East Region Playoff Discussion

[Bombers798891]

All of it gets pretty moot when the OAC can't compete with Mount. One regular season defeat in 2005 (1st since 1994) by Ohio Northern and ONU couldn't hold serve.  At 9-1 Mount won the league, ONU wound up 7-2.  Last time Mount did not win the OAC... 1991.

This tells me that you need superior talent, otherwise if its close, you stand a great chance of being outcoached.

What it really comes down to, and I haven't seen 'em in person in a while, is the oline and dlines.  Mount's are far superior on average than their opponents over the years.  When a team can pressure up front w/o blitzing, is when you stand a good chance.  If you can run on Mount too, even better.

Still the South and West get a pass, and the North gets a semi-finalist it wouldn't get under normal circumstances.

Good Point.  I've seen them live once (2007) and I have to say their lines were great, but it is their potential for big plays that impressed me.  Of course Garcon helped with that a little, but Kmic was able to break 3-4 huge plays that simply put Ithaca away.  If he ran the ball 25 times, 20 of them weren't great, but 5 of them were game breakers.  Also a credit to MUCs blocking receivers and other backs getting to the second level.  Those guys are huge too.

I spoke to Jamie Donovan about that game, and the main thing he mentioned was the sheer size of the MUC guys

[Bombers798891]

And don't think I didn't catch your little reverse-mojo statement of Alfred being the "favorite to win the E8."  I think Fisher still has a better chance than Alfred, but that speaks more to my insecurity as a Saxon fan playing Ithaca than anything else.

The Bombers currently rank 224 out of 236 teams in rushing...Alfred by 40. Secky for President

[Jonny Utah]

All of it gets pretty moot when the OAC can't compete with Mount. One regular season defeat in 2005 (1st since 1994) by Ohio Northern and ONU couldn't hold serve.  At 9-1 Mount won the league, ONU wound up 7-2.  Last time Mount did not win the OAC... 1991.

This tells me that you need superior talent, otherwise if its close, you stand a great chance of being outcoached.

What it really comes down to, and I haven't seen 'em in person in a while, is the oline and dlines.  Mount's are far superior on average than their opponents over the years.  When a team can pressure up front w/o blitzing, is when you stand a good chance.  If you can run on Mount too, even better.

Still the South and West get a pass, and the North gets a semi-finalist it wouldn't get under normal circumstances.

Good Point.  I've seen them live once (2007) and I have to say their lines were great, but it is their potential for big plays that impressed me.  Of course Garcon helped with that a little, but Kmic was able to break 3-4 huge plays that simply put Ithaca away.  If he ran the ball 25 times, 20 of them weren't great, but 5 of them were game breakers.  Also a credit to MUCs blocking receivers and other backs getting to the second level.  Those guys are huge too.

I spoke to Jamie Donovan about that game, and the main thing he mentioned was the sheer size of the MUC guys

They didn't look much bigger than SJF would.  Not as flabby, but not giants. and their best player (McCullah?) wasn't huge.  Their LB had some huge arms though (Deriggi?)

[Bombers798891]

All of it gets pretty moot when the OAC can't compete with Mount. One regular season defeat in 2005 (1st since 1994) by Ohio Northern and ONU couldn't hold serve.  At 9-1 Mount won the league, ONU wound up 7-2.  Last time Mount did not win the OAC... 1991.

This tells me that you need superior talent, otherwise if its close, you stand a great chance of being outcoached.

What it really comes down to, and I haven't seen 'em in person in a while, is the oline and dlines.  Mount's are far superior on average than their opponents over the years.  When a team can pressure up front w/o blitzing, is when you stand a good chance.  If you can run on Mount too, even better.

Still the South and West get a pass, and the North gets a semi-finalist it wouldn't get under normal circumstances.

Good Point.  I've seen them live once (2007) and I have to say their lines were great, but it is their potential for big plays that impressed me.  Of course Garcon helped with that a little, but Kmic was able to break 3-4 huge plays that simply put Ithaca away.  If he ran the ball 25 times, 20 of them weren't great, but 5 of them were game breakers.  Also a credit to MUCs blocking receivers and other backs getting to the second level.  Those guys are huge too.

I spoke to Jamie Donovan about that game, and the main thing he mentioned was the sheer size of the MUC guys

They didn't look much bigger than SJF would.  Not as flabby, but not giants. and their best player (McCullah?) wasn't huge.  Their LB had some huge arms though (Deriggi?)

I saw nothing first-hand. Just reiterating a first-hand account

[maxpower]

Coach you got the reaction that you wanted...
Whatever

BOO - FREAKIN' - HOO.

[boobyhasgameyo]

Coach you got the reaction that you wanted...
Whatever

BOO - FREAKIN' - HOO.

Max the failed expectations of the current season of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia have really turned you into an edgy guy as of late.  Don't worry I have faith the show will rebound. 

[pg04]

Not to be a d!ck (of course I am, though  ) but I think Max represents those of us (and there are some of us) who are sick of people complaining about MTU being moved in.  The Eastern teams have their chances to go undefeated and still none of them can do it. 

[maxpower]

boobs, you're right, but not about IAS (i don't really watch); but doesn't it seem like you guys are super touchy about Fisher as of late? first all the complaining about the poll last week, then all this stuff about how close you were to MUC this week. I see a team that hasn't won the conference since '07. Neither have we but all this chirping about respect is coming from one corner.

I think the simple fact is that the E8 is pretty weak right now. And I also think it's one of the best conferences in the East Region. Sad but true.

[HScoach]

All of it gets pretty moot when the OAC can't compete with Mount. One regular season defeat in 2005 (1st since 1994) by Ohio Northern and ONU couldn't hold serve.  At 9-1 Mount won the league, ONU wound up 7-2.  Last time Mount did not win the OAC... 1991.

This tells me that you need superior talent, otherwise if its close, you stand a great chance of being outcoached.

What it really comes down to, and I haven't seen 'em in person in a while, is the oline and dlines.  Mount's are far superior on average than their opponents over the years.  When a team can pressure up front w/o blitzing, is when you stand a good chance.  If you can run on Mount too, even better.

Still the South and West get a pass, and the North gets a semi-finalist it wouldn't get under normal circumstances.

JT,

Correct on both counts. 

If even talent, LK will win more than he loses.  The Ohio Northern teams of late 1990's were much better than Mount physically.  Their problem was they were coached by an idiot that out-thought himself constantly.  ONU had an RB every bit as good as Gagliardi winner Chuck Moore, but ONU in back-to-back possessions on 4th down in the 4th quarter of a tight game used him as a decoy an gave the ball to a FB that never carried the ball.  They'd also do stupid stuff like reverse half-back passes from inside their own 20 with a minute left before halftime that would get picked and give Mount another easy TD entering the break.  Just plain stupid.

Best chance to beat Mount is win the line of scrimmage, which is what has made Whitewater the beast that they are.   Whitewater has been the only team to be able to push Mount around on the line and get consistent pressure out of the front 4 recently.  Which is exactly why Rowan beat Mount in 1999.  Mount couldn't block the Rowan front 4.

When Mount first started winning titles back in 1990's, they did so in spite of their line play.  Much of the 2000's in because of their line play.  If you have access to the 1993 Stagg tape, go back and watch how much Rowan dominated the line of scrimmage that day.  It was scary.

[Frank Rossi]

I think I said earlier in the week that part of the problem is that arguments concerning this issue are interlocked -- that looking at one portion of the issue in a vacuum makes little sense.  My overall look at the issue is a longterm one that needs to start soon.  It's not about some instant fix.  With that, here are my answers to Keith's questions from last week in full.  I think this helps show my entire line of thinking about what needs to be done at a macro-level.  It's long, but hopefully it's worth the read:

1. Why do you think an East Region team hasn't been to Salem since 1999?

Put simply, Mount Union.  In the years that the East has had some quality teams in the running, the NCAA has either placed the "East Bracket" winner against the "North Bracket" winner or placed Mount Union in the bracket outright.  Thus, even in the years Mount Union wasn't placed in the East, the team was still there to knock out the East's representative in the Semifinals. 

2. Explain the gripe East Region fans have with building a bracket around No. 1-seeded Mount Union.

East Region fans have a relevant gripe concerning the Mount Union rotation into the East, since it is an indication that somehow, win-loss records are the only indication of teams' relative strengths.  It seems as though the Selection Committee doesn't notice that there are some relatively strong teams in the East that actually play each other and force each other to losses.  Thus, the actual depth of teams in the mix in the East is, I'd say, larger than those in the other regions.  If you remove Mount Union from the North and Wisconsin-Whitewater from the West, I don't see the same level of depth in the North and West, respectively.  The East has Fisher, Ithaca, Alfred, Union, RPI, Hobart, Cortland St., Rowan, Montclair St., Delaware Valley, Lycoming and others that all seem to be in the mix and that all intermix in out-of-conference games.  So, by placing Mount Union in the East because of the idea that no team went through undefeated in the East disrespects the teams in the East Region simply through that gesture.

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 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.

4. Do you feel there's no incentive for teams to play tough schedules because they aren't being rewarded with at-large playoff bids if they lose?

Put simply, absolutely.  There are enough teams in Division III now that we'll have at least six teams go 9-1 by losing a conference game and otherwise running the table.  So, if there are six or more 9-1 teams looking at Pool C, we have been told on two occasions (once by the Committee Chairwoman and once, more recently, by a former member of the Committee) that 8-2 teams would not be considered unless direct links could be used for comparison's sake between specific 9-1 and 8-2 teams in the mix.  How often can that happen when the regions RARELY cross over to play each other?

To go 9-1 and be staring at Pool C means you have to beat all out-of-conference opponents.  So, let's say Delaware Valley loses a close game to a remaining MAC opponent this year.  The team's stunningly close game at then-#3 Wesley actually would do more harm than good in retrospect.  Yet, Delaware Valley would finish 8-2 under that scenario with a quality loss better than most in the tournament field.  The same could be said for St. John Fisher last year if the team had won one more game, since it ventured to Alliance, Ohio to play Mount Union to open the teams' seasons.  At 8-2, it looks like St. John Fisher was not going to be in the mix.  Why should those teams play powerhouse teams?  Even if the "you gotta play the best to be the best" philosophy holds, your loss to a powerhouse Wesley team will come at the price of placing you at a disadvantage during selection and/or seeding in the playoffs -- meaning you might not play as many quality games later by playing your quality opponent(s) earlier in the season.

5. What alternatives to the current selection process would you suggest?

I think three things need to be done.  First, I think that the regional nature of Division III football needs to be honored in the meantime of things remaining as they are.  Specifically, the top teams in each region should be honored by not displacing them or moving them around.  They've earned the right to play at the top of their region by playing the best football in their region all season.  The only teams that should be rotated between brackets should be #7 and #8 seeds (or teams that might be worse than #8 in that region but are still selected) in order to assist the Committee in placing teams when a specific region might have more than eight teams in the field (due to Pool B/C reasons) or NCAA travel rules dictate.  Generally, #7 and #8 seeds are teams that won their conferences with weaker win-loss records -- thus, the teams should have the expectation of a certain level of travel in the tournament.  If those teams can win their First Round games, then they'll be back in their region the next weekend.

Second, the NCAA needs to look at what the BCS attempts to do in FBS football and realize that, while it may not be perfect, there's something to be learned.  Specifically, the NCAA realizes that the sample size for using bare strength-of-schedule statistics is too small and can ignore conference and individual team strength.  To avoid such problems, the BCS uses both statistics (computer rankings) and human opinions (i.e., the human polls) to determine the eventual placement of the teams.  I don't agree with using a facsimile of this process for Division III.  However, I do believe that it is time to use national polls, like D3football.com's and the AFCA's Top 25 polls, to help weight wins and losses like the BCS does to assist the Committee in the ultimate selection of the Pool B and C teams.  Using bare win-loss and strength-of-schedule numbers isn't enough because the sample size in Division III is even smaller.  Human polls tend to understand that a loss against a quality team should not severely penalize that team.  However, the Committee appears to be ignoring those distinctions, perhaps due to a lack of information or an overreaction to strength-of-schedule numbers that might not tell the real story (for instance, Mount Union at #3 in the North this week in the Regional Rankings).  Whatever is the cause, national human polls (not regional subcommittee polls) can help tell a better story when cross-regional decisions need to be made and when teams decide whether or not taking on a tough opponent is a wise idea.

Third, I think the NCAA needs to create a fund to subsidize regular season travel for teams that opt to take on out-of-region opponents during out-of-conference games.  If the eventual hope is to take the regional nature out of Division III football and if the Division can create incentives to make teams want to face traditionally powerful teams, the NCAA needs to put its money where its mouth is in this respect.  Long trips in these economic times are becoming less and less appealing.  Yet, if the NCAA can find a way to even create 50 more cross-regional games per season, we could measure the relative strengths of teams in each region much more easily while providing some entertaining games for the fans -- and experiences like no other for the student-athletes taking the long trips.

6. What specifically are fans and teams missing out on by doing it the way it's done?

They're missing out on unique, appealing matchups between teams that otherwise might never play.  Imagine if DelVal decided to end its series against Wesley.  Look at how entertaining that game was this year and how much attention it drew.  Why shouldn't we see an occasional battle between Union and Mary Hardin-Baylor every so often?  Yet, DelVal and Union have no incentive to play such games -- and under the current Mount Union-at-the-top-of-the-East scenario, they never will get to play those games if they aren't scheduled in the regular season.

The fans are also missing out on some variety in the Stagg Bowl because if the current selection process continues to disincentivize taking risks during the season, no team will be able to gain the experience and strength to reasonably take on Mount Union and Wisconsin-Whitewater for the next decade.  Those teams get five extra games each year -- their seniors will have had 15 extra weeks of practice and 15 extra games compared to teams that might have missed the playoffs the prior three years for whatever reason.  Sure, the "Any Given Saturday" idea is always at play, but there comes a point when fans are going to want to truly believe coming into a game that the game should be competitive.  Year to year, their hopes of this are fading more and more because there is no clear incentive being created to get other teams in a position to consistently compete.

7. How important is variety of playoff opponent in keeping the game interesting? What about scheduling tough opponents? Whose job is it to ensure that happens?

I've been reporting from the sidelines of the Stagg Bowl for the past three years.  While I love the atmosphere and the personalities I've grown accustomed to seeing every year in Salem, part of me really would love to see another team and their fans get a taste of the excitement in Salem.  We can only explain it so much in words -- you have to be there for a few days to understand it.  And this trickles down to the other playoff games.  When I announced the St. John Fisher/Mount Union playoff game in Alliance a few years ago, the excitement surrounding the Fisher program was electric, regardless of the result of the game.  It's just an intangible that keeps the game fresh and the teams striving to improve and play better teams.

It's partially the NCAA's job to ensure scheduling of quality opponents -- by that, I mean that the NCAA and/or Selection Committee cannot sit there and create disincentives like I have begun to witness over the last couple seasons.  To avoid Mount Union being placed in the East, a quality 10-0 team must exist in the East -- so why should Rowan or Montclair schedule a qualty out-of-conference opponent and risk the East being ambushed again by the Purple Raiders?  If 8-2 teams are not going to be truly considered in Pool C, then the same question gets asked again.  There are too many DISincentives being created right now -- and the source of them is either the NCAA or the Selection Committee, or perhaps both since the Selection Committee is following some level of the NCAA's protocol in the selection process.  Thus, it's incumbent on the NCAA to begin to consider what is happening and how to create better incentives in football since strength-of-schedule numbers are not really aiding in the creation of better regular season matchups.

8. You've seen the top teams from different regions play. Is there really a major difference in talent level?

I don't think it's a pure talent level issue. I think it's a depth issue.  Sure, there were players that were on Mary Hardin-Baylor and Hardin-Simmons a couple years ago when I called their First Round game and on Wesley, Mount Union and Whitewater that have major size advantages compared to Liberty League teams, for instance.  However, that's not the real story.  These teams seem to just be deeper at all positions than the lower teams in each region.  We know the Mount Union story with the unlimited depth they truly have -- but we don't seem to fully recognize that for a program to continuously win, it takes depth to dodge injury problems and fatigue throughout a game.  How does a team become deep?  Usually, it takes two things:  1) a commitment by a school to work with coaches in getting more players through the admissions process at a specific school; and 2) success on the field in the first place.  The national spotlight only falls on a few teams regularly -- and those teams seem to field deep teams -- it's not just a coincidence.  Whether it's the chicken or the egg is another question -- but I think commitment from these schools comes first, followed by success, which leads to more and more depth.

9. Is there any reason to believe an East Region team couldn't win a Stagg Bowl in the future?

It depends on how far in the future you mean and what happens in the meantime.  If things continue happening in the direction they have been, then I don't see it happening in the next decade -- it would take a truly magical run right now.  If the Committee begins respecting the top end of the East, then I think we could -- it would take one major cross-regional victory in the Semifinals to have it happen instead of two when Mount Union is placed at the top of the East Bracket.  So, it's tough to answer this question since we don't know what the next Selection Committee will decide to do and whether or not the NCAA will step in to shake things up a bit.  It's not looking good right now, though.

[boobyhasgameyo]

boobs, you're right, but not about IAS (i don't really watch); but doesn't it seem like you guys are super touchy about Fisher as of late? first all the complaining about the poll last week, then all this stuff about how close you were to MUC this week. I see a team that hasn't won the conference since '07. Neither have we but all this chirping about respect is coming from one corner.

I think the simple fact is that the E8 is pretty weak right now. And I also think it's one of the best conferences in the East Region. Sad but true.

Man, we are always super touchy about Fisher.  But the only only only reason we mentioned Mount Union was in response to HScoach (who has since posted non-inflammatory remarks that I am tending to agree with) who said Fisher could have gotten throttled in that game if they weren't being treatled as a cuddly non-threatening team from the East.  Surely you would defend your team if you felt this was not so.  

Also, we did "win" the conference last year as well...Alfred just so happened to win it along with us and they called shotgun on going to the tournament before us.  So what could we do about it?  They called Shotgun Max...

[theoriginalupstate]

boobs, you're right, but not about IAS (i don't really watch); but doesn't it seem like you guys are super touchy about Fisher as of late? first all the complaining about the poll last week, then all this stuff about how close you were to MUC this week. I see a team that hasn't won the conference since '07. Neither have we but all this chirping about respect is coming from one corner.

I think the simple fact is that the E8 is pretty weak right now. And I also think it's one of the best conferences in the East Region. Sad but true.

"all of the complaining"

Max, I hardly think a couple comments would fit that description...

The people who were doing all of the complaining were the ones talking about MSU dropping out of the poll...

My god if anything you're the one that needs to be criticized, if anyone says anything even remotely related about SJF's program you're the first one to say "here goes SJF guys complaing or boasting too much"...

Look, I imagine it hurts being SJF's bitch but get over it...

EDIT:

For the record I like your posts Max and you really seem like a good guy, the only problem i have is the over exaggerating of SJF's point of view.  If you want to take pot shots and jabs at us that's cool, I mean that's what we're all here for is football discussion and trash talk...

[maxpower]

+k boobs.

Look, I imagine it hurts being SJF's bitch but get over it...

If it's true how am I supposed to get over it? But remember when you could also point to your success against, you know, other teams? This little comment seems to be all you have left. You better hope that bitch wins on Saterday.

[maxpower]

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?

[JT]

All of it gets pretty moot when the OAC can't compete with Mount. One regular season defeat in 2005 (1st since 1994) by Ohio Northern and ONU couldn't hold serve.  At 9-1 Mount won the league, ONU wound up 7-2.  Last time Mount did not win the OAC... 1991.

This tells me that you need superior talent, otherwise if its close, you stand a great chance of being outcoached.

What it really comes down to, and I haven't seen 'em in person in a while, is the oline and dlines.  Mount's are far superior on average than their opponents over the years.  When a team can pressure up front w/o blitzing, is when you stand a good chance.  If you can run on Mount too, even better.

Still the South and West get a pass, and the North gets a semi-finalist it wouldn't get under normal circumstances.

JT,

Correct on both counts.  

If even talent, LK will win more than he loses.  The Ohio Northern teams of late 1990's were much better than Mount physically.  Their problem was they were coached by an idiot that out-thought himself constantly.  ONU had an RB every bit as good as Gagliardi winner Chuck Moore, but ONU in back-to-back possessions on 4th down in the 4th quarter of a tight game used him as a decoy an gave the ball to a FB that never carried the ball.  They'd also do stupid stuff like reverse half-back passes from inside their own 20 with a minute left before halftime that would get picked and give Mount another easy TD entering the break.  Just plain stupid.

Best chance to beat Mount is win the line of scrimmage, which is what has made Whitewater the beast that they are.   Whitewater has been the only team to be able to push Mount around on the line and get consistent pressure out of the front 4 recently.  Which is exactly why Rowan beat Mount in 1999.  Mount couldn't block the Rowan front 4.

When Mount first started winning titles back in 1990's, they did so in spite of their line play.  Much of the 2000's in because of their line play.  If you have access to the 1993 Stagg tape, go back and watch how much Rowan dominated the line of scrimmage that day.  It was scary.

When I'm feeling like a masochist I browse the 1993 and 1998 Stagg Bowls.  Haven't in a few years.  Got 'em all from OU25 including the 1999 Semi's.

The 2001 Bridgewater clip makes me want to go hunting for NCAC refs.  I haven't seen that in about 6 years. Probably a good thing.

Accorsi has been working the four year formula in an attempt to try another way to get back and compete.  Unfortunately, he's had some major disappointments with young talent that couldn't stay in school from one year to the next.  Plus, sometimes the rare transfer stud goes somewhere else in the NJAC today.