East Region Fan Poll

[lewdogg11]

But I think Fisher got really screwed here, given that their two losses are much better than Rowan's two losses (three-point loss to regional #2 and one-touchdown loss to Salisbury, who may be 5-3 but is indisputably a better loss than a 20-point loss to Morrisville State) and they also have a 21-point win over South-regionally-ranked W & J to match with Rowan's win over Wesley.

This is the issue with using any type of ranking to select playoff teams. It just does not work. I totally agree that Fisher is a much more impressive 6-2 than Rowan, but Rowan has a name and a quality win. These are the types of debates that a group has to discuss in detail before putting someon in the playoffs. Fisher probably doesn't deserve to get in with 2 losses, but if any 2 loss team in the East had an argument to make I think they are it, but, my bias is as bad a someone not really looking at the teams involved so it is all murky...

Fisher's schedule with 2 losses looks a he!! of a lot more impressive than Framingham's 1 loss record.

[sjfcards]

But I think Fisher got really screwed here, given that their two losses are much better than Rowan's two losses (three-point loss to regional #2 and one-touchdown loss to Salisbury, who may be 5-3 but is indisputably a better loss than a 20-point loss to Morrisville State) and they also have a 21-point win over South-regionally-ranked W & J to match with Rowan's win over Wesley.

This is the issue with using any type of ranking to select playoff teams. It just does not work. I totally agree that Fisher is a much more impressive 6-2 than Rowan, but Rowan has a name and a quality win. These are the types of debates that a group has to discuss in detail before putting someon in the playoffs. Fisher probably doesn't deserve to get in with 2 losses, but if any 2 loss team in the East had an argument to make I think they are it, but, my bias is as bad a someone not really looking at the teams involved so it is all murky...

Fisher's schedule with 2 losses looks a he!! of a lot more impressive than Framingham's 1 loss record.

Agreed, but someone who just looks at records may not see that. When you have coaches/fans/committees ranking teams they don't know as much about each team, week to week, as they need to make informed decisions.

My point is when making playoff decisions based on some ranking (be it Regional rankings, or the BCS) the process is flawed, because not everyone is putting in a perfect vote for the rankings. I don't know enough about how the regional rankings are made to give an example, but in the BCS coaches vote for the team that gets their conference more money. Coaches don't have enough time to watch every team play every game, so they have some assistant coach or intern do the rankings for them. A lot of times rankings are based on what the idea of your team was before the season started (if you don't lose people don't pass you), etc.

Rankings are a bad way to hand out pool C bids.

[ExTartanPlayer]

But I think Fisher got really screwed here, given that their two losses are much better than Rowan's two losses (three-point loss to regional #2 and one-touchdown loss to Salisbury, who may be 5-3 but is indisputably a better loss than a 20-point loss to Morrisville State) and they also have a 21-point win over South-regionally-ranked W & J to match with Rowan's win over Wesley.

This is the issue with using any type of ranking to select playoff teams. It just does not work. I totally agree that Fisher is a much more impressive 6-2 than Rowan, but Rowan has a name and a quality win. These are the types of debates that a group has to discuss in detail before putting someon in the playoffs. Fisher probably doesn't deserve to get in with 2 losses, but if any 2 loss team in the East had an argument to make I think they are it, but, my bias is as bad a someone not really looking at the teams involved so it is all murky...

Fisher's schedule with 2 losses looks a he!! of a lot more impressive than Framingham's 1 loss record.

As I said, I think Framingham's ranking is partially tied to Rowan's abnormally high ranking.  I know you're on the warpath about the lack of quality wins (you'll love this, if Endicott beats Salve to finish the season, they'll probably get into the last set of RR's and Framingham will end up with a win over a RR team), but I have no problem with a team that has close loss to a highly-ranked team and is otherwise undefeated being ranked in a vacuum.  Framingham two spots behind Rowan is okay...you may disagree, but IMO the problem is that Rowan's #4 ranking is actually just as much of a joke as Framingham's #6 ranking.  Rowan should be way lower than they are (as I said, the juxtaposition of Rowan/Fisher is pretty striking when you consider that both have one win over a South-RR and that Fisher's two losses are much better-looking than Rowan's two losses).  If Rowan was at #8 like they should be, Framingham would be #9 or 10 and that would be much more reasonable. 

Lebanon Valley behind Rowan is somewhat comical too.  Leb Val has a better record, a favorable common opponent (they beat Delaware Valley, who gave Rowan one of their two losses) and their only loss came against 5-3 Widener (again, far better than a loss to Morrisville State).

[sjfcards]

But I think Fisher got really screwed here, given that their two losses are much better than Rowan's two losses (three-point loss to regional #2 and one-touchdown loss to Salisbury, who may be 5-3 but is indisputably a better loss than a 20-point loss to Morrisville State) and they also have a 21-point win over South-regionally-ranked W & J to match with Rowan's win over Wesley.

This is the issue with using any type of ranking to select playoff teams. It just does not work. I totally agree that Fisher is a much more impressive 6-2 than Rowan, but Rowan has a name and a quality win. These are the types of debates that a group has to discuss in detail before putting someon in the playoffs. Fisher probably doesn't deserve to get in with 2 losses, but if any 2 loss team in the East had an argument to make I think they are it, but, my bias is as bad a someone not really looking at the teams involved so it is all murky...

Fisher's schedule with 2 losses looks a he!! of a lot more impressive than Framingham's 1 loss record.

As I said, I think Framingham's ranking is partially tied to Rowan's abnormally high ranking.  I know you're on the warpath about the lack of quality wins (you'll love this, if Endicott beats Salve to finish the season, they'll probably get into the last set of RR's and Framingham will end up with a win over a RR team), but I have no problem with a team that has close loss to a highly-ranked team and is otherwise undefeated being ranked in a vacuum.  Framingham two spots behind Rowan is okay...you may disagree, but IMO the problem is that Rowan's #4 ranking is actually just as much of a joke as Framingham's #6 ranking.  Rowan should be way lower than they are (as I said, the juxtaposition of Rowan/Fisher is pretty striking when you consider that both have one win over a South-RR and that Fisher's two losses are much better-looking than Rowan's two losses).  If Rowan was at #8 like they should be, Framingham would be #9 or 10 and that would be much more reasonable. 

Lebanon Valley behind Rowan is somewhat comical too.  Leb Val has a better record, a favorable common opponent (they beat Delaware Valley, who gave Rowan one of their two losses) and their only loss came against 5-3 Widener (again, far better than a loss to Morrisville State).

From now on you do the rankings...This makes a lot of sense.

[Bombers798891]

Wouldn't Ithaca be a possible Pool C over Fisher if they both go 8-2? The Bombers have a bad loss to the Wick, and certainly, W&J/Otterbein is much better than Union/Moravian. But does the H2H win overtake that?

In a related story, man the Bombers have to be kicking themselves for that Hartwick loss.

[Frank Rossi]

Lebanon Valley behind Rowan is somewhat comical too.  Leb Val has a better record, a favorable common opponent (they beat Delaware Valley, who gave Rowan one of their two losses) and their only loss came against 5-3 Widener (again, far better than a loss to Morrisville State).

This is my #1 problem with the rankings.  You can point out the two wins vs. regionally-ranked opponents for Rowan, but that stat is pretty much manufactured by the rankings themselves because of the mediocrity this year in the East and the oddity of the placement of Wesley.  The DelVal results should trump this criterion, but they obviously are not.  I have trouble when we ignore on-the-field data points in place of something that was created by the regional committees themselves.

I will also say that the placement of 7-0 Millsaps behind 4-2 Wesley (for D3 purposes) is an absolute abomination.  I understand the Committee is going to try to act in a manner that understands Wesley's scheduling issues overall as an independent team, but Millsaps is actually being punished for being in a conference in these rankings.  Why?  Because any team in a conference of seven teams or greater will not have the ability to post an SOS that is as high as Wesley's because the teams inside the conference will end up making the SOS numbers stick closer to 0.500 (in either direction).  Teams with more OOC games (or an independent team here) have much greater SOS volatility.  Thus, the Committee should not place that level of scrutiny on SOS when Wesley is involved and has two more losses than the team directly below them.  I could understand if Millsaps were 6-1 slightly better, but the team is 7-0 and is vying for a Pool B slot against Wesley.  Wesley has one remaining D3 game (to go to 5-2 in D3 games) against... Alfred State.  Millsaps could finish 9-0 in D3 games and still get jumped by Wesley?  That makes me very uncomfortable under these circumstances.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Wouldn't Ithaca be a possible Pool C over Fisher if they both go 8-2? The Bombers have a bad loss to the Wick, and certainly, W&J/Otterbein is much better than Union/Moravian. But does the H2H win overtake that?

In a related story, man the Bombers have to be kicking themselves for that Hartwick loss.

I don't think either gets in through Pool C regardless of who's ranked higher.  The Pool C board will have:

1) a 9-1 OAC runnerup on the board with big SOS and an RR win (maybe two or three RR wins, depending on exactly who this ends up being)
2) a 9-1 CCIW runner-up fitting that same description
3) a 9-1 WIAC runner-up fitting that same description

Those are all virtually locks assuming nothing crazy happens.  Then we have:

4) an 8-1 Pacific Lutheran with good SOS and their only loss to Linfield, and possibly with a couple wins over RR's if Pacific sneaks into the rankings

5) possibly 9-1 Concordia-Moorhead from the MIAC; if they lose this week, they're replaced by 8-2 St. Thomas who still probably has a better resume than hypothetical 8-2 Ithaca

6) most likely a 9-1 Thomas More team who is currently #6 in the South Regional Rankings and will stay there or move up (while hypothetical 8-2 Ithaca will drop from its current #2 in the East if it loses, although it probably shouldn't drop that FAR, it will)

7) probably a 9-1 St. Norbert with their only loss to possible OAC champion John Carroll; this is a weaker-SOS option but still may end up in the discussion

8) finally the possible Pool B leftovers, which could be one of Wesley, 9-1 Framingham State (who, like it or not, will probably look better by record/SOS/record vs. RR's than 8-2 Fisher/Ithaca does) or maybe even 10-0 Millsaps (see the Pool B thread for this discussion). 

There's just too many QUALITY one-loss candidates for me to think an 8-2 team from almost anywhere is going to get in, IMO.  I know we have seen 8-2 teams get in over 9-1 teams recently, but these are very, very strong one-loss teams.  I just don't see an 8-2 Pool C team going in any which way this year.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Lebanon Valley behind Rowan is somewhat comical too.  Leb Val has a better record, a favorable common opponent (they beat Delaware Valley, who gave Rowan one of their two losses) and their only loss came against 5-3 Widener (again, far better than a loss to Morrisville State).

This is my #1 problem with the rankings.  You can point out the two wins vs. regionally-ranked opponents for Rowan, but that stat is pretty much manufactured by the rankings themselves because of the mediocrity this year in the East and the oddity of the placement of Wesley.  The DelVal results should trump this criterion, but they obviously are not.  I have trouble when we ignore on-the-field data points in place of something that was created by the regional committees themselves.

I will also say that the placement of 7-0 Millsaps behind 4-2 Wesley (for D3 purposes) is an absolute abomination.  I understand the Committee is going to try to act in a manner that understands Wesley's scheduling issues overall as an independent team, but Millsaps is actually being punished for being in a conference in these rankings.  Why?  Because any team in a conference of seven teams or greater will not have the ability to post an SOS that is as high as Wesley's because the teams inside the conference will end up making the SOS numbers stick closer to 0.500 (in either direction).  Teams with more OOC games (or an independent team here) have much greater SOS volatility.  Thus, the Committee should not place that level of scrutiny on SOS when Wesley is involved and has two more losses than the team directly below them.  I could understand if Millsaps were 6-1 slightly better, but the team is 7-0 and is vying for a Pool B slot against Wesley.  Wesley has one remaining D3 game (to go to 5-2 in D3 games) against... Alfred State.  Millsaps could finish 9-0 in D3 games and still get jumped by Wesley?  That makes me very uncomfortable under these circumstances.

Agree strongly with the two bolded points.  Millsaps is ranked #5 in their region, yet I think they've been screwed as badly as anyone in any region.  Although their SOS number will come up a bit the next two weeks with games against decent Rhodes and Centre teams.  I don't know EXACTLY how Pool B selection works (if they do the same kind of thing as Pool B where they compare the top possible candidate from each region) but I posted a scenario on the Pool B boards where it's possible that Pool B selection takes TLU, then Framingham State over Wesley, then Wesley over Millsaps and 10-0 Millsaps is left in Pool C.

[Saxon73]

Regardless of the Win, Loss records at the end of the season, one might consider the "quality" of the TEAM after the last game of the regular season.  For instance Alfred's current team would not have lost to RPI IMHO.  This would potentially make them 9-1 with a loss to a very good team.  However, if some team was 9-0 going into their last game and lost to a poor team they would be 9-1 also.  So, if AU ends up 8-2 the TEAM is much better at the end of the season but doesn't have the 9 wins and 1 loss to get a bid.

Does anyone know if this type of scenario takes place.  If it doesn't maybe it should 

[AUPepBand]

Regardless of the Win, Loss records at the end of the season, one might consider the "quality" of the TEAM after the last game of the regular season.  For instance Alfred's current team would not have lost to RPI IMHO.  This would potentially make them 9-1 with a loss to a very good team.  However, if some team was 9-0 going into their last game and lost to a poor team they would be 9-1 also.  So, if AU ends up 8-2 the TEAM is much better at the end of the season but doesn't have the 9 wins and 1 loss to get a bid.

Does anyone know if this type of scenario takes place.  If it doesn't maybe it should 

Pep is going to go out on a limb and say that it ain't gonna happen. And it probably shouldn't. Fact is, AU was a team that was still trying to find itself when it played RPI. But every other team has similar situations. Given Alfred's entire "body of work," the Saxons are still a 6-2 team. Pep was somewhat surprised, even, that the Saxons made the list of regionally ranked teams, but then, this is the East, and there just aren't any legitimate unbeatens (excepting Hobart) and/or once beatens.

On Saxon Warriors!

[Saxon73]

PEP,

I don't think it is going to happen either. The curiosity of the scenario was what got me thinking.  Just sort of an angle that I hadn't seen discussed as I don't spend so much time on the site.

[Upstate]

One, there's a shortage of Pool C bids as opposed to previous years. Two, there's just way too many quality one loss teams out there right not to consider a two loss team getting in. Three, just going to toss out a friendly notification that you're not winning the Courage Bowl!

[AUPepBand]

One, there's a shortage of Pool C bids as opposed to previous years. Two, there's just way too many quality one loss teams out there right not to consider a two loss team getting in. Three, just going to toss out a friendly notification that you're not winning the Courage Bowl!

Haha! You may be right. After all, St. John Fisher has never lost a Courage Bowl and, Pep might add, Alfred has never won a Courage Bowl!
But it's a bit early to be thinking about it. After all, Buffalo State and Utica loom.

On Saxon Warriors!

[Jonny Utah]

Lebanon Valley behind Rowan is somewhat comical too.  Leb Val has a better record, a favorable common opponent (they beat Delaware Valley, who gave Rowan one of their two losses) and their only loss came against 5-3 Widener (again, far better than a loss to Morrisville State).

This is my #1 problem with the rankings.  You can point out the two wins vs. regionally-ranked opponents for Rowan, but that stat is pretty much manufactured by the rankings themselves because of the mediocrity this year in the East and the oddity of the placement of Wesley.  The DelVal results should trump this criterion, but they obviously are not.  I have trouble when we ignore on-the-field data points in place of something that was created by the regional committees themselves.

I will also say that the placement of 7-0 Millsaps behind 4-2 Wesley (for D3 purposes) is an absolute abomination.  I understand the Committee is going to try to act in a manner that understands Wesley's scheduling issues overall as an independent team, but Millsaps is actually being punished for being in a conference in these rankings.  Why?  Because any team in a conference of seven teams or greater will not have the ability to post an SOS that is as high as Wesley's because the teams inside the conference will end up making the SOS numbers stick closer to 0.500 (in either direction).  Teams with more OOC games (or an independent team here) have much greater SOS volatility.  Thus, the Committee should not place that level of scrutiny on SOS when Wesley is involved and has two more losses than the team directly below them.  I could understand if Millsaps were 6-1 slightly better, but the team is 7-0 and is vying for a Pool B slot against Wesley.  Wesley has one remaining D3 game (to go to 5-2 in D3 games) against... Alfred State.  Millsaps could finish 9-0 in D3 games and still get jumped by Wesley?  That makes me very uncomfortable under these circumstances.

The # of teams per conference issue should be addressed in the near future.  This year in Massachusetts HS football, a new playoff system was installed.  Overall it is a very long confusing set of rules, but one of the good things is how the number of schools per conference can become a factor. 

A dumbed down version goes like this:

6 divisions in the State (All broken into Central/West/North/South).
Central/West winner plays North/South winner
24 Teams in Central/West and 24 Teams in North/South
The top 16 teams in each side make the playoffs (28 total)

If your HS plays in a league with 5 or more teams, the top 2 teams in the league make the playoffs.  If the league has 4 or less, only the top team makes the playoffs.  After the league playoff teams are set up, a power ranking sorts out the rest of the teams to determine who takes those last spots, since many great teams actually do play in leagues with less than 5 teams.

Now, to get a little more confusing, if a 3rd place team has a higher power ranking than a 2nd place team in another league, the 3rd place team goes over the 2nd place team, if there are no more playoff spots.

Now MA HS football isn't as traditional as d3 is, as many leagues have broken up and changed, especially over the past 20 years, but the system does benefit leagues with more teams.  I think d3 could do something similar where teams that play in leagues with 7 or 8 teams, get additional SOS points or something like that for pool C bids.  This gives them more of a shot against teams that can pick and choose a weaker SOS for non league games. 

[Saxon73]

One, there's a shortage of Pool C bids as opposed to previous years. Two, there's just way too many quality one loss teams out there right not to consider a two loss team getting in. Three, just going to toss out a friendly notification that you're not winning the Courage Bowl!

I understand that what you are saying is the way it is done.

I was just thinking that the best teams at the END of the regular season should get in the playoffs.  In my scenario for example, the AU team at the end of the season would not be a 8-2 "quality" team.  They could be "considered" a 9-1 team as they would have beaten RPI.

Currently, "we've always done it this way."  I just wanted to post an alternative thought.