East Region Playoff Discussion

[wesleydad]

jt, you could make that argument if uwww wasnt the team being moved to the north as the #1 seed.

i do agree that if the ncaa is going to move teams around then they should do away with the regional rankings and in region games as criteria for getting in to and being seeded for the playoffs.

everyone wants to go as far as they can in the playoffs so avoiding the big 2 allows that to happen, but if your goal is to win the stagg bowl you will likely have to beat one of them sooner or later.  i will say that as a fan it has been fun the last 6 years watching wesley play into december so i do not begrudge anyone from wanting the same thing for there team.

[Jonny Utah]

I agree with a lot of things that Frank pointed out in his post, but I don't think they are set in stone and I'll play devil's advocate for a bit.

"Well, I think you need to consider two things before you make a final judgment [that the East is weak] there. First, I named you 11 teams generally in the mix for the top 2 spots in the East [Union, RPI, Hobart, SJF, Ithaca, Alfred, Rowan, Montclair, Cortland, DelVal, Lycoming]. Drop Wesley, MUC and UWW. Now name me 10 teams from the other regions that you can make the same claim for.

-Just because there might be 11 teams with a shot to win the east, that doesn't the top 2 of those year are going to be top 10 teams, and it doesn't mean those teams are good every year.  Plus all those teams you mention seem to lose to bad teams every year.  I don't see that happening across the country as much year in and year out.  The fact is North Central is undefeated and SJF if not, Montclair and Alfred are both in the top 25 when in reality they might not be top 25 teams.

Second, the East has the fewest Pool A conferences -- 5. One of them is the NEFC. So those 11 teams I named are dispersed only in 4 conferences. This means that we will see no more than 4 undefeated teams here of quality -- and less since they intermix at a high level. The fact that the other regions have so many 9-0 and 10-0 teams tells you two things: there are simply more Pool A conferences in which they are dispersed and they are not crossing over as much against quality OOC teams in their own region.    If that wasn't true, there would be less X-0 teams. I think we have trouble understanding what the numbers DON'T mean as much as we understand what they DO mean. DVC is X-1. Why? Because they took the top South team to the edge. If DVC scheduled Salve Regina instead, they would be X-0. This isn't isolated here (Cortland/Ithaca, Fisher/Hobart, Union/Ithaca, Rowan/Lycoming, Alfred/RPI, etc.). Someone has to lose those games

-The above is true, but do you want the east to have more pool A conferences?  Would it be good if the NEFC split and grabbed another one?  All that would do would be to take another pool C spot away from the E8, LL or MAC second place team.  And don't those leagues historically sometimes get another pool C team?  And as I mentioned in another post, if Del Val was 10-0 and not 9-1 what difference would that make in terms of an east team getting in or not? 

I think the issue of roster limits and stuff like they were discussing this week is BS. 100 players is sufficient for a quality, deep team if you have [high quality athletes] across the board. They're just not understanding the issue of their own region's structure (BTW, throw in Springfield in the mix and remember Springfield/Union is a game, too).

-The actual number of players allowed on the roster isn't going to help you, but the fact that you have more than 100 students wanting to play football helps your odds that you might get a starter that may have been overlooked in high school.  We all know that many great d3 football players may not have been all-league/all conference players in high school.  The more of these players that you can convine to come to your school, the more of a chance you have that some of these players will have an impact on your team as seniors.  When I was a senior in high school, the Hartwick coaching staff were telling me that at Hartwick I would play and probably start as a freshman, and at Ithaca I would probably have to wait until I was a junior or senior.  Now they were right, (I had an injury as a sophmore but wouldn't have started but would have played special teams) but that arguement didn't convince me to go to a worse program (at the time) for playing time right away.  There were other factors there of course as well.

[When challenged on the East's strength in the nation] How can SoS numbers look good for East teams if even playing the "quality" teams here involves computing more losses in the equation? We're looking at incomplete numbers right now. The East is at a disadvantage in SoS when the season ends because the intermixing forces more L's in every team's equation. And SoS is the main determining factor for any 1-loss teams surviving the regular season without Pool A bids.

-I'm a little confused by this one.  Wouldn't every team in the country be even for the most part with this one?

[Jonny Utah]

The only team the East's strongest teams get measured against now is MUC. So if we use that as an indicator, sure, the East is awful. But aside from UWW and Wesley, no team from any region challenges MUC. So we have to appraise the East beyond performance in the playoffs -- or grade the North, South and West using the same rationale. But one team in each region is not what defines depth.

This is the main point though, but I still don't think it is such a big deal since the only thing that really changes is that the easts best team has to face MUC in round 3 instead of round 4.

[JT]

jt, you could make that argument if uwww wasnt the team being moved to the north as the #1 seed.

i do agree that if the ncaa is going to move teams around then they should do away with the regional rankings and in region games as criteria for getting in to and being seeded for the playoffs.

everyone wants to go as far as they can in the playoffs so avoiding the big 2 allows that to happen, but if your goal is to win the stagg bowl you will likely have to beat one of them sooner or later.  i will say that as a fan it has been fun the last 6 years watching wesley play into december so i do not begrudge anyone from wanting the same thing for there team.

Then the West gets a pass. I agree that you are eventually going to have to beat either uww or mount, but after reading Frank's analysis, the East is getting screwed:

1) Number of bids they receive relative to other regions.
2) The fact that the East due to number of teams, is more competitive.
3) Who was the "genius" that developed the NJAC tie breaker

What if that one East team has a truly great game in them, but they have to play the best team too early and wear down or get injured.  Frankly, there's no reward for playing a tough schedule in the East.  

I'm not saying never move teams around, just mix it up once in while.  Why does the East get the short end most of the time?  

[dlippiel]

jt, you could make that argument if uwww wasnt the team being moved to the north as the #1 seed.

i do agree that if the ncaa is going to move teams around then they should do away with the regional rankings and in region games as criteria for getting in to and being seeded for the playoffs.

everyone wants to go as far as they can in the playoffs so avoiding the big 2 allows that to happen, but if your goal is to win the stagg bowl you will likely have to beat one of them sooner or later.  i will say that as a fan it has been fun the last 6 years watching wesley play into december so i do not begrudge anyone from wanting the same thing for there team.

Then the West gets a pass. I agree that you are eventually going to have to beat either uww or mount, but after reading Frank's analysis, the East is getting screwed:

1) Number of bids they receive relative to other regions.
2) The fact that the East due to number of teams, is more competitive.
3) Who was the "genius" that developed the NJAC tie breaker

What if that one East team has a truly great game in them, but they have to play the best team too early and wear down or get injured.  Frankly, there's no reward for playing a tough schedule in the East.  

I'm not saying never move teams around, just mix it up once in while.  Why does the East get the short end most of the time?  

Very true JT.

[JT]

Why not do this:

Mount - North
UWW - West

______________

Wesley - South
DVC - East

After all these Staggs... Mount vs. UWW, make them meet in the semi's this year.  Then set up a potential rematch of the year on the other side.

[PBR...]

jt, you could make that argument if uwww wasnt the team being moved to the north as the #1 seed.

i do agree that if the ncaa is going to move teams around then they should do away with the regional rankings and in region games as criteria for getting in to and being seeded for the playoffs.

everyone wants to go as far as they can in the playoffs so avoiding the big 2 allows that to happen, but if your goal is to win the stagg bowl you will likely have to beat one of them sooner or later.  i will say that as a fan it has been fun the last 6 years watching wesley play into december so i do not begrudge anyone from wanting the same thing for there team.

Then the West gets a pass. I agree that you are eventually going to have to beat either uww or mount, but after reading Frank's analysis, the East is getting screwed:

1) Number of bids they receive relative to other regions.
2) The fact that the East due to number of teams, is more competitive.
3) Who was the "genius" that developed the NJAC tie breaker

What if that one East team has a truly great game in them, but they have to play the best team too early and wear down or get injured.  Frankly, there's no reward for playing a tough schedule in the East.  

I'm not saying never move teams around, just mix it up once in while.  Why does the East get the short end most of the time?  

very well stated points JT...couldn't agree more...

[Frank Rossi]

The only team the East's strongest teams get measured against now is MUC. So if we use that as an indicator, sure, the East is awful. But aside from UWW and Wesley, no team from any region challenges MUC. So we have to appraise the East beyond performance in the playoffs -- or grade the North, South and West using the same rationale. But one team in each region is not what defines depth.

This is the main point though, but I still don't think it is such a big deal since the only thing that really changes is that the easts best team has to face MUC in round 3 instead of round 4.

As a small tease to Keith's article this week, here's my answer to this question when he posed it to me:

3. If you have to go through Mount Union to win it all anyway, what difference does it make when you do it?

There are two reasons. First, the disrespect issue -- it penalizes the East teams that schedule strong out-of-conference opponents (like Delaware Valley when the team schedules Wesley).  Because of the severe risk DelVal took, the team now likely gets penalized with the potential of just two home playoff games if it makes it that far.  That's a complete sign of disrespect to a team that tried to give the country an exciting cross-regional game.

Second, it's a self-defeating prophecy for the East.  The way to create an East team that can actually regularly compete with the powers of the South, West and North is by allowing a team to get the practice and actual game experience deeper in the playoffs.  By placing Mount Union in the East, it shorts the potential East winner one full game since no East team will go to the Semifinals if Mount Union isn't eliminated by them or another team earlier in the process.  The extra week of practice and extra game against a quality team would provide experience and lessons that can't be matched in normal regular season play.  So, if a team tries to go out and schedule a playoff-caliber team out of conference, they likely get penalized by being knocked down the bracket if they make it into the playoffs at all.  The Committee is not providing the East with a sufficient ability to breed a powerhouse by repeatedly placing Mount Union in the East and by penalizing teams taking risks earlier in the season.

[Bombers798891]

They don't NEED more than 1 quality team to go undefeated.  They need ONE!!  If you want to be considered one of the 4 top seeds YOU SHOULD RUN THE TABLE regardless of BS about conferences being tightly bunched in your region, or some other excuse you want to throw out there.  It is NOT impossible for a team to run the table.  Before this all started 4 years ago, we had an undefeated East team every year, and nothing dramatic has changed from now to then.  

Compare East teams OOC schedules then and now.  I think that's changed a lot.

Again Frank, it's not the OOC's that are causing all the issues...

DelVal would differ.

Yes, Frank...Del Valley would...but that's one team. You continue to ignore FIVE years of results from the E8 and LL...you continue to ignore that the NJAC did it to itself this season. It's not just the OOC's that are the problem

[Jonny Utah]

The only team the East's strongest teams get measured against now is MUC. So if we use that as an indicator, sure, the East is awful. But aside from UWW and Wesley, no team from any region challenges MUC. So we have to appraise the East beyond performance in the playoffs -- or grade the North, South and West using the same rationale. But one team in each region is not what defines depth.

This is the main point though, but I still don't think it is such a big deal since the only thing that really changes is that the easts best team has to face MUC in round 3 instead of round 4.

As a small tease to Keith's article this week, here's my answer to this question when he posed it to me:

3. If you have to go through Mount Union to win it all anyway, what difference does it make when you do it?

There are two reasons. First, the disrespect issue -- it penalizes the East teams that schedule strong out-of-conference opponents (like Delaware Valley when the team schedules Wesley).  Because of the severe risk DelVal took, the team now likely gets penalized with the potential of just two home playoff games if it makes it that far.  That's a complete sign of disrespect to a team that tried to give the country an exciting cross-regional game.

Second, it's a self-defeating prophecy for the East.  The way to create an East team that can actually regularly compete with the powers of the South, West and North is by allowing a team to get the practice and actual game experience deeper in the playoffs.  By placing Mount Union in the East, it shorts the potential East winner one full game since no East team will go to the Semifinals if Mount Union isn't eliminated by them or another team earlier in the process.  The extra week of practice and extra game against a quality team would provide experience and lessons that can't be matched in normal regular season play.  So, if a team tries to go out and schedule a playoff-caliber team out of conference, they likely get penalized by being knocked down the bracket if they make it into the playoffs at all.  The Committee is not providing the East with a sufficient ability to breed a powerhouse by repeatedly placing Mount Union in the East and by penalizing teams taking risks earlier in the season.

Ok.  But what risk did Del Val really take?  Isn't that the same risk Ithaca takes by scheduling Union, Lycoming or Cortland?  Or the risk Union takes by playing Springfield or Ithaca?  Ithaca, Union and Del Val know that for all intents and purposes, they have to win their league to make the playoffs.  If Del Val is really worried about getting the number 1 seed in the east, then yea, don't play Wesley and go 10-0 in the MAC.  But what would have happend if Del Val beat Wesley but lost the league to a 9-1 Albright like what happened last year?  What happens is that Del Val probably makes the playoffs because of the win against Wesley (which they almost did anyway).  So the pro of having that extra game would be to actually making the playoffs while the con would be to having one more home game in round 3?  Thats why I think the pros overweigh the cons in that situation.

As for the extra week of practice, yea that helps but that is a very minor issue in the long run in my opinion.  It might help you for the next season, but for the season at hand, teams that are playing in week 13 all have 13 weeks of practice don't they?  And you might even have an advantage against Mt. Union earlier in the playoffs because you aren't as banged up or as tired in round 1 like you might be in round 4.  Mount Union is used to playing 14-15 games, Ithaca, Union and Hobart are not.  It might give east teams an advantage in round 1 againts MUC.  (edit: I would see an advantage of playing in a stagg bowl, but I do not see that much of an advantage playing in a semifinal game)

[Frank Rossi]

They don't NEED more than 1 quality team to go undefeated.  They need ONE!!  If you want to be considered one of the 4 top seeds YOU SHOULD RUN THE TABLE regardless of BS about conferences being tightly bunched in your region, or some other excuse you want to throw out there.  It is NOT impossible for a team to run the table.  Before this all started 4 years ago, we had an undefeated East team every year, and nothing dramatic has changed from now to then.  

Compare East teams OOC schedules then and now.  I think that's changed a lot.

Again Frank, it's not the OOC's that are causing all the issues...

DelVal would differ.

Yes, Frank...Del Valley would...but that's one team. You continue to ignore FIVE years of results from the E8 and LL...you continue to ignore that the NJAC did it to itself this season. It's not just the OOC's that are the problem

You continue to ignore that the three teams in question in the NJAC are all possibly going to finish at 9-1.  Those three teams were going to account for three losses, with at least two of those teams absorbing at least one lostt.  That's pure math.  If UWW and MUC played each other in the regular season, someone would have to lose that game -- and it would make one of those teams look weak if we were doing this baseline W/L analysis.

You ignore that Rowan/Lycoming and Cortland/Ithaca were/are games that include losses for quality East teams, as do Hobart/SJF (one of Hobart's two losses right now), Alfred/RPI, SJF/Brockport, SJF/Buffalo State, Union/Ithaca, etc.  I'm not saying all these teams had stellar seasons or potential undefeated seasons -- my point is that if you take a look at the list of out-of-conference games played right now in the East and the teams playing them, you have numerous combinations of teams with strength in this Region that are attacking each other.  Things HAVE changed.  For instance, Union's OOC opponents in 2005 (the 10-0 season for Union) were Muhlenburg, Springfield and Franklin & Marshall.  Two of those teams are not even in the East Region.  Now, Union plays two in-region OOC games (potentially three soon).  It seems like the MAC is the only conference even going out of region for games in the East anymore with any regularity.  This is furthered by the creation of the ECFC taking away some of the softness that existed in OOC schedules  (or in the E8's case, in-conference schedules with Norwich) since ECFC teams now have less interaction with the LL, E8 and NJAC.  Things HAVE changed, Bombers.  I know it's tempting to just look at the wins and losses, but right now the East is in a perfect storm cycle.  If it doesn't change, get used to UWW/MUC for the next decade in the Stagg Bowl (and I'm not kidding about this).

[Jonny Utah]

They don't NEED more than 1 quality team to go undefeated.  They need ONE!!  If you want to be considered one of the 4 top seeds YOU SHOULD RUN THE TABLE regardless of BS about conferences being tightly bunched in your region, or some other excuse you want to throw out there.  It is NOT impossible for a team to run the table.  Before this all started 4 years ago, we had an undefeated East team every year, and nothing dramatic has changed from now to then.  

Compare East teams OOC schedules then and now.  I think that's changed a lot.

Again Frank, it's not the OOC's that are causing all the issues...

DelVal would differ.

Yes, Frank...Del Valley would...but that's one team. You continue to ignore FIVE years of results from the E8 and LL...you continue to ignore that the NJAC did it to itself this season. It's not just the OOC's that are the problem

You continue to ignore that the three teams in question in the NJAC are all possibly going to finish at 9-1.  Those three teams were going to account for three losses, with at least two of those teams absorbing at least one lostt.  That's pure math.  If UWW and MUC played each other in the regular season, someone would have to lose that game -- and it would make one of those teams look weak if we were doing this baseline W/L analysis.

You ignore that Rowan/Lycoming and Cortland/Ithaca were/are games that include losses for quality East teams, as do Hobart/SJF (one of Hobart's two losses right now), Alfred/RPI, SJF/Brockport, SJF/Buffalo State, Union/Ithaca, etc.  I'm not saying all these teams had stellar seasons or potential undefeated seasons -- my point is that if you take a look at the list of out-of-conference games played right now in the East and the teams playing them, you have numerous combinations of teams with strength in this Region that are attacking each other.  Things HAVE changed.  For instance, Union's OOC opponents in 2005 (the 10-0 season for Union) were Muhlenburg, Springfield and Franklin & Marshall.  Two of those teams are not even in the East Region.  Now, Union plays two in-region OOC games (potentially three soon).  It seems like the MAC is the only conference even going out of region for games in the East anymore with any regularity.  This is furthered by the creation of the ECFC taking away some of the softness that existed in OOC schedules  (or in the E8's case, in-conference schedules with Norwich) since ECFC teams now have less interaction with the LL, E8 and NJAC.  Things HAVE changed, Bombers.  I know it's tempting to just look at the wins and losses, but right now the East is in a perfect storm cycle.  If it doesn't change, get used to UWW/MUC for the next decade in the Stagg Bowl (and I'm not kidding about this).

Mt. Union playing UWW in the regular season is a little different than SJF playing Hobart or Ithaca playing Union.  Those two teams have established themselves as the clear #1 and #2 teams in the country and I don't think either of them would drop out of the top 3 or 4 if they did play each other.

[Jonny Utah]

I think we can all agree on one thing.  If the NCAA is going to have pool a bids (which means the top 32 teams in the country are not going to make the playoffs and the NCAA is more interested in 'giving teams a chance'), then the NCAA shouldn't have a problem with just letting the East teams playing in the east bracket. 

[Frank Rossi]

The only team the East's strongest teams get measured against now is MUC. So if we use that as an indicator, sure, the East is awful. But aside from UWW and Wesley, no team from any region challenges MUC. So we have to appraise the East beyond performance in the playoffs -- or grade the North, South and West using the same rationale. But one team in each region is not what defines depth.

This is the main point though, but I still don't think it is such a big deal since the only thing that really changes is that the easts best team has to face MUC in round 3 instead of round 4.

As a small tease to Keith's article this week, here's my answer to this question when he posed it to me:

3. If you have to go through Mount Union to win it all anyway, what difference does it make when you do it?

There are two reasons. First, the disrespect issue -- it penalizes the East teams that schedule strong out-of-conference opponents (like Delaware Valley when the team schedules Wesley).  Because of the severe risk DelVal took, the team now likely gets penalized with the potential of just two home playoff games if it makes it that far.  That's a complete sign of disrespect to a team that tried to give the country an exciting cross-regional game.

Second, it's a self-defeating prophecy for the East.  The way to create an East team that can actually regularly compete with the powers of the South, West and North is by allowing a team to get the practice and actual game experience deeper in the playoffs.  By placing Mount Union in the East, it shorts the potential East winner one full game since no East team will go to the Semifinals if Mount Union isn't eliminated by them or another team earlier in the process.  The extra week of practice and extra game against a quality team would provide experience and lessons that can't be matched in normal regular season play.  So, if a team tries to go out and schedule a playoff-caliber team out of conference, they likely get penalized by being knocked down the bracket if they make it into the playoffs at all.  The Committee is not providing the East with a sufficient ability to breed a powerhouse by repeatedly placing Mount Union in the East and by penalizing teams taking risks earlier in the season.

Ok.  But what risk did Del Val really take?  Isn't that the same risk Ithaca takes by scheduling Union, Lycoming or Cortland?  Or the risk Union takes by playing Springfield or Ithaca?  Ithaca, Union and Del Val know that for all intents and purposes, they have to win their league to make the playoffs.  If Del Val is really worried about getting the number 1 seed in the east, then yea, don't play Wesley and go 10-0 in the MAC.  But what would have happend if Del Val beat Wesley but lost the league to a 9-1 Albright like what happened last year?  What happens is that Del Val probably makes the playoffs because of the win against Wesley (which they almost did anyway).  So the pro of having that extra game would be to actually making the playoffs while the con would be to having one more home game in round 3?  Thats why I think the pros overweigh the cons in that situation.

As for the extra week of practice, yea that helps but that is a very minor issue in the long run in my opinion.  It might help you for the next season, but for the season at hand, teams that are playing in week 13 all have 13 weeks of practice don't they?  And you might even have an advantage against Mt. Union earlier in the playoffs because you aren't as banged up or as tired in round 1 like you might be in round 4.  Mount Union is used to playing 14-15 games, Ithaca, Union and Hobart are not.  It might give east teams an advantage in round 1 againts MUC.  (edit: I would see an advantage of playing in a stagg bowl, but I do not see that much of an advantage playing in a semifinal game)

Right now, the Committee would treat that Wesley win as a pure win.  Not a win vs. Wesley.  It doesn't look like the Committee is doing much "win differentiation" or "loss differentiation."  I'd like to see DelVal/Wesley remain because it can only make DelVal better in the longrun unless they will be penalized by losing a quality game later in the process.  Why should scheduling Wesley early hurt DelVal if Wesley is likely going to be the top South team year to year?  If DVC loses to a MAC team and loses the MAC through that (8-2), DVC is done for the season -- that DelVal/Wesley game is suddenly a death knell when combined with the Albright or Lycoming loss.  Where's the reward for scheduling?  I'd say that DVC has taken a larger risk than Ithaca and Union, etc.  It's more on the keel of the risk SJF took vs. MUC for two years.  That game was not going to benefit SJF -- it required SJF to go undefeated for the rest of the season to enter the playoffs, while everyone else could still burn a game and potentially make it.  Again -- NO INCENTIVE.

Part of the problem here is that you're seeing just one part of my argument.  Keith said he'll be posting my entire argument later in the week -- so I might sit back now and let you guys argue the points that I have included so far.  Incentivization of scheduling is a huge thing -- and that scheduling needs to break regional boundaries to make things a little more interesting (and to spread losses to the other regions instead of containing them within four quality conferences).  More later in the week.

[JT]

The only team the East's strongest teams get measured against now is MUC. So if we use that as an indicator, sure, the East is awful. But aside from UWW and Wesley, no team from any region challenges MUC. So we have to appraise the East beyond performance in the playoffs -- or grade the North, South and West using the same rationale. But one team in each region is not what defines depth.

This is the main point though, but I still don't think it is such a big deal since the only thing that really changes is that the easts best team has to face MUC in round 3 instead of round 4.

As a small tease to Keith's article this week, here's my answer to this question when he posed it to me:

3. If you have to go through Mount Union to win it all anyway, what difference does it make when you do it?

There are two reasons. First, the disrespect issue -- it penalizes the East teams that schedule strong out-of-conference opponents (like Delaware Valley when the team schedules Wesley).  Because of the severe risk DelVal took, the team now likely gets penalized with the potential of just two home playoff games if it makes it that far.  That's a complete sign of disrespect to a team that tried to give the country an exciting cross-regional game.

Second, it's a self-defeating prophecy for the East.  The way to create an East team that can actually regularly compete with the powers of the South, West and North is by allowing a team to get the practice and actual game experience deeper in the playoffs.  By placing Mount Union in the East, it shorts the potential East winner one full game since no East team will go to the Semifinals if Mount Union isn't eliminated by them or another team earlier in the process.  The extra week of practice and extra game against a quality team would provide experience and lessons that can't be matched in normal regular season play.  So, if a team tries to go out and schedule a playoff-caliber team out of conference, they likely get penalized by being knocked down the bracket if they make it into the playoffs at all.  The Committee is not providing the East with a sufficient ability to breed a powerhouse by repeatedly placing Mount Union in the East and by penalizing teams taking risks earlier in the season.

D III is very restricted in terms of practice, off season activity, etc.,.  Any team that makes it to the Stagg Bowl gets almost an extra half season of legal practice that other teams don't get.  By the time your average Mount player makes it to his Senior season and Stagg Bowl, he's had two years of extra practice (total of six years) over most opponents.  Huge.  Especially with Kehres running the show.

I certainly think it helped Rowan in the 90's and early 00's.  And it helps UWW now.  As it stands now, the East doesn't even make it to the fourth week.