East Region Fan Poll

[SJFF82]

....but why do we get bombarded with Regional rankings...and why does that matter for selection criteria....if an East team plays Wesley or MUC in the Reg season, they gain no benefit or detriment, win or lose, in the objective numbers crunching, yet come seeding time, we are supposed to accept that there are no regions

This is what has always bugged me about it. When it comes to selecting the teams for the playoffs, it's all about regional performance, but yet, come playoff time, the idea of regions disappears. The selection (and seeding) criteria for the at-large teams:

• Win-loss percentage against regional opponents.
• Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP).
- Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP).
• In-region head-to-head competition.
• In-region results versus common regional opponents.
• In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.

Every single primary criteria makes direct note that regions are what matters. The sport itself is regional. But come playoff time, that whole concept just shifts to something completely different. Why are regions so incredibly important right until we want to completely forget about them?

it is actually indefensible....The committee and its regular proponents on here claim that the top 4 should get #1's...well that has conveniently worked so long as MUC stays worthy of a number 1 and because they fit within the 500 mile rule for all potential East Region play-off matchups

What would happen if the 4 best in the country were West teams or otherwise not within 500 miles of the East matchups....?  They gonna make Linfield or UWW an "East' team? 

The 'fact' is that there is no undefeated team in the country that doesnt wear purple that can definatively make a claim that they are more deserving of a number #1 than even an 8-0 Hobart team.  Tell me the team that is going to compete with MUC in either the finals or semis that would be jobbed because they didnt get a number #1 and had to face UWW in their own Region?

[RedDragonFan]

I don't know if they're on the level of the top 4 teams in the nation and really neither does anyone else (perhaps someone from D3 has seen them, but seeing one game can be deceiving in both directions), but given that inability to compare, it would seem reasonable for them to be a #1.  If you want to go by D3football ranings, they'll probably be top 10 if they win out, which gives them enough credibility. 

I've seen every game Del Val has played for the last 8 years. I don't have them ranked in the Top 5 on my ballot.  The defense is very good. The offense is very young.  I think last year's Aggie team (offense + defense) is better than this year's overall.

That said, I don't have a problem with them being No. 1 in the bracket if they win out.  Or being No. 2 if they win out.  But they have to win out first, which will be very, very difficult.

Incidentally doesn't the highest ranked East team usually lose in the NCAA playoffs before playing Mount Union anyway?

I'm with SJF82. It's one thing if we're talking about a 9-1 Cortland State or IC a la 2008, or if some random ECFC team like Norwich goes 10-0, or even Hobart running it but only winning eight games.

But if you've got a traditionally strong program going 10-0 in the East in a decent conference, and they don't get a #1 seed, I mean, what's the point? It sort of becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy at that point. No East team makes a deep run to have the preseason equity built up enough to get a #1 seed even if they do go 10-0, especially if their conference is weak, so they keep getting Mount shipped East.

Hypothetically speaking, do you think the selection committee would have made IC or Cortland a #1 seed had they gone 10-0 in 2008? Cortland was ranked #7 before losing to Ithaca in Week 10, and Ithaca wound up at #12 following the regular season, despite being unranked as late as week 5. I know the Top 25 isn't a determining factor, but still, it's clear those were considered two of the best teams in the country.

I ask because this seemed to me to be the season where we had a legit chance to have a true #1, and Ithaca made a mess of the whole thing, losing to Fisher, beating Cortland and then blowing the Curry game in the NCAA's. I feel like had either the Bombers or Red Dragons not lost, they could have really changed the perception of the East

Great year.  An Ithaca win over Curry would have set up Cortaca Part Deux!  Cortland did make it to the Quarterfinals but lost to Mt Union 41-14.  Cortland went up early 7-0 which was the only game that year that Mt Union was down.  CState hung around till the third quarter going into the half down just 20-14.  It was all down hill from there with the game ending 41 -14.  Still a good run for Cortland and the East.  As was stated in earlier posts, while winning it all is the dream, that team can enjoy making it that far and losing to the ultimate National Champ.  Did making the quarterfinals in 2008 do the East any good or do we need to get a team deep into the playoffs consistently?  (oh and by the way, not lose 41 - 14 when you do make it that far!)

[pg04]

Hmmm... I'm trying to think of a way to state my view on this argument without having my Karma dinged excessively 

[SJFF82]

Hmmm... I'm trying to think of a way to state my view on this argument without having my Karma dinged excessively 

Just say "Shut the MUC up" and you'll be fine....

+k....there, I gave you a credit, so take a position now....

[Yanks 99]

I don't know if they're on the level of the top 4 teams in the nation and really neither does anyone else (perhaps someone from D3 has seen them, but seeing one game can be deceiving in both directions), but given that inability to compare, it would seem reasonable for them to be a #1.  If you want to go by D3football ranings, they'll probably be top 10 if they win out, which gives them enough credibility. 

I've seen every game Del Val has played for the last 8 years. I don't have them ranked in the Top 5 on my ballot.  The defense is very good. The offense is very young.  I think last year's Aggie team (offense + defense) is better than this year's overall.

That said, I don't have a problem with them being No. 1 in the bracket if they win out.  Or being No. 2 if they win out.  But they have to win out first, which will be very, very difficult.

Incidentally doesn't the highest ranked East team usually lose in the NCAA playoffs before playing Mount Union anyway?

I'm with SJF82. It's one thing if we're talking about a 9-1 Cortland State or IC a la 2008, or if some random ECFC team like Norwich goes 10-0, or even Hobart running it but only winning eight games.

But if you've got a traditionally strong program going 10-0 in the East in a decent conference, and they don't get a #1 seed, I mean, what's the point? It sort of becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy at that point. No East team makes a deep run to have the preseason equity built up enough to get a #1 seed even if they do go 10-0, especially if their conference is weak, so they keep getting Mount shipped East.

Hypothetically speaking, do you think the selection committee would have made IC or Cortland a #1 seed had they gone 10-0 in 2008? Cortland was ranked #7 before losing to Ithaca in Week 10, and Ithaca wound up at #12 following the regular season, despite being unranked as late as week 5. I know the Top 25 isn't a determining factor, but still, it's clear those were considered two of the best teams in the country.

I ask because this seemed to me to be the season where we had a legit chance to have a true #1, and Ithaca made a mess of the whole thing, losing to Fisher, beating Cortland and then blowing the Curry game in the NCAA's. I feel like had either the Bombers or Red Dragons not lost, they could have really changed the perception of the East

Great year.  An Ithaca win over Curry would have set up Cortaca Part Deux!  Cortland did make it to the Quarterfinals but lost to Mt Union 41-14.  Cortland went up early 7-0 which was the only game that year that Mt Union was down.  CState hung around till the third quarter going into the half down just 20-14.  It was all down hill from there with the game ending 41 -14.  Still a good run for Cortland and the East.  As was stated in earlier posts, while winning it all is the dream, that team can enjoy making it that far and losing to the ultimate National Champ.  Did making the quarterfinals in 2008 do the East any good or do we need to get a team deep into the playoffs consistently?  (oh and by the way, not lose 41 - 14 when you do make it that far!)

The problem isn't having an East Region team make the quarterfinals, or making a deep run in the playoffs, every single year over the past four years.  The "East" has had teams in the quarterfinals in each of the past four years.  Here is a quick list below:

- 2007:  St. John Fisher
- 2008:  Cortland
- 2009:  Albright
- 2010:  Alfred

In 2006, St. John Fisher and Springfield were playing in the "East" quarterfinals...St. John Fisher won and then gave Mount Union a hell of a game in the semi-finals that year.  The problem is that the committee keeps putting Mount Union in the "East" Region bracket...and therefore no true "East" region team has made it to the semi-finals since 2006.

[pg04]

*shameless Karma Grabbing*

Anyway, it's hard for me to disagree with the fact that Regional Rankings being such a part of the selection process and then stating that they want to select "the 4 best teams in the nation" is kind of a fallacy, and I get where it's coming from.  However...

I also think that if Del Val wins its last two games, it doesn't necessarily mean they warrant a #1 seed.  If there are 10 undefeated teams, it's possible they aren't one of the best 4.  I actually agree with the way they are attempting to make the brackets more dynamic and less "This is the East Region bracket" (within reason, because there still is the travel issue).  I also understand that this causes a major contradiction with the way the NCAA selects Pool C teams to begin with-- However, Pool B and C are what, 1/4 of the bracket?  The rest of the 3/4 aren't influenced by "regional" criteria at all.  Secondly, Pool C, determined by regional rankings, are certainly NOT the teams being considered for the #1 seeds, since this implies they have a loss. 

Just some random put together thoughts on the situation...

Edit (Addendum): Also, wouldn't the NCAA want to attempt to line up the 4 teams they determine are the best to meet in the National Semifinals?  I don't think this is a horrible thing to do...

[Bombers798891]

Great year.  An Ithaca win over Curry would have set up Cortaca Part Deux!  Cortland did make it to the Quarterfinals but lost to Mt Union 41-14.  Cortland went up early 7-0 which was the only game that year that Mt Union was down.  CState hung around till the third quarter going into the half down just 20-14.  It was all down hill from there with the game ending 41 -14.  Still a good run for Cortland and the East.  As was stated in earlier posts, while winning it all is the dream, that team can enjoy making it that far and losing to the ultimate National Champ.  Did making the quarterfinals in 2008 do the East any good or do we need to get a team deep into the playoffs consistently?  (oh and by the way, not lose 41 - 14 when you do make it that far!)

I've always found it interesting that many of the best games Mount seems to get pre-Whitewater come from these supposedly weaker East teams. In 2006, Fisher gave them all they could handle, losing by 12. In 2007, Ithaca gave them a better game than anyone in the OAC did in the regular season, to mention nothing of the 48 point win Mount had in the semi-finals over Bethel. In 2008, Cortland hung with them a lot longer in the regional finals than Wheaton did in the National semis. Last year, Del Valley did no worse than Bethel in the national semis. Sure, lots of times, East teams get boat-raced by Mount. So what? Like that's some new thing exclusive to the East?

[SJFF82]

Edit (Addendum): Also, wouldn't the NCAA want to attempt to line up the 4 teams they determine are the best to meet in the National Semifinals?  I don't think this is a horrible thing to do...

...except it often doesnt materialize....last year the Tommies HAD to get a #1 because we had to have the 4 best be #1....well funny thing happened on the way to Salem....they didnt even make it out of the North bracket that muc was shipped out of to make way for them

...and then, Bethel, who beat them 12-7, got MUCinized the next week....same 'ol story.....

[Pat Coleman]

I don't know if they're on the level of the top 4 teams in the nation and really neither does anyone else (perhaps someone from D3 has seen them, but seeing one game can be deceiving in both directions), but given that inability to compare, it would seem reasonable for them to be a #1.  If you want to go by D3football ranings, they'll probably be top 10 if they win out, which gives them enough credibility. 

I've seen every game Del Val has played for the last 8 years. I don't have them ranked in the Top 5 on my ballot.  The defense is very good. The offense is very young.  I think last year's Aggie team (offense + defense) is better than this year's overall.

That said, I don't have a problem with them being No. 1 in the bracket if they win out.  Or being No. 2 if they win out.  But they have to win out first, which will be very, very difficult.

Incidentally doesn't the highest ranked East team usually lose in the NCAA playoffs before playing Mount Union anyway?

Gordon -- guess your 80-plus games of Delaware Valley experience didn't impress 82. He wasn't interested in the contrary opinion, only assuming that we didn't know what we were talking about.

[dlippiel]

dlip just thinks the touney should be set up BY regions (yes meaning each region's bracket only contains teams from that region). Right or wrong, weak or strong, this is just dlip's opinion. It's region this, and region that, all year until it's time to place teams into the brackets (specifically the top four seeds). dlip doesn't think it's a bad idea to place the best 4 teams as #1 seeds, he just likes the purely regional set-up better. He thinks it provides each geographic region the opportunity to continue the battle, within itself, to make the final four. Then you truly have the best teams from each region facing off.

[dlippiel]

I don't know if they're on the level of the top 4 teams in the nation and really neither does anyone else (perhaps someone from D3 has seen them, but seeing one game can be deceiving in both directions), but given that inability to compare, it would seem reasonable for them to be a #1.  If you want to go by D3football ranings, they'll probably be top 10 if they win out, which gives them enough credibility. 

I've seen every game Del Val has played for the last 8 years. I don't have them ranked in the Top 5 on my ballot.  The defense is very good. The offense is very young.  I think last year's Aggie team (offense + defense) is better than this year's overall.

That said, I don't have a problem with them being No. 1 in the bracket if they win out.  Or being No. 2 if they win out.  But they have to win out first, which will be very, very difficult.

Incidentally doesn't the highest ranked East team usually lose in the NCAA playoffs before playing Mount Union anyway?

Gordon -- guess your 80-plus games of Delaware Valley experience didn't impress 82. He wasn't interested in the contrary opinion, only assuming that we didn't know what we were talking about.

No Pat, dlip doesn't think this is the case. 82, like some, seems to prefer a truly regional set-up as opposed to the way it is. It would be a miracle of God if you yourself could be objective and possibly understand anyone elses point of view...well here we go down the same old road again... 

[pumkinattack]

Gordon, thanks for the feedback.  Have you seen enough of Linfield & St Thomas (since it appears this debate, this year, assuming UMHB is locked into #1 in the south) to be comfortable with their strengths and weaknesses vis-a-vis Del Val.  Or is it just you know DelVal really well and don't believe they can be one of the top 5 teams this year?  Is it possible that you may be overly critical of DelVal vs a team like one of the aforementioned that you may have only seen once this year? 

If this sounds argumentative in any kind of hostile way, it's 100% not intended to be that, but too simply to understand the analysis.  I don't personally think they're there, but I don't really know how they would do ona nuetral field vs. St Thomas or Linfield, or how Hobart would do against them (understanding the probability of an 8-0 Hobart being a #1 is slim at best). 

[Bombers798891]

Gordon, thanks for the feedback.  Have you seen enough of Linfield & St Thomas (since it appears this debate, this year, assuming UMHB is locked into #1 in the south) to be comfortable with their strengths and weaknesses vis-a-vis Del Val.   

Gordon -- guess your 80-plus games of Delaware Valley experience didn't impress 82. He wasn't interested in the contrary opinion, only assuming that we didn't know what we were talking about.

Pat: How is seeing Delaware Valley play so many games over the years relevant to whether or not this year's team is better than say, St. Thomas this year? Many of the 80+ games you speak of are largely irrelevant to a discussion of the 2011 teams relative power.

The regional aspect of the game—and 10-game regular season—doesn't often lend itself to common opponents, or often times, even common opponents once removed. How many steps do we need to take to get from Linfield to DVC? So what are we using to compare two schools who are both very good but who play on opposite ends of the country? No matter how many games of the teams you've seen, when there's no common threads linking the two, there's always an element of guesswork and opinion. (This is true even when you do have the common threads, of course). But when the comparison isn't an obvious one—I'm thinking Mount is better than Norwich—what then? We're just supposed to say, "Well, the people in charge say it's so, so we have to go along with it"?

Obviously, I'd prefer someone like Gordon who has seen a lot of these teams in action many times. But that doesn't change the fact that people who watch a lot of stuff get things wrong all the time. I'm not saying Gordon's wrong in this case. But I'm not a fan of completely abandoning the regional aspect of the game that is so heavily emphasized, for a playoff seeding system that's based on what people think are the four best teams.

[Bombers798891]

Here's something else: If we truly wanted to give the 4 best teams the easiest route to get them through to the semis, why don't we re-seed the brackets after each game? Shouldn't a #1 seed always have the lowest seeded opponent? How is it fair that a #1 seed has to play a #4 seed when the #3 seed gets the #7?

[RedDragonFan]

dlip just thinks the touney should be set up BY regions (yes meaning each region's bracket only contains teams from that region). Right or wrong, weak or strong, this is just dlip's opinion. It's region this, and region that, all year until it's time to place teams into the brackets (specifically the top four seeds). dlip doesn't think it's a bad idea to place the best 4 teams as #1 seeds, he just likes the purely regional set-up better. He thinks it provides each geographic region the opportunity to continue the battle, within itself, to make the final four. Then you truly have the best teams from each region facing off.

I agree that regional brackets should only contain teams from that region.  Trying to have what they think the top 4 teams are make the semis might even be shortsighted.  Gonna ask questions that are probably naive but here it goes. (save the Cortland cracks for next week!)

If they stuck to each regions bracket having only teams from within the actual region, would it promote more competition within each region and ultimately build stronger regions across the board?  While the East region diehards on this board probably pay attention to the Stagg Bowl regardless of who's playing, wouldn't they draw more interest from more casual fans across the East (or the other regions if the same thing happens there) if a true East team played deeper into the playoffs and even to the Championship?