FB: Ohio Athletic Conference

[Craft_Beermeister]

I don't know much about the site Sports Insight, but I do see they claim to be
The industry's most advanced live odds platform.  They also Track in real time all the forces that move lines – public betting, sharp money, injury reports & weather updates.

3 days ago Sports Insight reported the odds for winning the College Football DIII Title which I pasted below. I added the current D3Football Top 25 ranking to each team which shows Whitewater under ranked in D3Football and Trinity not even getting a single vote in D3Football have much better odds than ranked teams.

Mount Union +150 (1)
WI Oshkosh +300 (4)
Mary Hardin-Baylor +400 (2)
Saint Thomas MN +1000 (3)
Brockport State +1800 (6)
WI Whitewater+2000 (12)
Linfield +2500 (5)
North Central IL +3000 (7)
St John's MN +3000 (11)
Trinity CT +4000

[Oline89]

Pretty sure the odds of Trinity (CT) being the National Champion, to quote Animal House, are 0.0.  They play  a nine game schedule in the NESCAC, no post season play allowed.  Otherwise the odds look pretty legit!

[Pat Coleman]

Pretty sure the odds of Trinity (CT) being the National Champion, to quote Animal House, are 0.0.  They play  a nine game schedule in the NESCAC, no post season play allowed.  Otherwise the odds look pretty legit!

You beat me to it but I find this hilarious!

[jknezek]

Pretty sure the odds of Trinity (CT) being the National Champion, to quote Animal House, are 0.0.  They play  a nine game schedule in the NESCAC, no post season play allowed.  Otherwise the odds look pretty legit!

I'm guessing they won't give me odds on the field vs Trinity. Even ridiculously low odds, if you raise enough money, are worth doing on a sure bet.

[bluestreak66]

Don't know if anyone has seen this yet, but looks like a new (and colorful!) field down at Marietta!

I say if you're a program like Marietta, embrace the wackiness of it! (although that old Dollar General outside the stadium leaves something to be desired!)

[hsbsballcoach7]

Don't know if anyone has seen this yet, but looks like a new (and colorful!) field down at Marietta!

I say if you're a program like Marietta, embrace the wackiness of it! (although that old Dollar General outside the stadium leaves something to be desired!)

If you're Marietta, you've got to do anything you can to spice up the experience of playing football there to attract quality athletes. I like it!

I don't know much about the site Sports Insight, but I do see they claim to be
The industry's most advanced live odds platform.  They also Track in real time all the forces that move lines – public betting, sharp money, injury reports & weather updates.

3 days ago Sports Insight reported the odds for winning the College Football DIII Title which I pasted below. I added the current D3Football Top 25 ranking to each team which shows Whitewater under ranked in D3Football and Trinity not even getting a single vote in D3Football have much better odds than ranked teams.

Mount Union +150 (1)
WI Oshkosh +300 (4)
Mary Hardin-Baylor +400 (2)
Saint Thomas MN +1000 (3)
Brockport State +1800 (6)
WI Whitewater+2000 (12)
Linfield +2500 (5)
North Central IL +3000 (7)
St John's MN +3000 (11)
Trinity CT +4000

Saw this and was surprised that UMHB didn't have closer odds to UMU. With UWO losing most of their offense and UMHB gaining a very good QB, I'd expect them to be next. I know UMHB loses some guys, but they have experience returning as well.

[raiderpa]

Love the new look at Marietta.  Fresh .  Can't say much for the Boise blue or the red I saw somewhere, but the Marietta choice is IMO pretty neat.

[Dr. Acula]

In other news - jcu's new AD...the comments. I know the scope wasn't limited to football however. Go ahead and keep telling yourself that their are other fish to fry. Maybe in other sports. But in football? No. There. Aren't. Her comment was the Tommie in her talking. As a Tommie there are other fish (like Johniies,etc to fry). You can't worry about Mount until you get to them by frying the other fish. As a Tommie she can say that. As a Blue Streak - she can't.

For JCU - there are no Tommies, Johnnies, Cru, UWW, UWO. To get a shot at any of them you have to beat Mount. Sure you can schedule one of them to open. Doesn't matter if you win or lose - means nothing. Because if you can't beat MOUNT - you more than likely won't make the playoffs anyway. And if you don't make the playoffs - you can't win a championship. And no championships means NOT A NATIONAL POWER. Mount isn't like the other fish - Mount ate them. They are the big friggin' FISH that will prevent you from becoming a national power. And they are in your conference. No other team matters if your jcu. You want titles and national recognition - you have to beat Mount. They are the key to all of that. My .02 cents.

I think winning their opener means everything.  If they go 9-1 and lose to Mount every year they will make the playoffs every year.  And at 9-1 they'd probably get their chance against one of those top teams sooner rather than later thanks to seeding.     

[wally_wabash]

I think winning their opener means everything.  If they go 9-1 and lose to Mount every year they will make the playoffs every year.  And at 9-1 they'd probably get their chance against one of those top teams sooner rather than later thanks to seeding.     

I don't think it's quite right to assume that an OAC runner up is locked in to the tournament.  There are too few at-large bids and you just never know how the selection committee is going to digest a typical OAC runner-up profile, particularly in years where the OAC is mediocre enough below Mount Union to not provide an extra regionally ranked opponent or two.  Playing UWO was juicy and good for John Carroll's tournament profile.  UWSP probably isn't a big helper for them this year (though could provide an unexpected piece of comparative data with Wabash should both of those schools wind up without AQs).  I just don't know that there are any absolute at-large locks anymore.  The committee's choices and rationales vary too much from year to year.

[Ereraider]

The last time Marietta put in a new field didn't they have a big flood and destroyed it?

[edward de vere]

It doesn't go away if you ignore it - it gets worse. I thought we all learned that in health class?

LOL.  +++

[Dr. Acula]

I think winning their opener means everything.  If they go 9-1 and lose to Mount every year they will make the playoffs every year.  And at 9-1 they'd probably get their chance against one of those top teams sooner rather than later thanks to seeding.     

I don't think it's quite right to assume that an OAC runner up is locked in to the tournament.  There are too few at-large bids and you just never know how the selection committee is going to digest a typical OAC runner-up profile, particularly in years where the OAC is mediocre enough below Mount Union to not provide an extra regionally ranked opponent or two.  Playing UWO was juicy and good for John Carroll's tournament profile.  UWSP probably isn't a big helper for them this year (though could provide an unexpected piece of comparative data with Wabash should both of those schools wind up without AQs).  I just don't know that there are any absolute at-large locks anymore.  The committee's choices and rationales vary too much from year to year.

I think 9-1 JCU is different than any other 9-1 OAC runner up.  But as you said, you never know how the committee will view things in any given year so maybe the committee doesn't share my view!  Full disclosure: I also forgot the pool C bids had dwindled down so that was a bonehead moment by me.   
     

[skunks_sidekick]

I think winning their opener means everything.  If they go 9-1 and lose to Mount every year they will make the playoffs every year.  And at 9-1 they'd probably get their chance against one of those top teams sooner rather than later thanks to seeding.     

I don't think it's quite right to assume that an OAC runner up is locked in to the tournament.  There are too few at-large bids and you just never know how the selection committee is going to digest a typical OAC runner-up profile, particularly in years where the OAC is mediocre enough below Mount Union to not provide an extra regionally ranked opponent or two.  Playing UWO was juicy and good for John Carroll's tournament profile.  UWSP probably isn't a big helper for them this year (though could provide an unexpected piece of comparative data with Wabash should both of those schools wind up without AQs).  I just don't know that there are any absolute at-large locks anymore.  The committee's choices and rationales vary too much from year to year.

Wally, I know you are trying to "rep" the NCAC, but if you think JCU going 9-1 doesn't get them in the playoffs, and probably a home game, then you are wearing NCAC blinders that just doesn't make sense.  The non-conference game has significant value, but Wabash loses to WITT & JCU loses to Mount is even/steven?  Ummm...no.  Now if JCU loses 42-3 or something I would be willing to listen to the argument, but I don't think that will happen.  Downgrade the OAC (our bottom is pretty bad although showing signs if getting better), but to then (according to your argument as I perceive it) to say the NCAC is  a better overall conference is a reach my man.

[Pat Coleman]

I think winning their opener means everything.  If they go 9-1 and lose to Mount every year they will make the playoffs every year.  And at 9-1 they'd probably get their chance against one of those top teams sooner rather than later thanks to seeding.     

I don't think it's quite right to assume that an OAC runner up is locked in to the tournament.  There are too few at-large bids and you just never know how the selection committee is going to digest a typical OAC runner-up profile, particularly in years where the OAC is mediocre enough below Mount Union to not provide an extra regionally ranked opponent or two.  Playing UWO was juicy and good for John Carroll's tournament profile.  UWSP probably isn't a big helper for them this year (though could provide an unexpected piece of comparative data with Wabash should both of those schools wind up without AQs).  I just don't know that there are any absolute at-large locks anymore.  The committee's choices and rationales vary too much from year to year.

Wally, I know you are trying to "rep" the NCAC, but if you think JCU going 9-1 doesn't get them in the playoffs, and probably a home game, then you are wearing NCAC blinders that just doesn't make sense.  The non-conference game has significant value, but Wabash loses to WITT & JCU loses to Mount is even/steven?  Ummm...no.  Now if JCU loses 42-3 or something I would be willing to listen to the argument, but I don't think that will happen.  Downgrade the OAC (our bottom is pretty bad although showing signs if getting better), but to then (according to your argument as I perceive it) to say the NCAC is  a better overall conference is a reach my man.

If the point is that the OAC No. 2 isn't automatically an at-large candidate, I'm down with that.

If they go 9-1 and lose to Mount every year they will make the playoffs every year.

I just don't think I can sign off on this statement. It'd depend on who the non-conference opponent is and how many other 9-1 teams there are (since we are unlikely to have any at-large 10-0 teams any longer). There really are very few at-large bids anymore, so to essentially give the OAC a second automatic bid every year might be a stretch.

[USee]

I think winning their opener means everything.  If they go 9-1 and lose to Mount every year they will make the playoffs every year.  And at 9-1 they'd probably get their chance against one of those top teams sooner rather than later thanks to seeding.     

I don't think it's quite right to assume that an OAC runner up is locked in to the tournament.  There are too few at-large bids and you just never know how the selection committee is going to digest a typical OAC runner-up profile, particularly in years where the OAC is mediocre enough below Mount Union to not provide an extra regionally ranked opponent or two.  Playing UWO was juicy and good for John Carroll's tournament profile.  UWSP probably isn't a big helper for them this year (though could provide an unexpected piece of comparative data with Wabash should both of those schools wind up without AQs).  I just don't know that there are any absolute at-large locks anymore.  The committee's choices and rationales vary too much from year to year.

Wally, I know you are trying to "rep" the NCAC, but if you think JCU going 9-1 doesn't get them in the playoffs, and probably a home game, then you are wearing NCAC blinders that just doesn't make sense.  The non-conference game has significant value, but Wabash loses to WITT & JCU loses to Mount is even/steven?  Ummm...no.  Now if JCU loses 42-3 or something I would be willing to listen to the argument, but I don't think that will happen.  Downgrade the OAC (our bottom is pretty bad although showing signs if getting better), but to then (according to your argument as I perceive it) to say the NCAC is  a better overall conference is a reach my man.

I don't see anywhere in Wally's post where he even mentions the NCAC, let alone any contention about the quality of either conference. You didn't read this right. He mentions Wabash because they, along with JCU, are playing UWSP. He is saying the OAC doesn't have an entitlement to the playoffs for their #2 anymore. That's all he said.