FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[USee]

I am not sure how the committee looks at two loss teams and separates them. While it seems straightforward that IWU beat Wheaton (and maybe it is that simple) you now have a situation where both have 2 losses and a three way conversation involving NCC. It may be that NCC isn't part of the conversation and IWU wins the HTD, but if the differing results with NCC are involved in the rankings and neutralizes the HTH, Wheaton's profile is potentially stronger than IWU's.

I honestly don't know and may be clouded by what I wish for more than what is reality. In reality I don't expect Wheaton to end up in the rankings at all, which would hurt IWU and NCC (for seeding purposes). I also remember something about RRO not being considered in the first regional ranking, but that could be wrong too.

It will be very interesting how the committee organizes the teams and that will have a huge affect on who gets to the table vs other regions. The east usually does the best job of getting the teams with the best national profile to the table first. But the people on these committees roll off every 2 years so who knows.

[Kovo]

Where is the love?

Keith's take: I'll go with the Titans.

Ryan's take: i think that IWU should be ranked higher, and I've got them pegged to win.

Adam's take: I think the Cardinals are the more talented team, but the Titans have been the more impressive team so far.

Sean's take: IWU clinches the CCIW Pool A with a win.

Despite the fact that NCC has now beaten IWU 9 years in a row, and 15 of the last 16, there curiously seemed to be an over abundance of pre-game love thrown the Green Team way. 🤔 🤫

NCC freshman kicker Derik Judka has hit on all 12 of his field goal tries, and 49/50 PATs.
Is he a first team All-American?

A few thoughts...

1. If one is going to complain about the D3football.com Quick Hits predictions with any sense of credibility, it seems like he/she should do so before the games are played.  To not have the guts to say what you're saying here before the game, and to wait until after the game is played, seems sort of, I don't know, weak/cowardly/shady/silly.

2. What has happened the last 9 or 16 years really has nothing to do with what happens in a game this year.

3. I think most people who know a lot about CCIW football felt the game in Bloomington yesterday was pretty much a toss up coming in based on 2018 results.  IWU beat Wheaton pretty convincingly, and Wheaton beat North Central pretty convincingly -- I think a lot of people considered those results. The game was in Bloomington which is probably worth 3 points or so for IWU.  There is nothing crazy about someone picking IWU to win that game.

I agree that the last 9 or 16 years has nothing to do with the game but IMHO the last three or four certainly does. There isn't a single player on NCC who has ever lost to IWU and there isn't a single player on IWU's roster who has ever beaten NCC. Confidence and expectations play a role.

[Titan Q]

I am not sure how the committee looks at two loss teams and separates them. While it seems straightforward that IWU beat Wheaton (and maybe it is that simple) you now have a situation where both have 2 losses and a three way conversation involving NCC. It may be that NCC isn't part of the conversation and IWU wins the HTD, but if the differing results with NCC are involved in the rankings and neutralizes the HTH, Wheaton's profile is potentially stronger than IWU's.

I honestly don't know and may be clouded by what I wish for more than what is reality. In reality I don't expect Wheaton to end up in the rankings at all, which would hurt IWU and NCC (for seeding purposes). I also remember something about RRO not being considered in the first regional ranking, but that could be wrong too.

It will be very interesting how the committee organizes the teams and that will have a huge affect on who gets to the table vs other regions. The east usually does the best job of getting the teams with the best national profile to the table first. But the people on these committees roll off every 2 years so who knows.

I believe when everything is close, a head-to-head result pretty much breaks the tie. 

I don't really see any chance Wheaton is ranked ahead of IWU in the North.  In that first North ranking IWU was #2 and Wheaton was not in.  The NCC/IWU results was huge, of course, but I don't think enough to flip a gap that big.

I do think the NCC win over IWU puts Wheaton in...because Wheaton's win over NCC means even more now.  And Eureka lost.  So to me it seems pretty certain Wheaton is going to be ranked in the North.

And once they look at Wash U vs Franklin now, and consider Wash U's win over Wheaton and other RRO (games played vs NCC and IWU), I can see the Bears getting ranked.

-------------
https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/football/d3/2018-19DIIIMFB_PreChampsManual.pdf

PRIMARY CRITERIA
The primary criteria emphasize regional competition (all contests leading up to NCAA championships); all criteria listed will be evaluated (not listed in priority order).
● Won-lost percentage against Division III opponents;.
● Division III head-to-head competition;
● Results versus common Division III opponents;
● Results versus regionally ranked Division III teams as established by the rankings at the time of selection. Conference postseason contests are included;
● Division III strength of schedule
- Opponents' average winning percentage (OWP), weighted 2/3.
- Opponents' opponents' average winning percentage (OOWP), weighted 1/3.
- See Appendix D for explanation of OWP and OOWP calculations.
● Should a committee find that evaluation of a team's won-lost percentage during the last 25 percent of the season is applicable (i.e., end-of-season performance), it may adopt such criteria with approval of the Championships Committee.

SECONDARY CRITERIA
If the evaluation of the primary criteria does not result in a decision, the secondary criteria will be reviewed. All of the criteria listed will be evaluated (not listed in priority order). The secondary criteria introduce results against out-of-region Division III and all other opponents, including those contests versus opponents from other classifications (i.e., provisionals, NAIA, NCAA Divisions I and II).
● Non-Division III won-lost percentage;
● Results versus common non-Division III opponents;
● Non-Division III strength of schedule;
Coaches' polls and/or any other outside polls or rankings are not used as a criterion by the Football Committee for selection purposes.

[Titan Q]

I agree that the last 9 or 16 years has nothing to do with the game but IMHO the last three or four certainly does. There isn't a single player on NCC who has ever lost to IWU and there isn't a single player on IWU's roster who has ever beaten NCC. Confidence and expectations play a role.

Maybe.  But how pre-game confidence and expectations impact the result is just a guess.  Like, maybe having lost to a team X number of times in a row makes you play harder or something.  Who knows.

Bottom line, I am not expecting the D3football.com Quick Hits guys to try to sort out the psychology of that in picking IWU or NCC.

[USee]

I am not sure how the committee looks at two loss teams and separates them. While it seems straightforward that IWU beat Wheaton (and maybe it is that simple) you now have a situation where both have 2 losses and a three way conversation involving NCC. It may be that NCC isn't part of the conversation and IWU wins the HTD, but if the differing results with NCC are involved in the rankings and neutralizes the HTH, Wheaton's profile is potentially stronger than IWU's.

I honestly don't know and may be clouded by what I wish for more than what is reality. In reality I don't expect Wheaton to end up in the rankings at all, which would hurt IWU and NCC (for seeding purposes). I also remember something about RRO not being considered in the first regional ranking, but that could be wrong too.

It will be very interesting how the committee organizes the teams and that will have a huge affect on who gets to the table vs other regions. The east usually does the best job of getting the teams with the best national profile to the table first. But the people on these committees roll off every 2 years so who knows.

I believe when everything is close, a head-to-head result pretty much breaks the tie. 

I don't really see any chance Wheaton is ranked ahead of IWU in the North.  In that first North ranking IWU was #2 and Wheaton was not in.  The NCC/IWU results was huge, of course, but I don't think enough to flip a gap that big.

I do think the NCC win over IWU puts Wheaton in...because Wheaton's win over NCC means even more now.  And Eureka lost.  So to me it seems pretty certain Wheaton is going to be ranked in the North.

And once they look at Wash U vs Franklin now, and consider Wash U's win over Wheaton and other RRO (games played vs NCC and IWU), I can see the Bears getting ranked.

-------------
https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/football/d3/2018-19DIIIMFB_PreChampsManual.pdf

PRIMARY CRITERIA
The primary criteria emphasize regional competition (all contests leading up to NCAA championships); all criteria listed will be evaluated (not listed in priority order).
● Won-lost percentage against Division III opponents;.
● Division III head-to-head competition;
● Results versus common Division III opponents;
● Results versus regionally ranked Division III teams as established by the rankings at the time of selection. Conference postseason contests are included;
● Division III strength of schedule
- Opponents' average winning percentage (OWP), weighted 2/3.
- Opponents' opponents' average winning percentage (OOWP), weighted 1/3.
- See Appendix D for explanation of OWP and OOWP calculations.
● Should a committee find that evaluation of a team's won-lost percentage during the last 25 percent of the season is applicable (i.e., end-of-season performance), it may adopt such criteria with approval of the Championships Committee.

SECONDARY CRITERIA
If the evaluation of the primary criteria does not result in a decision, the secondary criteria will be reviewed. All of the criteria listed will be evaluated (not listed in priority order). The secondary criteria introduce results against out-of-region Division III and all other opponents, including those contests versus opponents from other classifications (i.e., provisionals, NAIA, NCAA Divisions I and II).
● Non-Division III won-lost percentage;
● Results versus common non-Division III opponents;
● Non-Division III strength of schedule;
Coaches' polls and/or any other outside polls or rankings are not used as a criterion by the Football Committee for selection purposes.

Likely that's right. But if WashU doesn't get ranked, Wheaton will be 2-1 RRO and IWU 1-1, which is a big difference. But I think you are right that the gap is too big in the rankings from last week. This would be more interesting if Wheaton had appeared in the top 10 last week.

[USee]

Now if Millikin wins this Saturday all bets are off.

[kiko]

Where is the love?

Keith's take: I'll go with the Titans.

Ryan's take: i think that IWU should be ranked higher, and I've got them pegged to win.

Adam's take: I think the Cardinals are the more talented team, but the Titans have been the more impressive team so far.

Sean's take: IWU clinches the CCIW Pool A with a win.

Despite the fact that NCC has now beaten IWU 9 years in a row, and 15 of the last 16, there curiously seemed to be an over abundance of pre-game love thrown the Green Team way. 🤔 🤫

NCC freshman kicker Derik Judka has hit on all 12 of his field goal tries, and 49/50 PATs.
Is he a first team All-American?

You do realize that most of what you quoted were not actually predictions, right?

Huh?   You're kidding, right?

When the quotes are taken from——> TOP STORIES—Quick Hits: Our crew's picks for week 10, what else could you possibly call them but predictions?? 
They were predicting who they thought was going to win.

What does the word PICKS mean to you?  🤯

The quotes you lifted -- and in some cases, selectively edited -- came from a section of that article where the esteemed gentlemen answered this question: Which game is the Week 10 game of the week?  Not "who will win?", though Ryan did pick the Titans, but "which is this week's marquee game?"  Accordingly:

"Keith's take: No. 10 North Central at No. 13 Illinois Wesleyan. I'll go with the Titans for a second straight week instead of E8, NJAC clashes and an NCC win could have a cascade effect." ===>  He is saying that he picked IWU's game as the game of the week last week as well, and is doing so here, even though there are juicy matchups elsewhere.  He is not picking the Titans to win.  You misrepresented this quote.

"Ryan's take: No. 10 North Central at No. 13 Illinois Wesleyan. I think IWU should be ranked higher, and I've got them pegged to win."  ===> This was a prediction.

"Pat's take: No. 10 North Central at No. 13 Illinois Wesleyan. I'm going to assume most of my colleagues here have good reasons, so read theirs." ===> You didn't include this, and it should have been the clue that these are not predictions.  Pat is basically saying 'this is the game of the week for all the reasons everyone else is saying'.

"Adam's take: No. 10 North Central at No. 13 Illinois Wesleyan. I think the Cardinals are the more talented team, but the Titans have been the more impressive team so far. With a win, IWU can clinch its first outright CCIW title since 2009." ===>  There is no prediction in this quote.  He's essentially tossing out accolades for both teams, and somehow you read it as a slight of the Cardinals.

"Sean's take: No. 10 North Central at No. 13 Illinois Wesleyan. IWU clinches the CCIW Pool A with a win, while the loser gets a potential Pool C-crushing second loss. Doesn't get much better in Week 10."  ===> You turned the "IWU clinches..." line -- a statement of fact -- into a prediction by selectively editing out the second statement of fact, which is that whomever loses is in bad shape for Pool C.

In short, there was one pick of the Titans in this, and a bunch of other quotes saying that this was the nation's game of the week.  You turned it into something else entirely.  As connected as you are to the Cardinal athletics program, it's disappointing and frustrating to see this.  It is a distraction that takes away from a really nice and important victory on the field, and it really reflects badly on the program when an insider does something this disingenuous.

[Titan Q]

Now if Millikin wins this Saturday all bets are off.

Or North Park

[Marmac]

There's been much talk about how unpredictable the CCIW has been. However, all the unpredictability this year (as with last year) centers around one team: Wheaton. The same squad that looked like Stagg Bowl contenders against NCC, Millikin, and Carthage struggled mightily against IWU and WashU.

Yes, IWU and WashU have excellent offenses, but they both have middling defenses. Somehow the Thunder only managed one offensive TD in each of its games against the Titans and the Bears. It seems unfathomable given how their offense carved up NCC and Millikin.

I don't think Wheaton will get in the playoffs. That said, nobody in the field of 32 -- most of all NCC -- would want to face them.

[Marmac]

Where is the love?

Keith's take: I'll go with the Titans.

Ryan's take: i think that IWU should be ranked higher, and I've got them pegged to win.

Adam's take: I think the Cardinals are the more talented team, but the Titans have been the more impressive team so far.

Sean's take: IWU clinches the CCIW Pool A with a win.

Despite the fact that NCC has now beaten IWU 9 years in a row, and 15 of the last 16, there curiously seemed to be an over abundance of pre-game love thrown the Green Team way. 🤔 🤫

NCC freshman kicker Derik Judka has hit on all 12 of his field goal tries, and 49/50 PATs.
Is he a first team All-American?

You do realize that most of what you quoted were not actually predictions, right?

Huh?   You're kidding, right?

When the quotes are taken from——> TOP STORIES—Quick Hits: Our crew's picks for week 10, what else could you possibly call them but predictions?? 
They were predicting who they thought was going to win.

What does the word PICKS mean to you?  🤯

The quotes you lifted -- and in some cases, selectively edited -- came from a section of that article where the esteemed gentlemen answered this question: Which game is the Week 10 game of the week?  Not "who will win?", though Ryan did pick the Titans, but "which is this week's marquee game?"  Accordingly:

"Keith's take: No. 10 North Central at No. 13 Illinois Wesleyan. I'll go with the Titans for a second straight week instead of E8, NJAC clashes and an NCC win could have a cascade effect." ===>  He is saying that he picked IWU's game as the game of the week last week as well, and is doing so here, even though there are juicy matchups elsewhere.  He is not picking the Titans to win.  You misrepresented this quote.

"Ryan's take: No. 10 North Central at No. 13 Illinois Wesleyan. I think IWU should be ranked higher, and I've got them pegged to win."  ===> This was a prediction.

"Pat's take: No. 10 North Central at No. 13 Illinois Wesleyan. I'm going to assume most of my colleagues here have good reasons, so read theirs." ===> You didn't include this, and it should have been the clue that these are not predictions.  Pat is basically saying 'this is the game of the week for all the reasons everyone else is saying'.

"Adam's take: No. 10 North Central at No. 13 Illinois Wesleyan. I think the Cardinals are the more talented team, but the Titans have been the more impressive team so far. With a win, IWU can clinch its first outright CCIW title since 2009." ===>  There is no prediction in this quote.  He's essentially tossing out accolades for both teams, and somehow you read it as a slight of the Cardinals.

"Sean's take: No. 10 North Central at No. 13 Illinois Wesleyan. IWU clinches the CCIW Pool A with a win, while the loser gets a potential Pool C-crushing second loss. Doesn't get much better in Week 10."  ===> You turned the "IWU clinches..." line -- a statement of fact -- into a prediction by selectively editing out the second statement of fact, which is that whomever loses is in bad shape for Pool C.

In short, there was one pick of the Titans in this, and a bunch of other quotes saying that this was the nation's game of the week.  You turned it into something else entirely.  As connected as you are to the Cardinal athletics program, it's disappointing and frustrating to see this.  It is a distraction that takes away from a really nice and important victory on the field, and it really reflects badly on the program when an insider does something this disingenuous.

Yes, these quotes were taken out of context (tsk-tsk). It's worth noting, though, that Keith wasn't including NCC on his Top 25 ballot as recently as two weeks ago. He does great work, but Keith has been an NCC doubter.

I, too, wonder if Judka will get All-American consideration. Is there a placekicker with better numbers?

[Titan Q]

It's worth noting, though, that Keith wasn't including NCC on his Top 25 ballot as recently as two weeks ago. He does great work, but Keith has been an NCC doubter.

Based on the way North Central played against Wheaton - a team that "struggled mightily against IWU and Wash U" - is it that unfair for a D3football.com Top 25 voter to not be sure what to do with NCC as of a couple weeks ago?

[wally_wabash]

I honestly don't know and may be clouded by what I wish for more than what is reality. In reality I don't expect Wheaton to end up in the rankings at all, which would hurt IWU and NCC (for seeding purposes). I also remember something about RRO not being considered in the first regional ranking, but that could be wrong too.

This isn't wrong and in fact I mentioned Wheaton specifically toward the end of ATN podcast 219 (available through iTunes, Spotify, or wherever you like to get your podcasts) when discussing how the inclusion of RRO results for the second set of rankings may impact things.  With Eureka having lost and the inclusion of RRO results, I would be shocked if Wheaton isn't in the bottom third of this week's set of regional rankings. 

[Titan Q]

I honestly don't know and may be clouded by what I wish for more than what is reality. In reality I don't expect Wheaton to end up in the rankings at all, which would hurt IWU and NCC (for seeding purposes). I also remember something about RRO not being considered in the first regional ranking, but that could be wrong too.

This isn't wrong and in fact I mentioned Wheaton specifically toward the end of ATN podcast 219 (available through iTunes, Spotify, or wherever you like to get your podcasts) when discussing how the inclusion of RRO results for the second set of rankings may impact things.  With Eureka having lost and the inclusion of RRO results, I would be shocked if Wheaton isn't in the bottom third of this week's set of regional rankings.

I think Wheaton getting ranked this week is a lock.

The more intriguing one to me is Wash U.  I want to see how that turns out.

[iwu70]

Judka is a great kicker, a great year.  He should get All-CCIW and All-American honors.

We'll know soon on all the discussion about rankings, post-season bids.  Of course, I hope IWU gets a bid, but my feeling is they won't.  However, Q has been right before . . .   

NCC played very well yesterday -- esp. in the second half. 

I think both NCC and IWU finish out strong and share the regular season title.

IWU'70

[AndOne]

Where is the love?

Keith's take: I'll go with the Titans.

Ryan's take: i think that IWU should be ranked higher, and I've got them pegged to win.

Adam's take: I think the Cardinals are the more talented team, but the Titans have been the more impressive team so far.

Sean's take: IWU clinches the CCIW Pool A with a win.

Despite the fact that NCC has now beaten IWU 9 years in a row, and 15 of the last 16, there curiously seemed to be an over abundance of pre-game love thrown the Green Team way. 🤔 🤫

NCC freshman kicker Derik Judka has hit on all 12 of his field goal tries, and 49/50 PATs.
Is he a first team All-American?

A few thoughts...

1. If one is going to complain about the D3football.com Quick Hits predictions with any sense of credibility, it seems like he/she should do so before the games are played.  To not have the guts to say what you're saying here before the game, and to wait until after the game is played, seems sort of, I don't know, weak/cowardly/shady/silly.

2. What has happened the last 9 or 16 years really has nothing to do with what happens in a game this year.

3. I think most people who know a lot about CCIW football felt the game in Bloomington yesterday was pretty much a toss up coming in based on 2018 results.  IWU beat Wheaton pretty convincingly, and Wheaton beat North Central pretty convincingly -- I think a lot of people considered those results. The game was in Bloomington which is probably worth 3 points or so for IWU.  There is nothing crazy about someone picking IWU to win that game.

A few more thoughts........

1. Whether you've agreed with them or not you know, or should know, that I've rarely had a problem expressing an opinion.
So to say I lacked the guts to make a call doesn't hold water. Your conjecture might have merit had I read those quotes before the game. The problem being that I didn't! When I saw what appeared to be a majority of opinions favoring IWU, despite both the short and long term history between the football teams, I was quite surprised and reacted accordingly. You can choose to believe that or not. I don't really care.
The bottom line is that results over a pretty long period of time now show that Wesleyan isn't really able to handle North Central.
So, it shouldn't be surprising I was taken aback when I saw that a majority of the opinions in the article certainly seemed to favor the Weenies. As another poster said, none of the IWU seniors ever beat NCC.

2. I agree what happened 16, or 10, or 6 years ago isn't particularly pertinent to yesterday's result.
But what about 3 years ago, 2 years ago, and last year? With many of the same players going against each other for all or most of that period, it sure seems there would be some degree of residuum. 

3. In what might be considered a toss up, an article that leans heavily toward one team just seems surprising. 🤔