BB: SCAC: Southern Collegiate Athletic Conference

[Pat Coleman]

Trinity did not make the NESCAC tournament.

[Ralph Turner]

Trinity did not make the NESCAC tournament.

Thanks!

[frank_ezelle]

Ralph--I missed the 1-1 vs. Oglethorpe, including that incorrectly as part of the 2-14 SCAC record for Hendrix.  While it gets Hendrix closer to .333 on their winning percentage, it doesn't get them over the hump.

As you pointed out, the 2-3 record against the region 4 teams does not count--if they did Hendrix would be a 11-22-1 for a .338 percentage and everyone on the Hendrix schedule would get 2 extra points per game

-OR-

If Hendrix had made their schedule easier by replacing those 5 tougher games with games against Rust (I'm assuming this would lead to 4 wins), then everyone on the Hendrix schedule would get 2 extra points per game because Hendrix played weaker teams.

I know this QOWI is being replaced by something different yet similar next year so it seems like the same basic flaw will remain.  It seems like leagues should encourage their weaker teams to play weaker schedules.  I don't anticipate that any league would do this but if OU, Centre, Hendrix, and Southwestern (not exactly a weaker team) had all done this then Millsaps and Rhodes would both be much better off on the QOWI.

Doc, I still think that Millsaps is ahead of Rhodes in the QOWI and I'm going by what you've reported that it seems to be the first criteria for which teams are considered.  We'll see what the NCAA has for the South rankings when they come out this week but I think Millsaps should have been included last week so either my numbers are wrong or their numbers are wrong.  I don't think there will be any interest at Millsaps to check the numbers if Millsaps is still behind so we may never know which is right.  If Rhodes gets in the tournament then I wish them well.

[Ralph Turner]

Frank, you call this simple attempt at a Power Index (the QOWI) a flaw.  How do you propose to evaluate the quality of the competition that Millsaps has beaten?

I actually think that the coaches should concentrate on scheduling as many winnable games inside your region to give yourself the best chance.

Respectfully, I get the general impression that Millsaps is 2 victories shy of a playoff calibre team this year.  Cinderella (Austin College) got to go to the Dance this year because they beat you the 2 times they absolutely had to beat you.

Look at March Madness, the Majors' AQ's comprise most of the top 12 bids.  The best of the at-larges and the mid-major AQ's make up the mid 40 and the weakest AQ's make up the last 13.

On the big picture, we have 53 bids.  I submit that we have the best 16 AQ's (and I will call a Pool B like Emory or Chapman an AQ).  Next we have about 20 "mid-majors" and other Pool B's and Pool C's.  Finally, we have the weakest 17 AQ's.  I believe that Millsaps is better than plenty of those weakest AQ's, but not quite good enough for a Pool C bid.

Thanks! 

[frank_ezelle]

Doc, let me give a better (and much longer) answer to the question about Rhodes chances:

--I think the lists we are seeing now are just guessing games and I wouldn't put too much stock in them.

--It had to have helped Rhodes that York lost 3 of 4 since the last rankings.  All the games were against good teams but that has to hurt their rankings.  Also, Methodist lost a DH to Salisburg yesterday after beating York on Saturday.

--My gut feeling is that the coaches of teams like Rhodes and Millsaps must get some clue from the NCAA on their chances of getting an at-large bid.  Maybe I'm wrong on this but it seems like teams on the bubble would be told to keep practicing just in case.  Rhodes is still practicing so maybe that's some indication of what the NCAA committee is thinking.

--On the flip side, Millsaps is not practicing and Coach Page has been at this for 19 years and he is on the South Regional Advisory Committee.  From MY way of thinking (I'm stressing the MY), if Millsaps isn't in then Rhodes isn't in because I think Millsaps can make a slightly better case for an at-large bid.  I would expect all Rhodes fans to disagree but here would be my argument:

--Millsaps finished at 35-11 and 28-10 in region, basically the same as Rhodes at 36-10 and 27-10. 
--If you look at common results against good teams, it is basically the same.  Millsaps and Rhodes each split with Emory and each beat Huntingdon twice and Ill. Wesleyan once, and they split with each other.  Millsaps was 1-1 with LaGrange and Rhodes was 0-2.  On the other hand, Rhodes beat Methodist and Washington and that probably offsets the LaGrange losses and gives them a slight edge on wins against good teams.
--On QOWI, I think the two teams are very close with Millsaps slightly ahead.  I'm not 100% sure that my numbers are right and I'm also not 100% sure that the NCAA numbers are right.  I think this is close to dead even.
--At this point I would say that there isn't much difference between the two teams and that maybe Rhodes has a slight edge, but my final argument would be that Rhodes was 3-3 against SCAC West teams other than Millsaps and Millsaps was 13-6 against those same teams.  Millsaps was clearly playing the tougher conference schedule and their overall record and in-region record still matched Rhodes.  To me, that would give Millsaps the slight overall edge.

Let me conclude with this very important point:  If I were a Rhodes fan then I think I could make a convincing argument that Rhodes is a slightly better team than Millsaps, especially by stressing the wins over Washington and Methodist.  I don't think there is much difference between the two teams, I think both deserve to play in the NCAA Tournament, and I think both would do well in an NCAA Regional.  If the two teams are so close in every area, I think it would be logical that both have the same chance for an at-large berth and Millsaps apparently doesn't think that it has a chance.  That makes me wonder about the chances of Rhodes getting an at-large bid.

[frank_ezelle]

Ralph--You see that I was busy giving way too long an answer to Doc when you posted. 

I don't have a better solution as I have stated in past posts.  My impression is that the QOWI is used almost like a cutoff point on which teams are considered and maybe my solution would be that it not be such a definitive factor.  It just seems like teams are rewarded or penalized by the scheduling choices of their opponents, a factor beyond their control.  Of course, without a cutoff it makes the process more subjective with more teams in the mix and I understand the mess that causes.

You are right that the bottom line is Millsaps should have won a couple of more games on the last Sunday in April and then QOWI wouldn't have been an issue.  That would still leave Rhodes with the same argument that I've been making for both teams if they were out of the picture but the rest of you wouldn't be subjected to my long posts.

I also agree that because of the AQ situation the strongest 53 teams won't be in the field and that maybe Millsaps is just one of those teams that is better than some teams in the tournament but not necessarily better than the top candidates for the at-large bids.  I don't have a problem with that and I don't have a problem with AQ going to weaker teams if they are the best in their conference--I think that's good for D3 baseball.

SO, I think I have this out of my system.  Life will go on and I will still follow the NCAA Tournament with interest.  And I still thank you for all you do on the message board and for D3 sports in general.  Have a great summer.

[Ralph Turner]

Frank, I am not sure how long you have been a serious poster on the SCAC boards.

Your analysis of the situation is good.  I commend you.  Washington StL is not in the primary critieria for earning an at-large for either team, but they might figure in seeding the tourney were they (M'saps or Rhodes) sent to the same regional.

If Austin College is the only SCAC team in the tourney, I think that we might make the case that they knocked both M'saps and Rhodes from Pool C.

The current tourney gives access to all 350 schools playing baseball, and it is constructed so a team can build as AC did in baseball and Millsaps did in football.  After the equal access is determined by the 39 Pool A and B schools we get next best 14.

By the time we get thru with all of the conference tourneys, (33 conferences times an average of 6 teams invited to each conference tourney), we had one big playoff for 200 schools.

As for agonizing on how close McMurry was, I think that we were a road 1-point loss to ETBU in men's basketball and two of our six one-run losses in baseball from a Pool C.  We beat UT-Dallas 3 of 5 this year!  We just couldn't get past TLU.  Arrrrggggghhhh! 

[frank_ezelle]

Ralph, I'm just trying to learn this stuff as I go and I appreciate the input and corrections from more experience D3 followers.  What really has done in Rhodes and Millsaps at the moment is the move from 3-game to 4-game series in the SCAC.  I suspect it is a money saver to get away from the home and away 3-game series each year but the records of SCAC teams have suffered.

What it means is that each SCAC team has to develop 4 starters just to compete each weekend.  That means that early in the season you are losing non-conference games by trying to develop more pitchers instead of just using your top 3 or 4 guys.  It means that once conference play starts you are using 4 starters each weekend so you are always going with a #5 starter or a pitch by committee for the non-conference games.  It is the primary reason only 3 of 10 SCAC teams had overall winning records and why the in-region records were also weak. 

It also means that in conference games you are going with a #4 starter and maybe the opponent has saved their #1 or #2 starter for that game in an effort to salvage a game or to split the series.  It's just so hard to get a sweep when you have to get 4 quality starts instead of 3.

The good news is that SCAC teams that get to the NCAA Tournament should be fairly deep in pitching.  Millsaps has used 5 starters this year and their games started are 12-10-9-8-7 with 4 of the pitchers have 7 wins or more.  As I have said before, I think the Millsaps team has done enough to get in the tournament but we'll see if that becomes a reality.  Given their #16 ranking in today's poll, they might be a team that would be borderline on getting in because of QOWI even though they might be as high as a #2 or #3 seed if they do get in.

[frank_ezelle]

Here's a followup post on something I didn't realize until Ralph made a point about limited options in the South on who you play.  I looked at the non-SCAC teams in the surrounding states to Mississippi to see just which teams Millsaps could play as in-region teams.  Here's the list:

Louisiana:  LA College (200 mile rule)--Millsaps was 1-0 vs. LC this year.
Mississippi:  MS College--Millsaps 2-1 vs MC
Mississippi:  Rust College--Millsaps 2-0 vs. Rust
Alabama:  Huntingdon--Millsaps 2-0 vs. Huntingdon
Georgia:  Emory--Millsaps 1-1 vs Emory
Georgia:  LaGrange--Millsaps 1-1 vs. LaGrange
Georgia:  Piedmont--Millsaps 2-0 vs. Piedmont
Tennessee:  Maryville--did not play this season.

If you take out the SCAC East teams, Millsaps played every team that would count as a South Region game except for Maryville and they even played two non-conference games against SCAC East teams.  Millsaps made the attempt to prove themselves against the South Region teams.

As for non-region games, they played:
East Texas Baptist:  Millsaps won 2 of 2.  Not a great team this year but keep in mind that this home and away series was set up after ETB had a great season in 2005.
Belhaven College:  Millsaps won 2 of 3.  This is one of the top-10 teams in NAIA baseball.
Tougaloo College:  Millsaps won 2 of 2.  Okay, this was just a play everyone set of games.
Illinois Wesleyan:  Millsaps won 1 of 1.  A win over a nationally ranked team

Obviously Millsaps is trying to play tough teams and they are trying to prove themselves against all of the other teams within reasonable driving distance.  There's not a whole lot more they can do to upgrade their schedule (can't go to Texas instead of Georgia because those are out of region) unless they get a lot of extra money for travel, something that isn't going to happen.

[Ralph Turner]

Frank, I enjoy the discussion.  Let's work thru these points one at a time.

Ralph, I'm just trying to learn this stuff as I go and I appreciate the input and corrections from more experience D3 followers.  What really has done in Rhodes and Millsaps at the moment is the move from 3-game to 4-game series in the SCAC.  I suspect it is a money saver to get away from the home and away 3-game series each year but the records of SCAC teams have suffered.

The records of the 10 teams will still be a .500 percentage, and the effect on the QOWI will be a wash.  As I finally realized, the 14/15 strata for a win practically speaking began at .668 winning percentage.  They did not round up to .667.

What it means is that each SCAC team has to develop 4 starters just to compete each weekend.  That means that early in the season you are losing non-conference games by trying to develop more pitchers instead of just using your top 3 or 4 guys.  It means that once conference play starts you are using 4 starters each weekend so you are always going with a #5 starter or a pitch by committee for the non-conference games.  It is the primary reason only 3 of 10 SCAC teams had overall winning records and why the in-region records were also weak.

I can only see that having more pitching meant that in 2008, you have an underclassman that was your #4 now being #2 or #3.   I have to believe that this is a one-year aberration and pitchers will look at the SCAC and see that they get a better chance at starting in the SCAC than the ASC or the GSAC. 

It also means that in conference games you are going with a #4 starter and maybe the opponent has saved their #1 or #2 starter for that game in an effort to salvage a game or to split the series.  It's just so hard to get a sweep when you have to get 4 quality starts instead of 3.

The sweeping the series only knocks the QOWI of the SCAC team down even farther.

The good news is that SCAC teams that get to the NCAA Tournament should be fairly deep in pitching.  Millsaps has used 5 starters this year and their games started are 12-10-9-8-7 with 4 of the pitchers have 7 wins or more.  I strongly agree.  As I have said before, I think the Millsaps team has done enough to get in the tournament but we'll see if that becomes a reality.  Given their #16 ranking in today's poll, they might be a team that would be borderline on getting in because of QOWI even though they might be as high as a #2 or #3 seed if they do get in.

Please remember that the ABCA Poll has absolutely no impact on the NCAA Regional Rankings!!!  None at all.

I think that the SCAC was down this year.  I cannot get away from that fact as I look at records. 

These were the records versus the ASC:

AC  6-11
HC  1-4
Millsaps 5-1
SU  4-9
TU   5-5

Total 21-30.  Nine games below .500 knocks each teams QOWI just a bit.

[Ralph Turner]

Great post while I was typing. 

As an outsider, I can defend everyone of those games strategically.

Here's a follow up post on something I didn't realize until Ralph made a point about limited options in the South on who you play.  I looked at the non-SCAC teams in the surrounding states to Mississippi to see just which teams Millsaps could play as in-region teams.  Here's the list:

Louisiana:  LA College (200 mile rule)--Millsaps was 1-0 vs. LC this year.  (Also in Administrative Region #3.)
Mississippi:  MS College--Millsaps 2-1 vs MC (In-region; good game for D3)
Mississippi:  Rust College--Millsaps 2-0 vs. Rust (In-region; good midweek game)
Alabama:  Huntingdon--Millsaps 2-0 vs. Huntingdon
Georgia:  Emory--Millsaps 1-1 vs Emory
Georgia:  LaGrange--Millsaps 1-1 vs. LaGrange
Georgia:  Piedmont--Millsaps 2-0 vs. Piedmont
Tennessee:  Maryville--did not play this season.

If you take out the SCAC East teams, Millsaps played every team that would count as a South Region game except for Maryville and they even played two non-conference games against SCAC East teams.  Millsaps made the attempt to prove themselves against the South Region teams.

As for non-region games, they played:
East Texas Baptist:  Millsaps won 2 of 2.  Not a great team this year but keep in mind that this home and away series was set up after ETB had a great season in 2005.
Belhaven College:  Millsaps won 2 of 3.  This is one of the top-10 teams in NAIA baseball. (Great game for Jackson college baseball; doesn't hurt to play tough teams)
Tougaloo College:  Millsaps won 2 of 2.  Okay, this was just a play everyone set of games. (Easy mid-week game; easy on the budge and school time.)
Illinois Wesleyan:  Millsaps won 1 of 1.  A win over a nationally ranked team  (good to play non-in-region games against quality  D3 opponents)

Obviously Millsaps is trying to play tough teams and they are trying to prove themselves against all of the other teams within reasonable driving distance.  There's not a whole lot more they can do to upgrade their schedule (can't go to Texas instead of Georgia because those are out of region) unless they get a lot of extra money for travel, something that isn't going to happen.

I think that some creative scheduling may allow some administrative region #3 teams from  AR, MI, IN, OH, WV, and KY to come down for games.

Also Birmingham-Southern comes online next year.  Their games don't count towards the QOWI until 2010, but they provide some more games.

[frank_ezelle]

Ralph, you and I think a lot a like except for the fact you are a lot smarter--I'm somewhat of a Ralph-lite thinker.  There's no doubt that we pull for our particular team but we also take a logical approach and we try to back up our points with examples and facts. 

I believe that the reason the SCAC was down vs. ASC teams is because the ASC teams were seeing weaker pitchers or weakened staffs because of the 4-game series in the SCAC.  I won't go back and study the entire season, but I'll give one example that I remember because I commented on both games at the time. 

In the week prior to the crossover series McMurray beat Austin 22-4 and Trinty beat Texas Lutheran 5-4.  The pitchers used by Austin against McMurray didn't pitch a single inning in the crossover series or the SCAC Tournament and McMurray pounded out 26 hits.  The pitchers used by Trinity were some of their top-line guys and they won against a team ranked in the top-10.  I still wonder if Trinity should have saved those pitchers and given them rest for the crossover series but we will never know which was the right call.

In addition to often using weaker pitchers in non-conference games, I think some pitching staffs just wore out.  In the 3-games series you have 25 innings of pitching (7-9-9) and you don't have to squeeze an extra inning or two out of a pitcher.  In the 4-game series you have 32 innings (9-7-7-9) and guys are having to pitch to their absolute limits in some case just to get a staff through the weekend.  So even if the weekend pitchers are throwing in mid-week, I think they got worn out as the season progressed--Hendrix is a good example but you even saw that with the teams with the better and deeper pitching staffs.  As you pointed out, that might make for greater depth in the future but it hurt the teams this past season (in my opinion). 

And finally (for the moment), I know there are things that I point out about the Millsaps team that don't have any impact on getting an at-large bid.  How they are ranked in the coaches' poll, their wins against an NAIA powerhouse, and how they did last year in the tournament are good examples of this.  I mention these things because I want to make the case that this year's team is every bit as good as the team that was in a regional final last year.  Maybe they won't get into the NCAA's and have a chance to prove it but the players deserve an advocate who will point out that they did just as much and were just as good as the team that was so successful in 2006.

Last year the team went 37-13 and 15-5 in the SCAC.  This year the team is 35-11 and was 12-4 in the SCAC.  Last year they beat Emory twice but lost to I. Wesleyan twice.  This year they split with Emory but beat I. Wesleyan.  Last year they had an All-American rightfielder and this year his replacement put up similar numbers.  Last year they had two standout pitchers, maybe slightly stonger than who ever the top two are this year but there is more depth this year.  As for all of the other field players, they are the same as last year and they are just as good.

I have no doubt that this year's team is the equal of last year's team and I think they are very capable of getting to the World Series if they are selected to play in a regional.  I just want them to be judged by the merits of their season and not hampered by the win-loss percentages of their opponents.  But I guess you all have heard me say that about a dozen times already.

[Josh Bowerman]

Frank, Ralph, et. al.--

I've enjoyed reading the last few posts from you both--very well reasoned and thought out. 

Frank, I thought I'd chime in with MY opinion on your frustration (and Ralph and I have had this conversation before)--because I understand where you're coming from, and do sympathize. 

The regional system the AA employs for its DIII championships is inheirently skewed to benefit teams in the northeast and midwest parts of the nation, given the AA-imposed mileage limitations.  Simple math tells us this, and it has been bourne out in every "major" sport this year. 

The first thing that would help develop the best championship brackets possible, and Ron Boerger has suggested in the past--and I wholehartedly agree with him--would be for the AA to lose the regional system all together, and calculate stats like QOWI based on all results versus DIII competition, not just regional competition.

The second thing would be for the AA to actually be able to read and interpret their own rules, but I digress....

Would any of this help Millsaps or Rhodes get in this year?  I honestly don't know--I haven't followed baseball closely enough to make an educated guess at that.  At the end of the day, one or two teams that are better than some of the AQs (as Ralph points out) are unfortunately going to get left out.  But getting rid of the "regions" would at least allow for the most fair bracketing possible (and minimize to a large extent the eggregious exclusions with regard to determining at-large berths), and all of our DIII athletes deserve that no matter what.

[Doc Nelson]

Great thanks to Ralph and Frank for answering my request for enlightenment with their recent posts.  Even though no definitive answers are available this week, you have illuminated some important facts and issues.

My position on the change to the single, four-game, weekend series instead of two shorter weekend series against each division rival is not locked in stone.  But in focusing on the possible consequences of that change for pitching, let's not overlook the benefits in terms of reduced travel and fewer days away from class.  Baseball is not an end in itself in schools like ours.  Instead it's an integrated but nonetheless subordinate part of the academic mission of these institutions and of the experience the students on the teams have there.

[Ralph Turner]

Good morning Frank!

I did look at each schedule and considered the impact of SCAC on each one.

AC:  Played TU the 4 game series April 5-6, then played UT-Dallas Saturday April 14, then went to Abilene for an HSU McM DH on Tues. April 17.  The tourney started on Friday April 20th.  The UT-Dallas-game pitchers should have been ready.  For AC, I will concede a Wed, a Tues, a Tues and a Tues, versus UT-Tyler times 3 and UT-Dallas once during the SCAC play.  That puts AC at 5-4 versus ASC "non-second round" Tourney teams.

Hendrix had no crossover challenges.

Millsaps:  I see an IWU win in division play, a Belhaven loss, a Piedmont win and a Miss College loss in that crucial time period.

Southwestern:  no conflicts.

Trinity: Two wins over Schreiner and a win over TLU during the SCAC-West season.

It looks like AC's building a pitching staff on ASC competition may be working over the long haul.

Frank, I think that I have found the difference  between 2006 and 2007.

The 2006 team was 25-6 in-region before the SCAC tourney where they improved to 29-7, in-region.  They earned a bid as the AQ, the Pool A from the SCAC.

The 2007 team was 23-8 in-region before the SCAC tourney where they went 2-2.  That gives them an in-region record of 25-10 for the selection committee to consider.

Respectfully, the 2006 and 2007 teams are being considered by different criteria by the NCAA to make the tourney.  Pool C varies from year-to-year and the Majors are carrying 3 more losses into the selection criteria in 2007. 

We see how fine is the line.  Thanks.