Madness' is the possibility, however remote, of a Hoosiers scenario.  While it happens rarely, VERY good teams can emerge from VERY bad conferences (e.g., Larry Bird's Indiana State team) - if we bar entire conferences (and in football, there are too few non-con games for such a team to prove itself Pool C worthy), how would we ever have the thrill of seeing such a team?

[bleedpurple]

Well said Wesleydad.  Spot on. And in a very real way, the AQ system adds to the legitimacy of the champion more than it detracts from it. It's beautiful that at the beginning of the season, every single team has a path to the National Championship. When a team wins a conference that has enough teams to be an AQ conference, they must be stopped by another football team rather than by the perceptions of other people, most of whom have never seen them play. Nothing wrong with allowing kids to pursue their dreams until they hit a wall. I would guess that for many kids from the "weaker conferences", among their top football memories will turn out to be those playoff opportunities, even the ones that didn't turn out very well.

A couple of responses happened after I typed the above. Jete2, kids can get hurt in any football game. I suppose if a school agrees with you, they could turn down an invitation to the tournament, right? Let's not turn D-III football into a liberal "We have to protect the kids for their own good" mentality.

Bleed, I guess we are just gonna have to agree to disagree. But, since you mentioned the "liberal mentality" of protecting kids for their own good...I say let's not turn D3 into the liberal "everybody gets a trophy" mentality by letting undeserving teams in the playoffs.  Is that truly the American way?  I think your conference brothers in Platteville would agree with me.  Would you still feel the same way if UWW was in the same situation as UW-Platteville?

I am actually bummed that Platteville is not in. Not because they are in the WIAC as much as because there seems to be a consensus of those that know the most about it that they deserve to be in based on the criteria already established.  But the "process" did not favor them.  As far as the Pool C's I agree with your philosophy 100%.   I believe the philosophy should be the AQ's (so everyone has access to the dream at the beginning of the season) and then the very "best of the rest" making up the rest of the field through Pool C. The problem is, no matter the system it seems, there will always be disagreement as to who "the best of the rest" are.

My caveat regarding Platteville is that anyone with two losses is putting themselves on thin enough ice that it limits my sympathy to low level frustration as opposed to outrage. 

Mr. Ypsi, this is a discussion clearly about the selection process not politics. Both of our comments casually mentioning the word "liberal" were relatively benign. This is a message board. So, I'm sorry if it offends you, but in the most polite tone possible, I have to say I will use the word liberal whenever I want to. I don't know about helicopter parenting, but for sure policing words to that degree is a tactic I see incessantly from people who consider themselves liberal. So I will do what I suggest others do. I will consider myself free to type whatever I want and extend the same freedom to you to disagree.

[pg04]

I'd throw in my two cents but Mr Ypsi knows that could only lead to trouble 

[jete2]

Well said Wesleydad.  Spot on. And in a very real way, the AQ system adds to the legitimacy of the champion more than it detracts from it. It's beautiful that at the beginning of the season, every single team has a path to the National Championship. When a team wins a conference that has enough teams to be an AQ conference, they must be stopped by another football team rather than by the perceptions of other people, most of whom have never seen them play. Nothing wrong with allowing kids to pursue their dreams until they hit a wall. I would guess that for many kids from the "weaker conferences", among their top football memories will turn out to be those playoff opportunities, even the ones that didn't turn out very well.

A couple of responses happened after I typed the above. Jete2, kids can get hurt in any football game. I suppose if a school agrees with you, they could turn down an invitation to the tournament, right? Let's not turn D-III football into a liberal "We have to protect the kids for their own good" mentality.

Bleed, I guess we are just gonna have to agree to disagree. But, since you mentioned the "liberal mentality" of protecting kids for their own good...I say let's not turn D3 into the liberal "everybody gets a trophy" mentality by letting undeserving teams in the playoffs.  Is that truly the American way?  I think your conference brothers in Platteville would agree with me.  Would you still feel the same way if UWW was in the same situation as UW-Platteville?

I am actually bummed that Platteville is not in. Not because they are in the WIAC as much as because there seems to be a consensus of those that know the most about it that they deserve to be in based on the criteria already established.  But the "process" did not favor them.  As far as the Pool C's I agree with your philosophy 100%.   I believe the philosophy should be the AQ's (so everyone has access to the dream at the beginning of the season) and then the very "best of the rest" making up the rest of the field through Pool C. The problem is, no matter the system it seems, there will always be disagreement as to who "the best of the rest" are.

My caveat regarding Platteville is that anyone with two losses is putting themselves on thin enough ice that it limits my sympathy to low level frustration as opposed to outrage. 

Mr. Ypsi, this is a discussion clearly about the selection process not politics. Both of our comments casually mentioning the word "liberal" were relatively benign. This is a message board. So, I'm sorry if it offends you, but in the most polite tone possible, I have to say I will use the word liberal whenever I want to. I don't know about helicopter parenting, but for sure policing words to that degree is a tactic I see incessantly from people who consider themselves liberal. So I will do what I suggest others do. I will consider myself free to type whatever I want and extend the same freedom to you to disagree.

Thank you for your thoughtful response and comments, Bleedpurple. It truly is a discussion with give and take opinions. Nothing more and nothing less.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Well said Wesleydad.  Spot on. And in a very real way, the AQ system adds to the legitimacy of the champion more than it detracts from it. It's beautiful that at the beginning of the season, every single team has a path to the National Championship. When a team wins a conference that has enough teams to be an AQ conference, they must be stopped by another football team rather than by the perceptions of other people, most of whom have never seen them play. Nothing wrong with allowing kids to pursue their dreams until they hit a wall. I would guess that for many kids from the "weaker conferences", among their top football memories will turn out to be those playoff opportunities, even the ones that didn't turn out very well.

A couple of responses happened after I typed the above. Jete2, kids can get hurt in any football game. I suppose if a school agrees with you, they could turn down an invitation to the tournament, right? Let's not turn D-III football into a liberal "We have to protect the kids for their own good" mentality.

Bleed, I guess we are just gonna have to agree to disagree. But, since you mentioned the "liberal mentality" of protecting kids for their own good...I say let's not turn D3 into the liberal "everybody gets a trophy" mentality by letting undeserving teams in the playoffs.  Is that truly the American way?  I think your conference brothers in Platteville would agree with me.  Would you still feel the same way if UWW was in the same situation as UW-Platteville?

I am actually bummed that Platteville is not in. Not because they are in the WIAC as much as because there seems to be a consensus of those that know the most about it that they deserve to be in based on the criteria already established.  But the "process" did not favor them.  As far as the Pool C's I agree with your philosophy 100%.   I believe the philosophy should be the AQ's (so everyone has access to the dream at the beginning of the season) and then the very "best of the rest" making up the rest of the field through Pool C. The problem is, no matter the system it seems, there will always be disagreement as to who "the best of the rest" are.

My caveat regarding Platteville is that anyone with two losses is putting themselves on thin enough ice that it limits my sympathy to low level frustration as opposed to outrage. 

Applause, applause, applause.  Fabulously said, both wesleydad and bleedpurple.

We have some version of this discussion every year.  jete appears to be newish to the boards, so I don't blame him, but we've been down this path 100 times.  I'll repeat exactly what bleed said because it can't be said enough: the best thing about the AQ system is that it gives every single team in the division a chance to get into the field with NO subjectivity.  Win all of your games and you're into the dance. 

Someone else (I think it was jknezek) made a really good point the last time this discussion came up - to anyone who wants to remove league champions from the playoffs because you feel that it's an "everybody gets a trophy" mentality, I postulate that including more at-large teams at the expense of league champions is every bit as much of an "everybody gets a trophy" mentality.  Pool C is giving second (and in some cases third) chances to teams that already lost games.  Isn't that an awful lot closer to "everybody gets a trophy" than a system where you qualify by winning your league?  If we have to change something about the current system, I would sooner get rid of the at-larges altogether than start leaving conference champions out of the playoffs.

Another important point, which unfortunately does not get nearly enough of a look in these discussions, is that the AQ system is precisely why teams can feel free to schedule difficult non-conference games if they choose.  This year's North Central Cardinals, subject of much sympathy after close losses to UWP and Wesley early in the season (the regular season was not half over and we had people campaigning to put them in Pool C), still had a path to the playoffs if they could win their league's AQ bid.  For all the ink that's been spilled about how unfair the Pool C process is for teams that schedule difficult non-league games, this part of the system really should get more credit.

Although I have disagreed with him about how to fix this (or if it even needs to be fixed), I can at least respect emma's point of view that the Pool C process may not always get the best at-large teams into the field.  I can live with squabbling about whether UWP should have gotten into the field instead of Whitworth and ONU.  That probably isn't fair.  But removing that AQ's takes us down a path that's infinitely more unfair - now we're making judgement calls about every team that gets into the field, and opening the door to exclude entire leagues from the playoffs based on past performance.

[Toph]

I'm very surprised that ONU is in, but congrats to the Bears!  Wow!

And I'm already working on my wife to let me make the trip back to Ohio should UWW and Mount meet on the 12th.  Thankfully, she doesn't read this board and thinks the flowers are "just because."

[raiderguy]

I believe the idea about poor conference performance and losing AQ came from Pat and the boys at D3.com.  And its time has come, IMO.

if the weaker leagues loses it's AQ, how does it get it back or is it gone forever?  This comes up every year.  Yes there will be some really ugly games in the first round, but will that be any different than most weeks in most leagues where some teams are clearly over matched by the stronger teams in their league.  Wesley won 63-0 this week, does that mean that Willy P should not play Wesley anymore even though they are in the same league.  The first round of the playoffs is what it is, a chance for the weaker teams to play one more game and then put the equipment away.  They have little if any belief that they are going to win it all.  Let them enjoy what they have earned, a chance to play a playoff game.

Without looking at the real details there might be a way to modify the current playoff format with one minor addition to the AQ. Like in the big boys league they have a 6 game minimum to qualify for a bowl game appearance. Since there are more games for them to use to get to a gimme bowl. D3 should use a minimum 7 win season to be allowed an AQ if you are the conference champion. This is a small change but it might be enough to eliminate some of these issues.

[ExTartanPlayer]

I believe the idea about poor conference performance and losing AQ came from Pat and the boys at D3.com.  And its time has come, IMO.

if the weaker leagues loses it's AQ, how does it get it back or is it gone forever?  This comes up every year.  Yes there will be some really ugly games in the first round, but will that be any different than most weeks in most leagues where some teams are clearly over matched by the stronger teams in their league.  Wesley won 63-0 this week, does that mean that Willy P should not play Wesley anymore even though they are in the same league.  The first round of the playoffs is what it is, a chance for the weaker teams to play one more game and then put the equipment away.  They have little if any belief that they are going to win it all.  Let them enjoy what they have earned, a chance to play a playoff game.

Without looking at the real details there might be a way to modify the current playoff format with one minor addition to the AQ. Like in the big boys league they have a 6 game minimum to qualify for a bowl game appearance. Since there are more games for them to use to get to a gimme bowl. D3 should use a minimum 7 win season to be allowed an AQ if you are the conference champion. This is a small change but it might be enough to eliminate some of these issues.

That's one decent idea which has been kicked around some.  I don't think this is all bad, but the downside is that a win minimum would encourage avoiding any tough non-league matchups to make sure they get they don't lose out on their AQ.  The current system is what lets teams like Albion and Norwich step our of their league and play someone from a much tougher conference than their own (Albion played a WIAC team this year; Norwich has been playing Liberty League and Empire 8 teams for the last few years).  I know that stuff seems like small potatoes to the national giants, but that's a major step up in scheduling quality for those teams; I'm afraid that a 7-win minimum - which is very reasonable at first glance - would discourage that willingness to schedule tough (relatively speaking) non-league games and encourage teams to seek out the easiest possible non-league games to make sure they meet the 7-win threshold (much as the current 6-win minimum for bowl eligibility encourages mediocre FBS teams to schedule those gimme games to make sure they can say they went to a bowl in a year where they went 2-6 in league play because they scheduled Georgia Southern, Directional Michigan, Northern Toledo Tech, and Alaska A & M).  Norwich is trying to upgrade their program with those games; this year, leaving them out of the playoffs would surely send their AD scrambling to get out of any future games against the LL and E8 for some more layups against the MASCAC and NEFC.

Like I said - the idea isn't all bad (and any change we make will have some upside and some downside).  Just think it's worth presenting all sides of the issue.

Short version: the unintended consequence from a win threshold = teams avoiding tough non-league games to make sure they don't lose their AQ chance.

[reality check]

I believe the idea about poor conference performance and losing AQ came from Pat and the boys at D3.com.  And its time has come, IMO.

if the weaker leagues loses it's AQ, how does it get it back or is it gone forever?  This comes up every year.  Yes there will be some really ugly games in the first round, but will that be any different than most weeks in most leagues where some teams are clearly over matched by the stronger teams in their league.  Wesley won 63-0 this week, does that mean that Willy P should not play Wesley anymore even though they are in the same league.  The first round of the playoffs is what it is, a chance for the weaker teams to play one more game and then put the equipment away.  They have little if any belief that they are going to win it all.  Let them enjoy what they have earned, a chance to play a playoff game.

I'm sorry Wesleydad but I respectfully disagree with the concept of letting the weaker team play one more game and letting them enjoy what they have earned.  Who enjoys getting blown out 60-0?  I was at the Wesley-MIT playoff game last year and I was worried that someone from MIT was going to seriously get hurt.  As a matter of fact, some of their kids did get hurt, as I stood right behind their bench as Athletic trainers were treating them.  It was obvious that many of their kids who were much smaller and slower were intimidated. Is this the spirit of D3?  I assure you that MIT didn't face anything close in their conference to what Wesley had last year.  Why can't a conference champion from a weaker AQ conferences play an extra "Bowl" game against a conference champ from a regional and/or similar conference.  That in my opinion would be keeping with the spirit of D3.

Sounds like you should take this up with their athletic trainers and not the rest of D3.  If the trainers are hurting them right before your eyes, they were doing something wrong.   

[reality check]

While I am very pleasantly surprised about ONU's inclusion, I am also intrigued by the team that heads into the playoffs.  QB Will Freed had some very good moments in the first half of the season but the offense really seemed to discover its identity in the last couple of weeks.  Offensively, the Bears have averaged 51 PPG in the second half of the season.  Obviously Mount did a number on them but even the four other first half games, the Bears were only averaging 30 PPG.  Hopefully they continue to ride this wave into the playoffs.

[SaintsFAN]

I believe the idea about poor conference performance and losing AQ came from Pat and the boys at D3.com.  And its time has come, IMO.

if the weaker leagues loses it's AQ, how does it get it back or is it gone forever?  This comes up every year.  Yes there will be some really ugly games in the first round, but will that be any different than most weeks in most leagues where some teams are clearly over matched by the stronger teams in their league.  Wesley won 63-0 this week, does that mean that Willy P should not play Wesley anymore even though they are in the same league.  The first round of the playoffs is what it is, a chance for the weaker teams to play one more game and then put the equipment away.  They have little if any belief that they are going to win it all.  Let them enjoy what they have earned, a chance to play a playoff game.

I'm sorry Wesleydad but I respectfully disagree with the concept of letting the weaker team play one more game and letting them enjoy what they have earned.  Who enjoys getting blown out 60-0?  I was at the Wesley-MIT playoff game last year and I was worried that someone from MIT was going to seriously get hurt.  As a matter of fact, some of their kids did get hurt, as I stood right behind their bench as Athletic trainers were treating them.  It was obvious that many of their kids who were much smaller and slower were intimidated. Is this the spirit of D3?  I assure you that MIT didn't face anything close in their conference to what Wesley had last year.  Why can't a conference champion from a weaker AQ conferences play an extra "Bowl" game against a conference champ from a regional and/or similar conference.  That in my opinion would be keeping with the spirit of D3.

Sounds like you should take this up with their athletic trainers and not the rest of D3.  If the trainers are hurting them right before your eyes, they were doing something wrong.   

Yeah it doesn't sound like they were treating them, they were mistreating them.  I've never seen that before but apparently it happens

[Dr. Acula]

While I am very pleasantly surprised about ONU's inclusion, I am also intrigued by the team that heads into the playoffs.  QB Will Freed had some very good moments in the first half of the season but the offense really seemed to discover its identity in the last couple of weeks.  Offensively, the Bears have averaged 51 PPG in the second half of the season.  Obviously Mount did a number on them but even the four other first half games, the Bears were only averaging 30 PPG.  Hopefully they continue to ride this wave into the playoffs.

That's the first round game I'm most interested to see.  As usual Franklin can score a lot of points and so can ONU.  It should be a fun game.  And for ONU it's absolutely a winnable game too. 

A lot of us didn't think ONU would get in, but they did so now it's time for everyone to fall in line under that OAC flag.  That's one thing I enjoy about D3 as opposed to D1.  I live in Columbus.  Most OSU fans would NEVER root for Michigan or Michigan St. or whoever if they made the CFB playoffs.  They'd openly root against them.  D3 seems more like the SEC.  ONU is in and they're in our conference so most of us become ONU fans next Saturday.     

[Dr. Acula]

Good work by BW.  They showed well last week and then beat Berg today to finish 7-2 in OAC play and splitting with the other 7-2 teams. And they put up 44 points and 546 yds without Moeglin playing today too.  That's a long way from losing to Bluffton.

Agreed.  Sometimes on these boards we can get a little overly critical and dismissive of non-playoff teams, forgetting that 7-3 and 8-2 seasons are still very good for most programs.  It's especially neat to see teams that started off poorly and, instead of quitting, put their nose to the grindstone and churned out a strong finish.  Good for BW.

This may have proved to be even more important since ONU got a pool C bid.  BW looking pretty legit down the stretch certainly had to take some of the sting out of ONU's 1 point loss to the Jackets.  What initially looked like a really bad loss ended up being not nearly as damning by this week.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Good work by BW.  They showed well last week and then beat Berg today to finish 7-2 in OAC play and splitting with the other 7-2 teams. And they put up 44 points and 546 yds without Moeglin playing today too.  That's a long way from losing to Bluffton.

Agreed.  Sometimes on these boards we can get a little overly critical and dismissive of non-playoff teams, forgetting that 7-3 and 8-2 seasons are still very good for most programs.  It's especially neat to see teams that started off poorly and, instead of quitting, put their nose to the grindstone and churned out a strong finish.  Good for BW.

This may have proved to be even more important since ONU got a pool C bid.  BW looking pretty legit down the stretch certainly had to take some of the sting out of ONU's 1 point loss to the Jackets.  What initially looked like a really bad loss ended up being not nearly as damning by this week.

You know, I was thinking all along that if BW hadn't pulled off the rare "loss to Bluffton" feat in week 1, they also would have been a part of the regional ranking / Pool C discussion...

[GRIZ_BACKER]

That's the first round game I'm most interested to see.  As usual Franklin can score a lot of points and so can ONU.  It should be a fun game.  And for ONU it's absolutely a winnable game too. 

A lot of us didn't think ONU would get in, but they did so now it's time for everyone to fall in line under that OAC flag.  That's one thing I enjoy about D3 as opposed to D1.  I live in Columbus.  Most OSU fans would NEVER root for Michigan or Michigan St. or whoever if they made the CFB playoffs.  They'd openly root against them.  D3 seems more like the SEC.  ONU is in and they're in our conference so most of us become ONU fans next Saturday.     
[/quote]

Should be a good game.  Very winnable for both programs.  ONU hit the mini lottery.  Got in and then is not being sent to a sure death at a top seed.  FC got a decent deal as well.  Home game against similar talented opponent.  FC has been sent to the first round gallows a couple times in the past.