East Region Fan Poll

[SUADC]

Tartan you have to understand, that every team that has come out of the "East" has had to face Mount Union in the second round or third round, clearly if Mount Union was in the North and they sent Wisconsin-Whitewater "West" and kept both St. Thomas and Bethel in the "North" or "West" your quarterfinals would have been shorten to first and second round.  To get back to what I had stated earlier in this post. If Mount Union stayed in the North regional for playoffs, you would see a "East team" in the  final four, instead of two "West regional teams" a south and North. If you believe that St. Thomas is this and that, vouch for either Wisconsin-Whitewater or Mount Union to jump into your bracket. By the way Wisconsin-Whitewater is in your "West" region right, so why is it that when it comes to playoff time, Wisconsin-Whitewater playes "North" regional teams instead of St. Thomas and Bethel.

[Pat Coleman]

I'll also say that it's a little disingenuous to say the strong conferences voted for crappy conferences to get bids, so deal with it... What the schools voted on was the idea of broader overall access.  16 teams was woefully insufficient with D3 football's growth since the early 70s -- I still wonder what having 8 teams was like in the 80s.  I highly doubt that many schools focused on how the mechanism of Pool A would play out the way it has.  Unintended consequences, like the growth in number of crappy conferences, 4- and 5-loss teams entering the tournament and a shrinkage of Pool C bids since we grew to 32 were not necessarily foreseeable.  All many schools saw was 12 extra slots.

Frank, I don't think that's true at all. First of all, football was not the only sport in the mix here. There were other sports where access grew, but bids did not, including both basketball tournaments.

The tenor of the discussions at the time were as I describe them. If you'd been around in 1998 and 1999, you'd have seem how that went down. It was a surprising show of solidarity in Division III, rallying around the D-III philosophy even though it meant an end to three WIAC teams and four NJAC teams in the NCAA Tournament for basketball.

[gordonmann]

Delaware Valley has won one in that time frame (and don't give me the excuse about losing to Mount Union - Del Val was eliminated by Albright in 2009).

Actually Del Val has won two games. One over Salisbury and one over Susquehanna. Carry on.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Because Mount Union is located in the North Region, frustration has led to a fair amount (or, actually, an UNfair amount) of North bashing.  Let's look at the tape.

The Stagg Bowl has so far been played 38 times.  The North has won the Stagg 21 of those 38 times.  While it is true that 10 of those wins are by UMU (mostly by MUC, but nevermind ), the 11 remaining wins by North teams is STILL more than any other region.  (The North has also lost 11 Staggs - yes, they have been in 32 of the 38 Stagg Bowls.)  The West has won 10 Staggs, the East 6, the South 1 (by West Georgia which is no longer d3).

[BTW, Frank's 800-pound gorilla, Rowan, has never won the Stagg.  In fairness, they have appeared in the Stagg five times, but never won - nationally, perhaps a 400-pound gorilla? ]

If the full Stagg history is going back too far, let's look at the Salem era.  In those 18 games, the North has won 11 times, the West 7, the East 0, the South 0.  While UMU and UWW account for 13 of those wins, they also came from Albion (North) and UW-LaX, Pac Lu, St. John's, and Linfield (all West).

Admittedly, none of this is directly relevant to 2011.  But power only rarely arises overnight, or crashes-and-burns short term.  Where dominance has been is the best place to look for it, barring compelling evidence to the contrary.

[Pat Coleman]

I am sure everyone on this board knows Rowan has never won the Stagg ... doesn't need to be repeated, I suspect.

[Mr. Ypsi]

I am sure everyone on this board knows Rowan has never won the Stagg ... doesn't need to be repeated, I suspect.

I meant no disrespect to Rowan - I still would not want to fight a 400-pound gorilla!   But Frank was essentially equating Rowan and Mount Union in terms of shifting regions.

[Ralph Turner]

But from a philosophical standpoint, we "protect" teams the top teams in crappy conferences and "give" them playoff berths, even though other teams are clearly better.

Well, this is a different argument, now. This conversation is already pretty chaotic as it is but remember, this is the Division III philosophy, and the "strong conferences" had to agree to allow the "crappy conferences" to have this access. They had to vote for it in order for it to pass back in the late '90s.

I am all for the "crappy" conferences sending their champion to the playoffs.  It is about access. Those student-athletes have the same clear goal ahead of them in August just as they do in Alliance Ohio, Belton TX or Whitewater WI.

But why wouldn't this apply without autobids?

The move to autobids across all of the D-III sports has prompted schools to add new sports on campus.

We have not seen it as much growth in M/W Hoops, M/W Soccer, M/W XC, baseball and volleyball, but once you have your core 5 sports over 3 seasons according to D-III rules, schools are adding golf, lacrosse, tennis and even football at remarkable rates.  Those team sports have AQ's for the conferences.  It is all about the AQ!

In our part of the country, in 1998, Hardin-Simmons (9-1) lost to D-2 Midwestern State and it kept the school out of the 16 team format when four schools were selected from each region.  That was a great miscarriage of justice.  The next season,  HSU beat (highly regarded) Wash U 28-21, W&J ( a perennial favorite with a great reputation) 51-3 and finally lost to Trinity 40-33.  Not getting a bid in 1998 under the non-AQ format was not fun!

[Ralph Turner]

And before UMU, there was Capital...

Actually, I was thinking about #7 seed John Carroll which beat Hobart, (South Region) Muhlenberg and Brockport State to get to the semis against MUC.   

[Bombers798891]

In our part of the country, in 1998, Hardin-Simmons (9-1) lost to D-2 Midwestern State and it kept the school out of the 16 team format when four schools were selected from each region.  That was a great miscarriage of justice.  The next season,  HSU beat (highly regarded) Wash U 28-21, W&J ( a perennial favorite with a great reputation) 51-3 and finally lost to Trinity 40-33.  Not getting a bid in 1998 under the non-AQ format was not fun!

So what about Rowan last year? They went 9-1 and missed out on the playoffs because a 5-5 St. Lawrence had to go. Seems to me we've got great miscarriages of justice in this format too.

[Jonny Utah]

But from a philosophical standpoint, we "protect" teams the top teams in crappy conferences and "give" them playoff berths, even though other teams are clearly better.

Well, this is a different argument, now. This conversation is already pretty chaotic as it is but remember, this is the Division III philosophy, and the "strong conferences" had to agree to allow the "crappy conferences" to have this access. They had to vote for it in order for it to pass back in the late '90s.

I am all for the "crappy" conferences sending their champion to the playoffs.  It is about access. Those student-athletes have the same clear goal ahead of them in August just as they do in Alliance Ohio, Belton TX or Whitewater WI.

But why wouldn't this apply without autobids?

The move to autobids across all of the D-III sports has prompted schools to add new sports on campus.

We have not seen it as much growth in M/W Hoops, M/W Soccer, M/W XC, baseball and volleyball, but once you have your core 5 sports over 3 seasons according to D-III rules, schools are adding golf, lacrosse, tennis and even football at remarkable rates.  Those team sports have AQ's for the conferences.  It is all about the AQ!

In our part of the country, in 1998, Hardin-Simmons (9-1) lost to D-2 Midwestern State and it kept the school out of the 16 team format when four schools were selected from each region.  That was a great miscarriage of justice.  The next season,  HSU beat (highly regarded) Wash U 28-21, W&J ( a perennial favorite with a great reputation) 51-3 and finally lost to Trinity 40-33.  Not getting a bid in 1998 under the non-AQ format was not fun!

Ralph,

Ithaca used to play 1-3 d2 schools a year before 2000, and in 1997 we lost to Mercyhurst in the first game but then beat AIC and Mansfield that year (2-1 vs d2 schools).  We still had a clear shot at the playoffs as Ithaca had made it before with losses to those d2 and 1-aa teams that had good records.  Other years they missed playoff births if those d2/1-aa teams were actually any good. 

Midwestern State was 3-7 that year with losses to Ouachita Baptist and Texas A&M Commerce.  Do you think if Hardin Simmons lost to Northwest Missouri  State instead that they would have missed the playoffs?

I mean, you can choose to play non-d3 teams, but if you lose to a crappy one, you shouldn't expect the NCAA to just overlook it.

[Pat Coleman]

In our part of the country, in 1998, Hardin-Simmons (9-1) lost to D-2 Midwestern State and it kept the school out of the 16 team format when four schools were selected from each region.  That was a great miscarriage of justice.  The next season,  HSU beat (highly regarded) Wash U 28-21, W&J ( a perennial favorite with a great reputation) 51-3 and finally lost to Trinity 40-33.  Not getting a bid in 1998 under the non-AQ format was not fun!

So what about Rowan last year? They went 9-1 and missed out on the playoffs because a 5-5 St. Lawrence had to go. Seems to me we've got great miscarriages of justice in this format too.

Except that in this format Rowan had a way to guarantee its playoff spot: Win the automatic bid. In the old system, someone could go 10-0 and stay home. And several teams did.

[RedDragonFan]

Pat...any chance you might consider offering Cliff Notes on the content of this board?  I ask once again of those reading this hanging Cortland target to fight the urge to reply with a Cortland joke until next week! 

Kidding aside, great stuff. Enjoy reading it.

[Frank Rossi]

In our part of the country, in 1998, Hardin-Simmons (9-1) lost to D-2 Midwestern State and it kept the school out of the 16 team format when four schools were selected from each region.  That was a great miscarriage of justice.  The next season,  HSU beat (highly regarded) Wash U 28-21, W&J ( a perennial favorite with a great reputation) 51-3 and finally lost to Trinity 40-33.  Not getting a bid in 1998 under the non-AQ format was not fun!

So what about Rowan last year? They went 9-1 and missed out on the playoffs because a 5-5 St. Lawrence had to go. Seems to me we've got great miscarriages of justice in this format too.

Except that in this format Rowan had a way to guarantee its playoff spot: Win the automatic bid. In the old system, someone could go 10-0 and stay home. And several teams did.

Not even sure how this is relevant.  Nobody is suggesting going back to 16 teams.  Nobody is suggesting completely removing AQs.  We're suggesting revising the system based on the unintended consequences we've seen, stopping the sword and shield use of "regions" the NCAA has been doing of late and explaining why the "Top 4" concept is bogus under current circumstances.  If you were around since 1995, you would probably understand our institutional knowledge of such issues...

[Bombers798891]

In our part of the country, in 1998, Hardin-Simmons (9-1) lost to D-2 Midwestern State and it kept the school out of the 16 team format when four schools were selected from each region.  That was a great miscarriage of justice.  The next season,  HSU beat (highly regarded) Wash U 28-21, W&J ( a perennial favorite with a great reputation) 51-3 and finally lost to Trinity 40-33.  Not getting a bid in 1998 under the non-AQ format was not fun!

So what about Rowan last year? They went 9-1 and missed out on the playoffs because a 5-5 St. Lawrence had to go. Seems to me we've got great miscarriages of justice in this format too.

Except that in this format Rowan had a way to guarantee its playoff spot: Win the automatic bid. In the old system, someone could go 10-0 and stay home. And several teams did.

But would that happen today with the 32-team format? By my count, there are 13 unbeaten, non-NESCAC teams teams in D-III right now--one being Hobart, who will go at best 8-0. This will likely get reduced even more as the season progresses. Last year (I think) there were eleven. In 2009, there were 11 again. I could see how in the 16-team format, that may cause problems, but with 32 spots, would we have unbeaten teams left out?

[Jonny Utah]

In our part of the country, in 1998, Hardin-Simmons (9-1) lost to D-2 Midwestern State and it kept the school out of the 16 team format when four schools were selected from each region.  That was a great miscarriage of justice.  The next season,  HSU beat (highly regarded) Wash U 28-21, W&J ( a perennial favorite with a great reputation) 51-3 and finally lost to Trinity 40-33.  Not getting a bid in 1998 under the non-AQ format was not fun!

So what about Rowan last year? They went 9-1 and missed out on the playoffs because a 5-5 St. Lawrence had to go. Seems to me we've got great miscarriages of justice in this format too.

Except that in this format Rowan had a way to guarantee its playoff spot: Win the automatic bid. In the old system, someone could go 10-0 and stay home. And several teams did.

But would that happen today with the 32-team format? By my count, there are 13 unbeaten, non-NESCAC teams teams in D-III right now--one being Hobart, who will go at best 8-0. This will likely get reduced even more as the season progresses. Last year (I think) there were eleven. In 2009, there were 11 again. I could see how in the 16-team format, that may cause problems, but with 32 spots, would we have unbeaten teams left out?

Well the pool a thing has kind of forced d3 teams to join leagues which means there will be less undefeated teams.  That needs to be factored in as well.