East Region Playoff Discussion

[theoriginalupstate]

I don't have a problem with MUC coming to the East, if the NCAA wants to make 4 top seeds and fill out brackets that fit within their 500 mile thing that's cool.  Just don't use regional results to pick the last 6 and just take the best 6 teams...

[maxpower]

you misunderstood me: i don't think MUC coming east is F'd. I think MUC (and UWW) being so dominant over everyone is a little F'd.

[theoriginalupstate]

you misunderstood me: i don't think MUC coming east is F'd. I think MUC (and UWW) being so dominant over everyone is a little F'd.

I got what you were saying, I was just throwing that point out there as my stance on the whole playoff picture...

[Doid23]

What I really wanted to post here, was this:

So I will be the one to bring it up. Ain't this MUC-UWW situation a little F'd?

Amen brotha'

[Pat Coleman]

I don't think we can use 2002 as a sample anymore.  

Tell that to the Guru...

I was responding to someone who had already brought it up, but with incomplete information. Namely, you, Upstate.

Don't act like you don't bring it up every chance you get...

Well, honestly, if someone brings it up from the East-centric perspective then you might well expect to get challenged from the national perspective. Sorry I responded to it but at least it didn't derail the conversation.

[union89]

Well believe what you want (as everyone always does), but as someone who had direct access to LK after that game, I can tell you he DEFINITELY pulled back the reigns regarding the passing attack during that game.  Remember, Micheli wasn't the full-time starter then, but with the injury to the starter, he was getting all/most of the playing time.  

He really came into his own during the Stagg (MVP), and I can tell you that Mount was game-planning for just that coming out party in that game.  LK knew that Micheli could/would be the difference, as UWW would prepare a defense to stop Kmic after what happened the year before, and due to how he was running in the '06 play-off run.

I know you don't want to hear it, but it doesn't make it less so.  LK has always been much more conservative in play-off games wherever/whenever he can, as he has said many times you get no style points once it's the play-offs.  It's all about winning and moving on.

Skunks, with all due respect, I don't know what that means.  Do you mean he was saving a few formations or concepts for the Stagg Bowl like no huddle, spread, quick passing game etc?  Or do you mean they just gave Kmic the ball 80% of the time in that game and less in the next game?

LK (like most coaches) will run something until a team stops it.  If one team cannot stop the run, he ain't gonna pass a whole lot.

He's only hiding something if he has the luxury to do so.

I have a feeling this is exactly what happened....JT, your pretty smart for a guy who had the gaul earlier to evaluate the play of defensive backs!!

+1

[Pat Coleman]

I don't have a problem with MUC coming to the East, if the NCAA wants to make 4 top seeds and fill out brackets that fit within their 500 mile thing that's cool.  Just don't use regional results to pick the last 6 and just take the best 6 teams...

I think they are doing their best to actually do this. If you look at the regional rankings, for example, in the north and the east, you'll see it is not simply a straight recitation of regional record (East) nor does it ignore the non-regional results (North, esp. Wabash).

The system voted on by the Division III member schools constrains them but they are truly trying to do the right thing. We do harp on it because a bunch of us think last year they failed mightily.

[union89]

It doesn't matter that much.  MUC and UWW would be having 15 weeks of practice no matter who they played, and thats a fact (unless they played each other in the first round, if they play in the semi-finals, then yea, its 14 extra weeks of practice, and we all get to see some more 55-3 stagg bowls)

If in a couple years, if DelVal's seniors have 12 extra weeks, it doesn't give them a chance?  A team eventually taking down the Mount isn't going to just magically appear, is it?  Let's ask the North guys -- HEY NORTH GUYS, WHEN IS YOUR MAGIC UNICORN APPEARING?

Sure it gives them a chance.  But so does lifting 2 extra hours a week, or doing 3 extra sprints a day in the summer, or an extra phone call by an assistant coach to that kid he saw in the paper that might go to your school instead of your rival's school, etc, etc.

Just pointing out that these things matter, but not that much in the long run. 

Totally agree....

[JT]

Well, if MUC happens to go East, strap it up and go 'em.  It is true that there are "weaker" MUC teams from time-to-time and sometimes they get beat and sometimes they still squeak by.

I think arguments have been productive. It went national and the chairwoman was quizzed about it.

[Bombers798891]

What I really wanted to post here, was this:

I think a lot of people are hiding the opinion, for fear of upsetting the MUC guys, that having two teams in the entire DIII pool that dominate this much is so frustrating that it might be time to start referring to it as a problem.....

So I will be the one to bring it up. Ain't this MUC-UWW situation a little F'd?

I think it's an issue of unintended consequences. Much like getting an East team to #1, teams have to take care of business. It's 100% the responsibility of the other teams to step up and beat MUC and UW-W. Those two schools have nothing to apologize for, obviously.

But yes, there has been, for the past five years, a sense of inevitability about the whole thing. Maybe at Wesley, UMHB, etc. this isn't the case. But it does feel to me like it's 234 teams and then Mount and Whitewater. Now again, that's something the other schools have to change. But it is fair to ask if it's the best thing for the sport.

Of course, there are dynasties in many sports, but I think what makes this different is because these teams can (and do) go undefeated, the idea of them being unbeatable isn't the same as it is when it's the Yankees and we see them lose 50-70 times a season. Or even the Bulls who would lose 15-20. When we say they're "unbeatable" we're being extremely hyperbolic. Sure it may be surprising if they don't win a title, but it's not like those teams losing an individual game is incredibly noteworthy

Over the past 5+ seasons, MUC and Whitewater have gone 153-3 against teams not each other. So, it almost IS like they're unbeatable in the literal sense.

Now sure, Whitewater has played a number of close games in 2008 and 2007 and even Mount has had a few relatively close games. So it's not like an "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here" scenario before a game, (for the good teams at least). But at the same time...153-3. I think we tend to notice bigger picture in a case like this. Our "progress" is Mount "only" winning by 14, Whitewater "only" winning by 10. We say things like "Mount isn't exactly looking like Mount," and "Maybe this is the year," and hope for a better next week. But what happens if we get a sixth straight National Championship between the two? Again, no-one will blame those two teams, and we'll rightfully say that Del Valley, Wesley and Linfield had their shots.

But it's hard sometimes not to feel disappointed in the D-III game as a whole at times. Not because you don't like it, but because yeah it feels inevitable. I'm always excited for Bomber football, but even in the seasons where they had great teams that make deep playoff runs, in the back of my mind I knew "Yeah, but Mount's there, so it's not like we've got a shot at a title." This was right around the time Mount went something like 98-1 over six+ seasons. Now I feel like there's no shot at even getting into the title game at all. I mean, we can't even get teams like Wesley and Linfield through anymore. Forget a Cinderella-type like Butler or teams like the Flyers, Marlins or Cardinals making stunning playoff runs.

And yes, this topic is brought up every year, but as every year passes where this happens, I think it becomes more and more of a legitimate concern for fans.

[Pat Coleman]

I think we used to talk the same way about it being Mount Union and everyone else. We were always urging teams to stand up to Mount Union, elevate their game and compete. UWW managed to do it. Maybe someone else can.

[Bombers798891]

I think we used to talk the same way about it being Mount Union and everyone else. We were always urging teams to stand up to Mount Union, elevate their game and compete. UWW managed to do it. Maybe someone else can.

I nominate St. Lawrence

[Mr. Ypsi]

And if this site had been around in the 1980s, no doubt the same thing would have been said about Augustana.

Fortunately, as the Vikings discovered, all dynasties end eventually.  Mt. Union (and now UWW) just seem to be taking longer than most to fall!

[Bombers798891]

It's funny, because Ithaca was a major power back in the day, but actually has never had a team go 10-0 (or better). So people think I'm being hypocritical because hey, wasn't IC that way? But those teams never once even ran the table. Augustana, I can't speak to though. Did they have long stretches of never losing?

[Mr. Ypsi]

Augustana never lost a game from 1983-86.