FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[hazzben]

Maybe it's been discussed on previous pages, but I would think a win over St. Thomas (required to even be considered for Pool C) would bump Bethel's SOS in both the flawed D3 NCAA method and also in the committee's minds. There's no way a 1-loss MIAC team gets left out.

The mock accounted for the SOS bump a win over UST would provide Bethel. The issue is they'd likely be up against a one loss CCIW candidate in North Central. One power league is likely having a 1 loss, Top 10 ranked team left home. It's entirely possible, barring Coe/Loras upsetting Central/Wartburg, that Bethel gets left out.

It's not criteria, but I think Massey's neutral field predictions are interesting (these are before a potential UST win for Bethel):

Bethel v. Redlands = 51% win probability for Redlands, 1 pt Spread
Bethel v. Wartburg = 65% win prob for Bethel, 6 pt spread (I think Last years game bears out it's probably a wider margin)
Bethel v. Central = 87% win prob for Bethel, 16 pt spread (I realize they are Pool A or out, but it's still an interesting data point
Bethel v. JCU = 80% win prob for Bethel, 7 pt spread
Bethel v. NCC = 92% win prob for NCC, 21 pt spread (both seem out of wack, especially given the matchup last year, though I think NCC would be favored)
Bethel v. Susquehanna = 59% win prob for Susqh, 3 pt spread

And just for fun, the teams keeping UST out of the regional rankings the last few weeks:

Monmouth v. UST = 97% win prob for UST, 21 pt spread
Martin Luther v. UST = 99% win prob for UST, 34 pt spread (viewing the common opponent in GAC, I think 45+ is more likely)

Actual Saturday matchups:
Bethel @ UST = 51% win prob for UST, 1 pt spread [should be a classic again]
Central @ Coe = 50/50
Loras @ Wartburg = 95% win prob for Wart, 24 pt spread
UWW @ UWO = 70% win prob for UWW, 7 pt spread

[wally_wabash]

Well, the Pool C mock went about how I figured. I do chuckle, when I raised some questions a few weeks back about Bethel's prospects and several posters on the boards scoffed "A one loss Bethel will never be left out."

Still need to win Saturday for any of it to matter. Should be a great game.

I don't know if I went on record saying this about the 2019 Bethel team but I've said it before. I know things don't look good for them now but I'll be stunned if a 1 lost MIAC team is left out.

I'll be curious if any of Pool C noise will impact how Bethel plays Saturday.

Maybe it's been discussed on previous pages, but I would think a win over St. Thomas (required to even be considered for Pool C) would bump Bethel's SOS in both the flawed D3 NCAA method and also in the committee's minds. There's no way a 1-loss MIAC team gets left out.

Wesley and Redlands are locks and I don't see a logical way around that, unless either lose.  Redlands is playing winless Occidental and hasn't struggled at all with their lesser competition, so that isn't happening.  Wesley likes to make things interesting and CNU seems to be playing a little better so maybe?  But let's just assume not.  So you've got:

1-loss MIAC
1-loss ARC
1-loss CCIW
1-loss OAC
1-loss CC

They can't all go forward next week.  And they're all saying "there's no way a 1-loss team from ___ gets left out."  Somebody has to get left out. 

[USee]

Maybe it's been discussed on previous pages, but I would think a win over St. Thomas (required to even be considered for Pool C) would bump Bethel's SOS in both the flawed D3 NCAA method and also in the committee's minds. There's no way a 1-loss MIAC team gets left out.

The mock accounted for the SOS bump a win over UST would provide Bethel. The issue is they'd likely be up against a one loss CCIW candidate in North Central. One power league is likely having a 1 loss, Top 10 ranked team left home. It's entirely possible, barring Coe/Loras upsetting Central/Wartburg, that Bethel gets left out.

It's not criteria, but I think Massey's neutral field predictions are interesting (these are before a potential UST win for Bethel):

Bethel v. Redlands = 51% win probability for Redlands, 1 pt Spread
Bethel v. Wartburg = 65% win prob for Bethel, 6 pt spread (I think Last years game bears out it's probably a wider margin)
Bethel v. Central = 87% win prob for Bethel, 16 pt spread (I realize they are Pool A or out, but it's still an interesting data point
Bethel v. JCU = 80% win prob for Bethel, 7 pt spread
Bethel v. NCC = 92% win prob for NCC, 21 pt spread (both seem out of wack, especially given the matchup last year, though I think NCC would be favored)
Bethel v. Susquehanna = 59% win prob for Susqh, 3 pt spread

And just for fun, the teams keeping UST out of the regional rankings the last few weeks:

Monmouth v. UST = 97% win prob for UST, 21 pt spread
Martin Luther v. UST = 99% win prob for UST, 34 pt spread (viewing the common opponent in GAC, I think 45+ is more likely)

Actual Saturday matchups:
Bethel @ UST = 51% win prob for UST, 1 pt spread [should be a classic again]
Central @ Coe = 50/50
Loras @ Wartburg = 95% win prob for Wart, 24 pt spread
UWW @ UWO = 70% win prob for UWW, 7 pt spread

HansenRatings has:

Bethel +6.6
Coe +2.9
Loras +23.2
UWO _8.2
JCU -7.5

And for kicks Hansen has 4-5 SUNY Maritime, who is already in via Pool A as a 28 pt underdog vs Mt St Joseph.

[AO]

Bethel v. NCC = 92% win prob for NCC, 21 pt spread (both seem out of wack, especially given the matchup last year, though I think NCC would be favored)

It's a little harder for Massey to rank the CCIW teams this year since they only play 1 non-conference game.   

[hazzben]

And for kicks Hansen has 4-5 SUNY Maritime, who is already in via Pool A as a 28 pt underdog vs Mt St Joseph.

Not to beat a dead horse, but a 5-5 or 4-6 Pool A candidate is exactly why I proposed my "Earned Access" model earlier this year. The d3 pure-ests were up in arms, but a 6 loss or .500 team has no business in the field when we are talking about a Top 10ish team (JCU, Bethel, or NCC) potentially being left home. There are a dozen 2 loss teams that have more business being in the field than SUNY Maritime, but I digress (it's a participation trophy world, we're all just living in it).

[jamtod]

And for kicks Hansen has 4-5 SUNY Maritime, who is already in via Pool A as a 28 pt underdog vs Mt St Joseph.

Not to beat a dead horse, but a 5-5 or 4-6 Pool A candidate is exactly why I proposed my "Earned Access" model earlier this year. The d3 pure-ests were up in arms, but a 6 loss or .500 team has no business in the field when we are talking about a Top 10ish team (JCU, Bethel, or NCC) potentially being left home. There are a dozen 2 loss teams that have more business being in the field than SUNY Maritime, but I digress (it's a participation trophy world, we're all just living in it).

I don't think one even needs to drag "participation trophy culture" into the discussion here. The Earned Access philosophy is a legacy that has been around for a long time. It just so happens that the disparity between the good and the bad has widened (or at least we are more aware of it with the internet and twitter).
I'm sure there is some history of some pretty garbage W-L records getting in as AQs in the past? There are plenty of examples from March Madness.

[hazzben]

And for kicks Hansen has 4-5 SUNY Maritime, who is already in via Pool A as a 28 pt underdog vs Mt St Joseph.

Not to beat a dead horse, but a 5-5 or 4-6 Pool A candidate is exactly why I proposed my "Earned Access" model earlier this year. The d3 pure-ests were up in arms, but a 6 loss or .500 team has no business in the field when we are talking about a Top 10ish team (JCU, Bethel, or NCC) potentially being left home. There are a dozen 2 loss teams that have more business being in the field than SUNY Maritime, but I digress (it's a participation trophy world, we're all just living in it).

These are the same people that were up in arms when a lesser qualified minority got the job before them. The entitled want a level playing field when the deck is stacked in their favor. Keep those below them from ever getting their feet on firm ground. Thankfully D-3 is giving everyone a chance for success and not just catering to the power conferences.

WHOA!! Did you just take this in a racial/political direction?! There are so many layers of assumptions, false equivalency, and assigning motives in that post I'm not even sure where to start...

[OzJohnnie]

[bleedpurple]

And for kicks Hansen has 4-5 SUNY Maritime, who is already in via Pool A as a 28 pt underdog vs Mt St Joseph.

Not to beat a dead horse, but a 5-5 or 4-6 Pool A candidate is exactly why I proposed my "Earned Access" model earlier this year. The d3 pure-ests were up in arms, but a 6 loss or .500 team has no business in the field when we are talking about a Top 10ish team (JCU, Bethel, or NCC) potentially being left home. There are a dozen 2 loss teams that have more business being in the field than SUNY Maritime, but I digress (it's a participation trophy world, we're all just living in it).

These are the same people that were up in arms when a lesser qualified minority got the job before them. The entitled want a level playing field when the deck is stacked in their favor. Keep those below them from ever getting their feet on firm ground. Thankfully D-3 is giving everyone a chance for success and not just catering to the power conferences.

That's a bit harsh, don't you think?

[OzJohnnie]

[57Johnnie]

[hazzben]

I'm sure there is some history of some pretty garbage W-L records getting in as AQs in the past? There are plenty of examples from March Madness.

Just to clairy, I'm not trying to keep lesser conferences out of the tournament. When CSS had some of their relatively speaking great teams, I thought they had every business being in the tournament. And I wasn't one bit surprised when they got triple monkey stomped in round one. Martin Luther's turnaround story is really cool, and they've earned a spot in the post-season this year. But having some mechanism that recognizes "hey, that team is only .500, reps a conference that hasn't won a postseason game in 10 years, and they've done nothing to earn a berth this year" seems like a reasonable idea. Exclusion of these teams shouldn't be the norm, but a rare mechanism in place to keep teams that aren't very good out of the tournament, in place of much more deserving teams.

And the difference with March Madness, is that I'm not aware of even a Top 25 team every being left out of the dance. I just think there's a middle ground.

Maybe it's as simple as improving the SOS criteria so it actually reflects who is playing tougher schedules. Not sure, but I do know that not all 8-2, 9-1, or 10-0 records are created equal. Bethel scheduled teams from two neighboring states that belong to good to great conferences. Those teams ended up pretty bad this year, Simpson in particular was surprisingly so. They'd have been better off scheduling the best teams from the worst conferences. But, guess what, those schools aren't picking up the phone when Bethel calls. 

Monmouth is a team from a traditionally lower tier conference. But kudos to them for going out and scheduling two really quality non-con games (SNC did something similar and beat a WIAC school, nicely done!). If they'd won out, they should have been at least in the discussion for a #1 seed. As it stands, they lost those two, are in position to win their league, and still get a shot to play. There are a lot of other schools in leagues like Monmouth's who won't pick up the phone when a traditional Top 25 team calls to schedule a non-con game.

[Baldini]

And for kicks Hansen has 4-5 SUNY Maritime, who is already in via Pool A as a 28 pt underdog vs Mt St Joseph.

Not to beat a dead horse, but a 5-5 or 4-6 Pool A candidate is exactly why I proposed my "Earned Access" model earlier this year. The d3 pure-ests were up in arms, but a 6 loss or .500 team has no business in the field when we are talking about a Top 10ish team (JCU, Bethel, or NCC) potentially being left home. There are a dozen 2 loss teams that have more business being in the field than SUNY Maritime, but I digress (it's a participation trophy world, we're all just living in it).

These are the same people that were up in arms when a lesser qualified minority got the job before them. The entitled want a level playing field when the deck is stacked in their favor. Keep those below them from ever getting their feet on firm ground. Thankfully D-3 is giving everyone a chance for success and not just catering to the power conferences.

WHOA!! Did you just take this in a racial/political direction?! There are so many layers of assumptions, false equivalency, and assigning motives in that post I'm not even sure where to start...

Really? "Earned Access" was brought forward here, but D-3 already has an earned access structure in place. It just currently has a group on the outside that isn't accustomed to that position and their reaction is to take from those that have earned their access. Rather than working with-in the system that is in place, attention is stiffed to alter a system to favor a few rather than most. You can take that anyway you would like, but no one is looking for a participation trophy or wants one. Only the access they earned under the system in place.

[d-train]

I'm sure there is some history of some pretty garbage W-L records getting in as AQs in the past? There are plenty of examples from March Madness.

Just to clairy, I'm not trying to keep lesser conferences out of the tournament. When CSS had some of their relatively speaking great teams, I thought they had every business being in the tournament. And I wasn't one bit surprised when they got triple monkey stomped in round one. Martin Luther's turnaround story is really cool, and they've earned a spot in the post-season this year. But having some mechanism that recognizes "hey, that team is only .500, reps a conference that hasn't won a postseason game in 10 years, and they've done nothing to earn a berth this year" seems like a reasonable idea. Exclusion of these teams shouldn't be the norm, but a rare mechanism in place to keep teams that aren't very good out of the tournament, in place of much more deserving teams.

I agree with your overall point - but I'm not sure I'd go with the conference's postseason history, and I don't feel like that fits with D3. But I think something like a 4th D3 loss on the year means that you and your conference's auto bid gets placed into the Pool C consideration. This year that would likely be Bethel or NCC getting a '6th' Pool C and SUNY staying home. A 4+ loss AQ will be very rare. I'd suggest 3rd loss...but I don't want to discourage scheduling tough non-conference games too much.

[Ice Bear]

Ice Bear is in full agreement that a sub 500 team from one of the weakest conferences in the nation getting into the tourney is beyond frustrating...for any team that could take the aforementioned team to the ****ing woodshed with their second team playing.

Ice Bear recalls SLU getting the IQ in Ice's beloved LL some years back at 5-5. Ice doesn't pretend to be smart enough or to dedicate enough time to work out a solution but in these situations Ice certainly believes something should be done. Ice likes the example of say a certain amount of losses to D3 competition  and that bid gets pool ****ing c'd out from your ass. Certainly seems reasonable and could prevent these small amount of teams from getting in and provide an in for a much more deserving team.