FB: Presidents' Athletic Conference

[SaintsFAN]

Posted this earlier, but asked and answered:

PAC tiebreaker

Tiebreaker for NCAA automatic qualifier (AQ): 1) Head-to-head competition, 2) Record against the highest-ranked team in the conference not involved in the tie. In the case of a three-way tie, it would be the fourth team. In case of a four-way tie, it would be the fifth-team, etc. If the records against that team are the same, it goes to the next highest team not involved in the tie, etc., 3) strength of conference wins (conference winning percentage of teams you beat in 8 PAC games, 4) Overall record, 5) Record vs. common non-league opponent(s). Note: if one team is eliminated, the tiebreaker begins again at step #1. All teams in a 3 or more team tie must have played each other for the head-to-head tiebreaker to be applicable.  [Emphasis added]

I would think #3 would favor TMC with Case not playing W&J. 

[E.115]

Great breakdown and analysis -- thank you. 

A couple big games this week to better define the landscape:

Carnegie Mellon @ Washington and Jefferson
St.Vincent @ Westminster

Interesting day around the league yesterday.

Carnegie Mellon 49, Bethany 26: I was fortunate to take in most of the CMU-Bethany game, and it went about according to the expected script (despite a 30-minute delay halfway through the first quarter due to lightning in the area).   Bethany has some impressive athletes on both sides of the ball, but is lacking discipline, especially on defense; the Tartans exploited several breakdowns for big offensive plays.  RB Benger (174 yards, 4 TD) and WR Prather (125 yards, 2 TD) were the offensive centerpiece, as usual.  Benger had two "one play touchdown drives" (49 and 55 yard runs that came on the first play of the possession).  Another impressive weapon for CMU is freshman KR/PR William Richter - he had several excellent returns and set the Tartans up with really great field position almost every time he touched the ball.  Listed as an RB, I'm not sure how much Richter will get on the field in regular offensive packages due to the presence of Benger, but I've been very impressed by Richter's return skills in both games that I've seen.  Quick feet, decisive runner, appears to have some wheels in the open field.  Should be a useful playmaker in a special-teams role this year and could be an heir apparent to Benger down the line.  Huge game for the Tartans next week with W&J.

Thomas More 45, Westminster 35: TMC has rebounded from a week 1 ding against Franklin to take down all of their top PAC challengers in a row.  I'm not sure how much I would like this schedule as a TMC fan - it's nice to have the league basically sewn up by mid-October, as the Saints really should not be challenged for the remainder of the regular season, but going into the playoffs after this stretch...would you rather be a little better tested at the end of the season?  Oh, and then there's the elephant in the room...there's one more "challenger" remaining that they won't get to play...

Case Western 53, St. Vincent 28: after seeing both of these teams live last year, I am not at all surprised that Case won the battle of unbeatens here, and realistically CWRU should be 7-0 going into a tough closing stretch with WashU (not PAC, but still, tough game) and then Westminster and CMU.  I don't know what the tiebreaker will be if CWRU and TMC both finish league play undefeated but presumably Thomas More will want to avoid that mess by rooting for Westminster/CMU when the time comes.  Of course, Case can root for TMC opponents too, but it's not likely to do very much good.

W&J 62, Thiel 14: Presidents lick their wounds after taking it on the chin from Thomas More a few weeks ago with a blowout win.  Big game against CMU coming up next week - will be very telling for both teams.

Waynesberg 14, Grove City 10: Poor Grove City battled to the whistle (ended the game with the ball, down 14-10, on the Waynesburg 40) but their futility continues (after many years of consistent-mid-pack finishes in the PAC, hovering between 3-7 in bad years and 6-4 in good ones, they have lost 25 straight games).  Meanwhile, Waynesburg also is trying to rebound from an uncharacteristically bad 2015 (their 3-7 finish was their first losing season since 2005) so it is nice to get a win, but a 14-10 win over winless Grove City to break a four-game losing streak is probably not what they've had in mind...part of this can be attributed to opening league play with three of the PAC's better teams, but that's little comfort to a program that's used to thinking of itself as one of the PAC's better teams.

Now that we've got some league play, I'll take a crack at my first PAC rankings of the season.

Tier 1:

1. Thomas More

With wins over W&J, Carnegie Mellon, and Westminster already in their pocket...I think they stand alone for now.

Tier 2:

2. Case Western
3. W&J
4. Westminster
5. Carnegie Mellon

CWRU is 4-0 and should coast along until playing Westminster and CMU to close the season. W&J has taken one beating from Thomas More but otherwise rolled; their game with CMU this week will help sort out Tier 2.  Westminster and CMU both played very gamely against Thomas More but lost.  They will each get chances for redemption against W&J and CWRU in the weeks to come.  You certainly can argue via the transitive property that Westminster and CMU deserve to be ranked ahead of W&J because of the respective results against TMC (two were competitive, one wasn't close) but we can wait for the respective head-to-head matchups.

Tier 3:

6. St. Vincent
7. Geneva
8. Thiel
9. Bethany
10. Waynesburg
11. Grove City

This sorts out pretty cleanly.  SVC has beaten Geneva and Thiel.  Geneva has beaten Thiel and Bethany.  Thiel has beaten Bethany.  Not really sure whether Bethany is better than Waynesburg and Grove City...we'll see on them.

[Bob.Gregg]

I would think #3 would favor TMC with Case not playing W&J.

Get a 12th team, play two divisions with conference championship.
Tie-breaker issue solved.

Allegheny
John Carroll
Defiance
Capital
Hiram
Marietta
Muskingum
Oberlin
Otterbein
Wooster

Have no idea about interest from any of them but most are between current PAC core and TMC geographically (Allegheny & JC not).

[ADL70]

Historical note:  JCU, Allegheny, and Hiram all have been PAC members.

[E.115]

One more interesting historical note -- Case Western Reserve has been a founding member in five conferences:

OAC
MAC
PAC
NCAC
UAA

[DagarmanSpartan]

Does the "Big Four" count as a conference?

If so, then one could add that to the list as well!

[E.115]

Does the "Big Four" count as a conference?

If so, then one could add that to the list as well!

Perhaps we can.  I understand it to have lasted from 1933 -1942.

Here's a cool picture of Baldwin Wallace vs Western Reserve during the Big Four heyday: https://twitter.com/thiswascle/status/721401444021063680?s=09

On October 19 would come the big game of the season, a Big Four contest pitting the Yellow Jackets
against Western Reserve's Red Cats before 21,000 at Cleveland's League Park. The game would be
pitting the passing attack of B-W against Reserve's formidable running game.

[wally_wabash]

I would think #3 would favor TMC with Case not playing W&J.

Get a 12th team, play two divisions with conference championship.
Tie-breaker issue solved.

Maybe that solves your tiebreak problem, but it introduces a way bigger problem- the problem where you let some team other than the best team in the league over the course of an entire regular season represent your league in the tournament. 

[ADL70]

Posted this earlier, but asked and answered:

PAC tiebreaker

Tiebreaker for NCAA automatic qualifier (AQ): 1) Head-to-head competition, 2) Record against the highest-ranked team in the conference not involved in the tie. In the case of a three-way tie, it would be the fourth team. In case of a four-way tie, it would be the fifth-team, etc. If the records against that team are the same, it goes to the next highest team not involved in the tie, etc., 3) strength of conference wins (conference winning percentage of teams you beat in 8 PAC games, 4) Overall record, 5) Record vs. common non-league opponent(s). Note: if one team is eliminated, the tiebreaker begins again at step #1. All teams in a 3 or more team tie must have played each other for the head-to-head tiebreaker to be applicable.  [Emphasis added]

I would think #3 would favor TMC with Case not playing W&J.

True, but I don't see a 9-1 TMC or 10-0 CWRU not making the field.

[D3MAFAN]

Posted this earlier, but asked and answered:

PAC tiebreaker

Tiebreaker for NCAA automatic qualifier (AQ): 1) Head-to-head competition, 2) Record against the highest-ranked team in the conference not involved in the tie. In the case of a three-way tie, it would be the fourth team. In case of a four-way tie, it would be the fifth-team, etc. If the records against that team are the same, it goes to the next highest team not involved in the tie, etc., 3) strength of conference wins (conference winning percentage of teams you beat in 8 PAC games, 4) Overall record, 5) Record vs. common non-league opponent(s). Note: if one team is eliminated, the tiebreaker begins again at step #1. All teams in a 3 or more team tie must have played each other for the head-to-head tiebreaker to be applicable.  [Emphasis added]

I would think #3 would favor TMC with Case not playing W&J.

True, but I don't see a 9-1 TMC or 10-0 CWRU not making the field.

One of the two will TMC will either be heading back to Franklin or Mount Union and CWRU playing Witt or a rematch with Wabash.

[wally_wabash]

Posted this earlier, but asked and answered:

PAC tiebreaker

Tiebreaker for NCAA automatic qualifier (AQ): 1) Head-to-head competition, 2) Record against the highest-ranked team in the conference not involved in the tie. In the case of a three-way tie, it would be the fourth team. In case of a four-way tie, it would be the fifth-team, etc. If the records against that team are the same, it goes to the next highest team not involved in the tie, etc., 3) strength of conference wins (conference winning percentage of teams you beat in 8 PAC games, 4) Overall record, 5) Record vs. common non-league opponent(s). Note: if one team is eliminated, the tiebreaker begins again at step #1. All teams in a 3 or more team tie must have played each other for the head-to-head tiebreaker to be applicable.  [Emphasis added]

I would think #3 would favor TMC with Case not playing W&J.

True, but I don't see a 9-1 TMC or 10-0 CWRU not making the field.

One of the two will TMC will either be heading back to Franklin or Mount Union and CWRU playing Witt or a rematch with Wabash.

These are definite possibilities.  But CWRU is in an area where a lot of teams can go play there (1st round) and they can go play at a lot of other places (later rounds).  CWRU can certainly fit into a pod with Eastern teams, so games with teams to their west aren't necessarily a given. 

Wabash needs to play better and get some help over the last six weeks here to get back into the party. 

[Bob.Gregg]

Maybe that solves your tiebreak problem, but it introduces a way bigger problem- the problem where you let some team other than the best team in the league over the course of an entire regular season represent your league in the tournament.

Why does it, by necessity, "let some team other than the best..." in the tournament?
And, how does the current "don't play everyone and hope we don't need the tie-breaker" not do the exact thing you're worried about?

Win your division, play the other division's winner, to the victor go the spoils.  To the vanquished, weeping, gnashing of teeth and a winter thinking "what if...."

Honestly, I don't see the problem with deciding who gets the NCAA AQ on the field.
No debate, no ranking/rating systems, no three degrees of separation comparitives.
One thing, one thing only:  Who won the PAC Championship Game?

[SaintsFAN]

Posted this earlier, but asked and answered:

PAC tiebreaker

Tiebreaker for NCAA automatic qualifier (AQ): 1) Head-to-head competition, 2) Record against the highest-ranked team in the conference not involved in the tie. In the case of a three-way tie, it would be the fourth team. In case of a four-way tie, it would be the fifth-team, etc. If the records against that team are the same, it goes to the next highest team not involved in the tie, etc., 3) strength of conference wins (conference winning percentage of teams you beat in 8 PAC games, 4) Overall record, 5) Record vs. common non-league opponent(s). Note: if one team is eliminated, the tiebreaker begins again at step #1. All teams in a 3 or more team tie must have played each other for the head-to-head tiebreaker to be applicable.  [Emphasis added]

I would think #3 would favor TMC with Case not playing W&J.

True, but I don't see a 9-1 TMC or 10-0 CWRU not making the field.

One of the two will TMC will either be heading back to Franklin or Mount Union and CWRU playing Witt or a rematch with Wabash.

These are definite possibilities.  But CWRU is in an area where a lot of teams can go play there (1st round) and they can go play at a lot of other places (later rounds).  CWRU can certainly fit into a pod with Eastern teams, so games with teams to their west aren't necessarily a given. 

Wabash needs to play better and get some help over the last six weeks here to get back into the party.

And while we are at it; though Thomas More has already played who was thought to be the strongest teams on their schedule already (by preseason prognosticators), they are hardly a shoo-in for 9-1.  They still have to win 5 more games to have a shot. 

If the season ended this past week, then they'd have the PAC Auto Berth but they are still 5 PAC games from being able to consider that.

[SaintsFAN]

Maybe that solves your tiebreak problem, but it introduces a way bigger problem- the problem where you let some team other than the best team in the league over the course of an entire regular season represent your league in the tournament.

Why does it, by necessity, "let some team other than the best..." in the tournament?
And, how does the current "don't play everyone and hope we don't need the tie-breaker" not do the exact thing you're worried about?

Win your division, play the other division's winner, to the victor go the spoils.  To the vanquished, weeping, gnashing of teeth and a winter thinking "what if...."

Honestly, I don't see the problem with deciding who gets the NCAA AQ on the field.
No debate, no ranking/rating systems, no three degrees of separation comparitives.
One thing, one thing only:  Who won the PAC Championship Game?

I like it. 

[SaintsFAN]

One of the two will TMC will either be heading back to Franklin or Mount Union and CWRU playing Witt or a rematch with Wabash.

or a trip TO the ODAC Champion for Thomas More.  There are alot of possibilities if they are included in this year's Tournament.