Pool C

[gordonmann]

Stevens and Baruch were each much better placed nationally going into their conference tournaments in those years. Baruch was a complete lock for a Pool C bid in 2006, and Stevens was in good shape.

While comparing QoWI to OWP/OOWP is beyond me, Stevens had six regional loses when they were selected last year.  That's two more than Farmingdale State has right now.  The Ducks debuted as No. 2 in the Atlantic with four regional loses in the first regional rankings of 2007.  I don't think that's significantly better shape than the Rams' spot in 2008.

[Ralph Turner]

Remember the 2006 playoffs?

Oxy beat CMS in the Wednesday night game and then flew to Puget Sound, who got a bye, for the Saturday game.

[sac]

They've skipped over Atlantic C teams before...

Yeah, but have they skipped over any region entirely since the bracket expanded to 59 teams?  I know it's only a couple of years, but I thought every region had at least one at-large the past two seasons.  It turns out I was wrong.

2007 (just one listed)
Northeast: Amherst
East: Brockport State
Mid-Atlantic: Hood
Atlantic: Stevens
Midwest: None
South: Va Wes
West: St. John's
Great Lakes: Hope

2006 (just one listed)
Northeast: Tufts
East: Cortland State
Mid-Atlantic: Widener
Atlantic: Baruch
Midwest: IWU
South: Trinity (Texas)
West: UW-Stout
Great Lakes: Calvin

Not that it matters to your point, but Hope was an at-large from the Great Lakes in 2007.  Calvin won the AQ from the MIAA.

[ronk]

By my estimates, Aurora was #11 in the Midwest (behind Elmhurst and Defiance).

Using the same estimates, they're #4 for Pool B, just ahead of MSOE and Wisconsin Lutheran.

My guess is that one of the teams from the NAthC will make it, but not necessarily the tournament winner.

pabegg,
   Who's #3 in your pool B rankings and, since you were so accurate with your regional rankings, could you list your top 10 for pool  B when you list your next region ranking?                                                 

[Mr. Downtown]

Using the same estimates, they're #4 for Pool B, just ahead of MSOE and Wisconsin Lutheran.

I like that there are Pool B bids, but I have a problem when schools like MSOE and Wisconsin Lutheran, who would finish in the bottom of the WIAC, can make it in the tourney. While this season it looks like the WIAC could have just one team in the tourney, despite having four top 25 teams.

[magicman]

I saw that picture of you at the Cal Tech game back in Dec. I think. The one where the only person in the stands was you. You didn't  look old, or grumpy then. More like middle aged. And with Occidental's fine season this year you've gotta be anything but grumpy.

Rooting for my Tigers keeps me young, and I prefer curmudgeon to grumpy.

I wasn't the only one in the stands. I had a date with me...

http://gocaltech.com/images/mbkb/mbb_dec17.jpg?max_width=405

OxyBob
[/quote]

Sorry OB I forgot you brought a lady friend with you that night.

[pabegg]

pabegg,
   Who's #3 in your pool B rankings and, since you were so accurate with your regional rankings, could you list your top 10 for pool  B when you list your next region ranking?                                                 

Yeah, I've got to get a post over on the Pool B page. Nebraska Wesleyan is the other team. They're in a weird situation with a limited number of D3 games, so the D3 Independents Tournament at the end of the season will really affect their chances positively or negatively.

[Greek Tragedy]

I like that there are Pool B bids, but I have a problem when schools like MSOE and Wisconsin Lutheran, who would finish in the bottom of the WIAC, can make it in the tourney. While this season it looks like the WIAC could have just one team in the tourney, despite having four top 25 teams.

As you know, Mr. DT, d3hoops.com's Top 25 is as legitimate as MY Top 25, if I were to have one, when it comes to what the NCAA thinks!  There has always been a number of Top 25 teams that don't make the tourney at the end of the year.  There are only 4 Pool B bids and I'm not sure how many conferences don't have AQs, aside from the NathCon (another year in Pool B after this year?) and the GSAC (Maryville).  Plus you have a handful of independents (16?).  I guess I could look up in the handbook, but I'm too lazy.

Aside from Aurora, Maryville and Chapman (and Green Mountain? 17-4) not sure who else is a Pool B candidate. 

Tomorrow, I hope to have an updated list of the regional rankings with this week's results included.  It should be interesting!

EDIT:  I see the NEWMAC only has 6 teams in it's league, and I thought you needed at least 7 to get an AQ.  So, throw in Worchester Polytech at 17-5...and of course the LANDMARK is a new conference, so Moravian (17-5) is in there!  Does that make you feel better? lol

2007 (just one listed)
Midwest: None

2006 (just one listed)
Midwest: IWU

I'm guessing the Midwest doesn't have many teams to choose from.  Aren't they one of the smaller regions?  Anyway, aside from the CCIW, there aren't many leagues that can consistently put in two teams, one AQ and one Pool C.  The CCIW, like the WIAC, beat each other up and if they do that enough, boom, one bid.  The Midwest Conference usually is a two-horse race and the team that doesn't win the conference tourney doesn't have a good enough record to get that Pool C bid.  I think it was 206 when Carroll and Lawrence got in...last year LU had an "off year", while Grinnell lost in the semis of the tourney at home and Carroll was the only one to get in.  Of course, the NathCon was Pool B eligible and Aurora got in.  Chicago and Washington U. are the only UAA members in the region. 

[smedindy]

I like that there are Pool B bids, but I have a problem when schools like MSOE and Wisconsin Lutheran, who would finish in the bottom of the WIAC, can make it in the tourney. While this season it looks like the WIAC could have just one team in the tourney, despite having four top 25 teams.

You know, that happens. There's one way to get into the tourney, and that's WIN your conference tourney. Otherwise, you put it into the hands of others. It is unfair to exclude any Pool A team because they have a weak conference, and unfair to exclude Pool B teams if the NCAA has decided that those teams should have a chance for representation in the tourney.

I would prefer that all conference champs make it, myself, and that the NCAA rely less on regionality in the at-large process.

During the D-1 tourney I get sick of elitists who think that power conferences have a birthright on multiple NCAA bids (see Packer, Billy) and the mid majors don't deserve a chance, and the low majors no chance at all. They're members in good standing of the NCAA so they deserve a tourney chance.

Same with D-3. Yes. some B's aren't strong, but some A's aren't strong, either. And if you don't wanna mess around with a "C", then win the league. Otherwise, no complaining allowed.

[gordonmann]

Sac:

Yes, all the teams I listed were at-large recipients.  That was my point.

[sac]

Sac:

Yes, all the teams I listed were at-large recipients.  That was my point.

I know, I edited it, you had Calvin as an at-large in 2007, they won the AQ, Hope was the at-large team that year.

[Ralph Turner]

Using the same estimates, they're #4 for Pool B, just ahead of MSOE and Wisconsin Lutheran.

I like that there are Pool B bids, but I have a problem when schools like MSOE and Wisconsin Lutheran, who would finish in the bottom of the WIAC, can make it in the tourney. While this season it looks like the WIAC could have just one team in the tourney, despite having four top 25 teams.

Mr. Downtown,
If you were a "common" fan, who is just reading the boards for something to do on a Saturday afternoon, then I would let the remark pass.

However, we haven't met, but your signature line lists some accolades that I assume you have earned.  Therefore, I believe that your voice to your listeners is very important in educating them to the principles behind the D3 playoffs.

The NCAA is inherently just with respect to access to the post-season.

1)  Individual Conferences (and their member teams) can determine how the Automatic Qualifier (Pool A) Bid is awarded.  The UAA has no tourney; the WIAC does.

2)  Pool B is comprised of:

-- members of conferences that are in transition, e.g., the Landmark for 2007-08 and 2008-09, the Northwest Conference in football in 2006-07 or the NATHC in 2006-07 and 2007-08, or
-- members of conferences that do not have seven members, e.g., the 4-member Great South AC Men or even the 4-member WIAC in Men's Soccer, and
-- the independents.

In basketball, that is 38 schools.

3)  D-III determines the access ratio for the playoff bids in all sports.  With the current NCAA March Madness "paycheck", we got the number of bids (in all sports) increased from 1 bid for every 7.5 schools to 1 bid for every 6.5 schools.  Divide 387 eligible schools by 6.5 to get 59 bids.  With those 59 bids in D-III men, D-III voted on one automatic qualifier bid for every one of the 38 full conferences, i.e., conferences having a minimum seven members.  (The 15-member ASC does not get 2 Pool A bids.)

4)  That leaves 21 bids.  The NCAA divided the 38 conferences into the number of teams belonging to those 38 conferences (344) to get the access ratio of 9.29, (according to the Handbook)   The NCAA has considered the 38 Pool B schools as if they were four big conferences.  The 38 Pool B schools were divided by the 9.29 access ration to give 4.09 bids.  That was truncated to 4 bids.  That is equal access, and every calculation for bids is done that way in every sport.

(Please follow my math here. In 2009, the NATHC should move to Pool A bid and take its 12 teams that are allocated to Pool B.  Those teams are allocated to Pool A and Pool C.  At first calculation, Pool B shrinks 38 schools to 26 schools and from 4 bids (4.09) to 2 bids, 26 schools divided [(356 / 39 or 9.31)]  = 2.79 bids.  In effect, the bid from the NATHC'S going to Pool A takes one bid from Pool B and transfers another Pool B bid to Pool C.  One of those coveted Pool C bids is partially due to the large numbers of members in the 12-team NATHC and the 15-team ASC.  In fact, there is a chance that there will only be one bid in Pool B allocated in 2009.)


5)  Every team that has not received a bid is now considered in Pool C, for the remaining 17 bids.  The formulae take over.  If the WIAC is so much better that they deserve so many bids, then they should be able to get that extra boost in the OWP and the OOWP.  The adoption of the OWP and the OOWP has been specifically implemented to favor the "stronger" conferences.

The playoffs in D-III is about equal access with limited money.

I hope that this has helped fans understand the nature of the Pools across all sports.

Thanks to pabegg for his proofreading.  His "unofficial" runs of the OWP and the OOWP have increased our understanding of the process.  Over the last 5-7 years, the process has gotten better and more transparent.  After all of the bids have been awarded at the end of the seasons, we now realize that the debate has been about the last 1-2 bids, which is about as transparent as one can make it.

[pabegg]

Ralph,

I'd add just one more point to what is a terrific description of the process:

Conferences don't get at-large bids, schools get at-large bids.

No matter how strong your conference is, if your runners-up beat up on each other, they'll be at a disadvantage relative to a conference where the second-place team loses only to the automatic qualifier.

[Gregory Sager]

Well said, Ralph and Patrick.

Mr. D, it's completely fair that NAthC teams such as MSOE and Wisconsin Lutheran have as much access to a potential tourney appearance as do the WIAC schools. It's no different than in the D1 tournament, where every year teams like Coastal Carolina, Rider, Arkansas-Little Rock, Bucknell, etc., get automatic bids through their conferences, in spite of the fact that they're often no match for the middle-of-the-pack power conference teams that get left out of the tournament and have to go to the NIT instead, much less the power-conference teams that actually make the tourney and typically drub those unknown schools in the first round by thirty points or more.

The NCAA's primary interest in staging national tournaments is to fairly distribute access to all member schools -- not to stage national tournaments that necessarily have all of the best teams in them.

[Cards7580]

i believe Vermont beat Syracuse one year and Didn't Siena come close another year.  And who can forget any time Princeton has played.   Anything is possible once you get in.