FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[WW]

FWIW I don't at all read or interpret that tiebreak as every quarter starts at 0-0 for tiebreaking purposes.  A team that leads after the first quarter 7-0 and at halftime 7-3 has led after two quarters.

Correct, they lead at the end of the first and end of the second, so counts as two quarters led.

UChicago does have a chance to win the MWC still. They have to lead at the end of all 4 quarters against Lake Forest. Or if Monmouth loses to Ripon.

How? Chicago halved the first quarter with Grinnell. Winning all four vs LF leaves them a half-quarter short. A Ripon upset of Monmouth changes things, but isn't likely to occur.

By my calculations through last weekend Lake Forest has led 31 of 32 quarters and Chicago has led 27 of 32 quarters. Their games against Beloit and Lawrence this weekend presumably will add 4/4 to each total. That means if Chicago leads LF in the finale all 4 quarters they will end up 35 quarters led for the season and LF will end up with 35. That means coin flip is the best Chicago can do.

Let me know if someone sees it different.

You're counting Non conference game quarters. Wouldn't have thought that they apply

[wally_wabash]

FWIW I don't at all read or interpret that tiebreak as every quarter starts at 0-0 for tiebreaking purposes.  A team that leads after the first quarter 7-0 and at halftime 7-3 has led after two quarters.

Correct, they lead at the end of the first and end of the second, so counts as two quarters led.

UChicago does have a chance to win the MWC still. They have to lead at the end of all 4 quarters against Lake Forest. Or if Monmouth loses to Ripon.

How? Chicago halved the first quarter with Grinnell. Winning all four vs LF leaves them a half-quarter short. A Ripon upset of Monmouth changes things, but isn't likely to occur.

By my calculations through last weekend Lake Forest has led 31 of 32 quarters and Chicago has led 27 of 32 quarters. Their games against Beloit and Lawrence this weekend presumably will add 4/4 to each total. That means if Chicago leads LF in the finale all 4 quarters they will end up 35 quarters led for the season and LF will end up with 35. That means coin flip is the best Chicago can do.

Let me know if someone sees it different.

You're counting Non conference game quarters. Wouldn't have thought that they apply

Yes, probably only counting MWC quarters played and, because this needs to be just one more level complicated, LFC and Cornell only played two quarters.   

[wally_wabash]

Number of teams regionally ranked:

Region 1 - 8 of 42*
Region 2 - 8 of 41
Region 3 - 7 of 34
Region 4 - 7 of 35
Region 5 - 8 of 38
Region 6 - 8 of 40

* - total excludes the ten NESCAC teams given their policy on not competing in the football playoff process.

Clearly we are likely to see a couple of losses among Region 5 regionally ranked teams.  But given the initial list of ranked teams, I don't see Wash U both (1) losing a game and (2) entering the rankings without either an upset win or close loss this coming weekend.

Other handbooks have said 20% of teams would be ranked, which typically drops any remainders when doing the division.  They thumbed the scale in Regions 3 and 5, but it's fine.  I think this is a pretty good spot to be that doesn't drift into the too-many-teams-are-ranked zone. 

[D3FLETCH]

How does Coe make the ranking?

Here we go!

https://www.d3football.com/playoffs/2021/first-regional-ranking

Region 5           
   Aurora   6-2   6-2
   Central   8-0   8-0
   Chicago   7-1   7-1
   Coe   6-2   6-2
   Lake Forest   8-0   8-0
   Lakeland   7-1   7-1
   North Central (Ill.)   8-0   8-0
   Wheaton (Ill.)   7-1   7-1

[USee]

FWIW I don't at all read or interpret that tiebreak as every quarter starts at 0-0 for tiebreaking purposes.  A team that leads after the first quarter 7-0 and at halftime 7-3 has led after two quarters.

Correct, they lead at the end of the first and end of the second, so counts as two quarters led.

UChicago does have a chance to win the MWC still. They have to lead at the end of all 4 quarters against Lake Forest. Or if Monmouth loses to Ripon.

How? Chicago halved the first quarter with Grinnell. Winning all four vs LF leaves them a half-quarter short. A Ripon upset of Monmouth changes things, but isn't likely to occur.

By my calculations through last weekend Lake Forest has led 31 of 32 quarters and Chicago has led 27 of 32 quarters. Their games against Beloit and Lawrence this weekend presumably will add 4/4 to each total. That means if Chicago leads LF in the finale all 4 quarters they will end up 35 quarters led for the season and LF will end up with 35. That means coin flip is the best Chicago can do.

Let me know if someone sees it different.

You're counting Non conference game quarters. Wouldn't have thought that they apply

Yes, probably only counting MWC quarters played and, because this needs to be just one more level complicated, LFC and Cornell only played two quarters.   

Hmmmm. Well this could get interesting. If you count just MWC quarters and include the Cornell game, if both teams lead all 4 quarters this weekend (likely) and Chicago leads for 4 quarters in a victory @LF, then Chicago would have led for 31 quarters and LF for 30. If the Cornell game is considered a 4qtr game for some reason, LF wins. If Chicago leads for 3 quarters vs LF the LF wins the tie.

Fascinating.

[USee]

Here's how I would rank them based on current data.

1   North Central   8-0   .520   2-0
2   Central            8-0   .446   1-0
3   Wheaton         7-1   .512   0-1
4   Lake Forest     8-0   .483   0-0 (vs Chicago)
5   Chicago          7-1   .498   0-0 (@LF)
6   Aurora            6-2   .534   0-2 (@Lakeland)
7   Coe                6-2   .505   1-1
8   Lakeland         7-1   .447   0-0 (v Aurora)

Coe is ranked in part because they are 1-1 vs RRO (though that's not officially factored in) and have the 3rd highest SOS currently among these teams (which is a legendary bad group at this point). 4 of these teams play each other and there are games vs others who are likely just outside these rankings that will factor in (NCC @ WashU this weekend, Coe playe 5-3 Buena Vista this weekend). Lakeland and either Chicago or LF are likely to drop off this list before the final rankings come out.

[SpartanHouse]

FWIW I don't at all read or interpret that tiebreak as every quarter starts at 0-0 for tiebreaking purposes.  A team that leads after the first quarter 7-0 and at halftime 7-3 has led after two quarters.

Correct, they lead at the end of the first and end of the second, so counts as two quarters led.

UChicago does have a chance to win the MWC still. They have to lead at the end of all 4 quarters against Lake Forest. Or if Monmouth loses to Ripon.

How? Chicago halved the first quarter with Grinnell. Winning all four vs LF leaves them a half-quarter short. A Ripon upset of Monmouth changes things, but isn't likely to occur.

By my calculations through last weekend Lake Forest has led 31 of 32 quarters and Chicago has led 27 of 32 quarters. Their games against Beloit and Lawrence this weekend presumably will add 4/4 to each total. That means if Chicago leads LF in the finale all 4 quarters they will end up 35 quarters led for the season and LF will end up with 35. That means coin flip is the best Chicago can do.

Let me know if someone sees it different.
[/]

Aha! LF led for 3/4 quarters vs Wisconsin Lutheran.

So, LF wins and they are in.

But, Chicago has no chance. Monmouth currently has led for (1) more quarter than they have and Monmouth presumably will win their next (8) quarters and thus Chicago can not pass up Monmouth.

Lake Forest beats Chicago for (2) quarters and they will represent the conference.
Chicago wins for all (4) quarters and Monmouth will represent the conference.

FWIW, I think Chicago will win for all (4) quarters and Monmouth will win the tie breaker.

I bet Chicago makes the playoffs - just my gut.

[blue_jays]

FWIW I don't at all read or interpret that tiebreak as every quarter starts at 0-0 for tiebreaking purposes.  A team that leads after the first quarter 7-0 and at halftime 7-3 has led after two quarters.

Correct, they lead at the end of the first and end of the second, so counts as two quarters led.

UChicago does have a chance to win the MWC still. They have to lead at the end of all 4 quarters against Lake Forest. Or if Monmouth loses to Ripon.

How? Chicago halved the first quarter with Grinnell. Winning all four vs LF leaves them a half-quarter short. A Ripon upset of Monmouth changes things, but isn't likely to occur.

By my calculations through last weekend Lake Forest has led 31 of 32 quarters and Chicago has led 27 of 32 quarters. Their games against Beloit and Lawrence this weekend presumably will add 4/4 to each total. That means if Chicago leads LF in the finale all 4 quarters they will end up 35 quarters led for the season and LF will end up with 35. That means coin flip is the best Chicago can do.

Let me know if someone sees it different.
[/]

Aha! LF led for 3/4 quarters vs Wisconsin Lutheran.

So, LF wins and they are in.

But, Chicago has no chance. Monmouth currently has led for (1) more quarter than they have and Monmouth presumably will win their next (8) quarters and thus Chicago can not pass up Monmouth.

Lake Forest beats Chicago for (2) quarters and they will represent the conference.
Chicago wins for all (4) quarters and Monmouth will represent the conference.

FWIW, I think Chicago will win for all (4) quarters and Monmouth will win the tie breaker.

I bet Chicago makes the playoffs - just my gut.

Non-conference games don't count. Conference games only. The game that LFC played for only 2 quarters was official, so they only get 2 quarters of lead from that result. Going into Nov. 6 game, LFC has led 26 quarters, Monmouth 24 quarters, UChicago 23 quarters. LFC has big advantage in the tiebreak scenarios and UC will need everything to break their way the next 2 weeks, but it is possible for the Maroons to still get the AQ.

[kiko]

Number of teams regionally ranked:

Region 1 - 8 of 42*
Region 2 - 8 of 41
Region 3 - 7 of 34
Region 4 - 7 of 35
Region 5 - 8 of 38
Region 6 - 8 of 40

* - total excludes the ten NESCAC teams given their policy on not competing in the football playoff process.

Clearly we are likely to see a couple of losses among Region 5 regionally ranked teams.  But given the initial list of ranked teams, I don't see Wash U both (1) losing a game and (2) entering the rankings without either an upset win or close loss this coming weekend.

Other handbooks have said 20% of teams would be ranked, which typically drops any remainders when doing the division.  They thumbed the scale in Regions 3 and 5, but it's fine.  I think this is a pretty good spot to be that doesn't drift into the too-many-teams-are-ranked zone.

Adding percentages...

Region 1 - 8 of 42*  (19.0%)
Region 2 - 8 of 41   (19.5%)
Region 3 - 7 of 34   (20.6%)
Region 4 - 7 of 35   (20.0%)
Region 5 - 8 of 38   (21.1%)
Region 6 - 8 of 40   (20.0%)

Had one fewer team been ranked in Regions 3 and 5, these percentages would have been 17.6% (R3) and 18.4% (R5) respectively.

The variance with the current numbers is 2.1% (gap between 19.0 and 21.1); had they ranked one less team in R3 and R5, it would be 2.4% (gap between 20.0 and 17.6).  I would say 'eh, it doesn't really matter, does it?', but after how 2019 played out, the simple question of how many teams are ranked clearly could have an impact on things.

---

Unrelated, IDK how the MWC's tiebreaker is worded, but I hope for their sake it is very clear.  If their two-quarter game (called early because of lightning in the area) is considered two quarters and not four for the purposes of the tiebreaker, they could mathematically get a different result depending on how they tally this up:

Team A won the most quarters (example - 33 of 36 for 91%)
Team B won the highest percentage of quarters (32 of 34 for 94%).

[blue_jays]

Number of teams regionally ranked:

Region 1 - 8 of 42*
Region 2 - 8 of 41
Region 3 - 7 of 34
Region 4 - 7 of 35
Region 5 - 8 of 38
Region 6 - 8 of 40

* - total excludes the ten NESCAC teams given their policy on not competing in the football playoff process.

Clearly we are likely to see a couple of losses among Region 5 regionally ranked teams.  But given the initial list of ranked teams, I don't see Wash U both (1) losing a game and (2) entering the rankings without either an upset win or close loss this coming weekend.

Other handbooks have said 20% of teams would be ranked, which typically drops any remainders when doing the division.  They thumbed the scale in Regions 3 and 5, but it's fine.  I think this is a pretty good spot to be that doesn't drift into the too-many-teams-are-ranked zone.

Adding percentages...

Region 1 - 8 of 42*  (19.0%)
Region 2 - 8 of 41   (19.5%)
Region 3 - 7 of 34   (20.6%)
Region 4 - 7 of 35   (20.0%)
Region 5 - 8 of 38   (21.1%)
Region 6 - 8 of 40   (20.0%)

Had one fewer team been ranked in Regions 3 and 5, these percentages would have been 17.6% (R3) and 18.4% (R5) respectively.

The variance with the current numbers is 2.1% (gap between 19.0 and 21.1); had they ranked one less team in R3 and R5, it would be 2.4% (gap between 20.0 and 17.6).  I would say 'eh, it doesn't really matter, does it?', but after how 2019 played out, the simple question of how many teams are ranked clearly could have an impact on things.

---

Unrelated, IDK how the MWC's tiebreaker is worded, but I hope for their sake it is very clear.  If their two-quarter game (called early because of lightning in the area) is considered two quarters and not four for the purposes of the tiebreaker, they could mathematically get a different result depending on how they tally this up:

Team A won the most quarters (example - 33 of 36 for 91%)
Team B won the highest percentage of quarters (32 of 34 for 94%).

The MWC office has made it clear that it's total quarters, not percentage of quarters. Lake Forest chose to call their game at halftime and it was ruled an official game, so they hurt their own tiebreaker case slightly by doing so.

[SpartanHouse]

The MWC office has made it clear that it's total quarters, not percentage of quarters. Lake Forest chose to call their game at halftime and it was ruled an official game, so they hurt their own tiebreaker case slightly by doing so.

This is all really fascinating.
LF not finishing a game...
Chicago tied after 1q in a game they won by 70+...

LF = win and your in.
Monmouth = needs Chicago to beat LF for all four quarters and their in.
Chicago = impressive win over LF and get hope for a bid.

Exciting stuff. MWC hasn't anything exciting to happen in the conference in sometime.

Can Chicago and Wheaton both get bids?

[WW]

The MWC office has made it clear that it's total quarters, not percentage of quarters. Lake Forest chose to call their game at halftime and it was ruled an official game, so they hurt their own tiebreaker case slightly by doing so.

This is all really fascinating.
LF not finishing a game...
Chicago tied after 1q in a game they won by 70+...

LF = win and your in.
Monmouth = needs Chicago to beat LF for all four quarters and their in.
Chicago = impressive win over LF and get hope for a bid.

Exciting stuff. MWC hasn't anything exciting to happen in the conference in sometime.

Can Chicago and Wheaton both get bids?

I think Monmouth is better than Ripon but presuming a 4-quarter sweep over a 6-2 team is a stretch

[WW]

The MWC office has made it clear that it's total quarters, not percentage of quarters. Lake Forest chose to call their game at halftime and it was ruled an official game, so they hurt their own tiebreaker case slightly by doing so.

This is all really fascinating.
LF not finishing a game...
Chicago tied after 1q in a game they won by 70+...

LF = win and your in.
Monmouth = needs Chicago to beat LF for all four quarters and their in.
Chicago = impressive win over LF and get hope for a bid.

Exciting stuff. MWC hasn't anything exciting to happen in the conference in sometime.

Can Chicago and Wheaton both get bids?

Unlikely, but might have a greater chance if a 9-1 Chicago team tops Region 5 Pool C candidates, and if the committee toes the line, they can make a solid case. Their SOS will be better than Wheaton's (and probably significantly), and they could have two or as many as three wins vs RROs when all is said and done, while Wheaton will have just one in same scenario. The common opponent consideration favors Wheaton (their beatdown vs WUSTL compared to a more modest 10-pt win for U of C) but by such a degree to overcome SOS and RRO disadvantages? I wouldn't think so... unless "because they're Wheaton", preseason biases, or influence by rankings (which should have no influence) come into play.

In pool C consideration, say Chicago gets picked in an early round in this scenario. Wheaton could stand out in remaining rounds, even if it's just one or two remaining. You only gotta win one of those fights.

If Chicago somehow comes away with the pool A berth, Lake Forest would be no threat to Wheaton at the top of Region 5 Pool C. They won't have the SOS, or the RRO distinction.

[USee]

I think there is no way Region 5 gets 2 teams. I would be surprised if Wheaton isn't the top Pool C team next week when teams are ranked. It has nothing to do with "They are Wheaton" but has to do with examining ALL the criteria closely. This has been detailed by people who know and have accurately assessed the Pool C bids. If Chicago is the top Pool C team in Region 5 I think our region gets no at large bids. For Chicago to be considered, they have to beat LF and the Foresters would likely drop out of the rankings entirely with a loss in the final week. Monmouth may be a team that is lurking in the rankings so that would be a big development. WashU getting ranked helps both Chicago and Wheaton.

That said, its more dicey than ever to be a Pool C team. Whomever is the top Region 5 team, they will have to contend with some serious Pool C candidates from other regions.

I look forward to Wally doing his mock predictions!

[SpartanHouse]

I think Monmouth is better than Ripon but presuming a 4-quarter sweep over a 6-2 team is a stretch

Normally I would say they absolutely should lead for 4q vs Ripon but based on last weeks performance....I would agree wtih you. Last time these two teams played it was a close game as well.