Pool C -- 2007

[CardinalAlum]

Can someone give me an idea on North Central's chances for a pool C bid if they should beat Carthage on Saturday and assuming Wheaton beats IWU and grabs the Pool B bid for the CCIW?  What else has to happen around the region to help their cause?

cardalum,

if you read the top of page 14 the first two posts give you all the info you need. the actual regional rankings should be out this afternoon and we will know where NCC sits now. the key is where the committee sees them vs capital and then it becomes an issue of how many of the situations need to transpire to create spots for 2 loss teams.

Thanks Usee!

[Pat Coleman]

New regional rankings:

http://www.d3football.com/dailydose/2007/11/07/third-regional-rankings/

[HScoach]

Does anyone agree with my opinion that the regions will be seeded as such?

1.  NORTH - Mount Union
2.  WEST - Whitewater
3.  SOUTH - Washington & Jefferson
4.  EAST - College of New Jersey

[Carl Menist]

Here it is --- enjoy!!!

East 
1.  The College of New Jersey  8-1 8-1 
2.  Curry  10-0 10-0 
3.  St. John Fisher  8-1 8-1 
4.  Rensselaer  7-1 7-1 
5.  Hobart  7-2 7-2 
6.  Cortland State  6-2 7-2 
7.  Widener  6-2 7-2 
8.  Hartwick  7-2 7-2 
9.  Ithaca  7-2 7-2 
10.  Alfred  7-2 7-2 
North 
1.  Mount Union  9-0 9-0 
2.  Wabash  9-0 9-0 
3.  Case Western Reserve  7-0 9-0 
4.  Wheaton (Illinois)  8-1 8-1 
5.  Franklin  8-1 8-1 
6.  Mount St. Joseph  8-1 8-1 
7.  Capital  7-2 7-2 
8.  Wittenberg  7-2 7-2 
9.  North Central (Illinois)  7-2 7-2 
10.  Carthage  7-2 7-2 
South 
1.  Washington and Jefferson  6-0 9-0 
2.  Wesley  6-1 8-1 
3.  Muhlenberg  9-0 9-0 
4.  Mary Hardin-Baylor  8-1 8-1 
5.  Salisbury  4-1 8-1 
6.  Trinity (Texas)  7-1 8-1 
7.  Randolph-Macon  8-1 8-1 
8.  Millsaps  7-2 7-2 
9.  Hampden-Sydney  6-2 7-2 
10.  Waynesburg  6-1 7-2 
West 
1.  Wisconsin-Whitewater  8-0 8-1 
2.  St. John's (Minnesota)  8-0 9-0 
3.  Central (Iowa)  8-0 9-0 
4.  St. Norbert  9-0 10-0 
5.  Bethel (Minnesota)  8-1 8-1 
6.  Wartburg  8-1 8-1 
7.  Occidental  7-1 7-1 
8.  Redlands  6-1 7-1 
9.  Whitworth  7-1 7-2 
10.  Wisconsin-Eau Claire  4-2 7-2 

The NCAA Division III Football Committee has released this week's regional polls. The top 10 teams by region, with in-region and overall records through Saturday, October 27, are listed above:

[theoriginalupstate]

Does SJF have a shot at the #1 seed if they end up 9-1?

[Bob.Gregg]

...so long as the committee members are adhering to the rules.  And if they're not, there are a whole lot of bright people watching this closely who are ready to call the committee out for blatant oversights of said criteria. 

And the calling out did what for MapQuestGate of the recent past?

Tell me the following is not a real possibility:

You and I are on the committee (okay, that's not possible) with 8 other people.
Team A is 8-1 on the board.  Team B is 8-1 on the board.  The other criteria are fairly even.  But YOU & I know that Team A is really 8-2 (loss to Geneva).  While that game doesn't REALLY count, with all other things being equal, I know Team A has another loss.  So, I vote for Team B.

The two teams, on established criteria are a virtual draw.  Team B got selected on a subjective, human factor based on a non-official piece of information.  Bias.

[labart96]

Does SJF have a shot at the #1 seed if they end up 9-1?

I think it depends on whether or not Wesley gets moved into the East Region bracket.  If Wesley comes over, then the best case scenario for SJF is probably a #2.  I do think, however that TCNJ will be seeded higher than SJF since their only loss was to Muhlenberg while SJF had the loss to Wick.

[Lance Harbor]

It's an annual tradition for me.  I put together my 2007 Pool C Breakdown --

http://bigredlance.blogspot.com/2007/11/2007-d3-football-pool-c-playoff.html

I'm sure I've left someone important off the list, but this is pretty good considering I don't understand all the intricate ins-and-outs of every conference's tie-breaker system.

[Pat Coleman]

...so long as the committee members are adhering to the rules.  And if they're not, there are a whole lot of bright people watching this closely who are ready to call the committee out for blatant oversights of said criteria. 

And the calling out did what for MapQuestGate of the recent past?

Tell me the following is not a real possibility:

You and I are on the committee (okay, that's not possible) with 8 other people.
Team A is 8-1 on the board.  Team B is 8-1 on the board.  The other criteria are fairly even.  But YOU & I know that Team A is really 8-2 (loss to Geneva).  While that game doesn't REALLY count, with all other things being equal, I know Team A has another loss.  So, I vote for Team B.

The two teams, on established criteria are a virtual draw.  Team B got selected on a subjective, human factor based on a non-official piece of information.  Bias.

I disagree. Non-regional games are part of the secondary criteria. It's an official piece of information.

[Ralph Turner]

Here it is --- enjoy!!!

East
1.  The College of New Jersey  8-1 8-1  Pool A NJAC
2.  Curry  10-0 10-0                               Playoff versus Coast Guard--NEFC
3.  St. John Fisher  8-1 8-1                     E8 versus Alfred
4.  Rensselaer  7-1 7-1                          LL at Union
5.  Hobart  7-2 7-2                                 LL   at Rochester
6.  Cortland State  6-2 7-2                     NJAC  at Ithaca
7.  Widener  6-2 7-2                              Pool A MAC
8.  Hartwick  7-2 7-2                              E8 at Utica
9.  Ithaca  7-2 7-2                                  LL versus Cortland
10.  Alfred  7-2 7-2                                 E8 at SJF

North 
1.  Mount Union  9-0 9-0                           Pool A OAC
2.  Wabash  9-0 9-0                                  Pool A NCAC  at DePauw
3.  Case Western Reserve  7-0 9-0           Pool B versus Ohio Wesleyan
4.  Wheaton (Illinois)  8-1 8-1                   CCIW at IWU
5.  Franklin  8-1 8-1                                   Pool A HCAC
6.  Mount St. Joseph  8-1 8-1                    Pool C        versus Thomas More
7.  Capital  7-2 7-2                                    Pool C        versus Baldwin-Wallace
8.  Wittenberg  7-2 7-2                              Pool C       versus Hiram
9.  North Central (Illinois)  7-2 7-2             CCIW at Carthage         
10.  Carthage  7-2 7-2                               CCIW versus North Central       

IBC -- Concordia WI
 
South 
1.  Washington and Jefferson  6-0 9-0    Pool A Pres AC
2.  Wesley  6-1 8-1                                  Pool B              versus Morrisville St
3.  Muhlenberg  9-0 9-0                           Pool A CC
4.  Mary Hardin-Baylor  8-1 8-1                Pool A ASC
5.  Salisbury  4-1 8-1                               Pool B                versus Frostburg St                     
6.  Trinity (Texas)  7-1 8-1                       SCAC  at Austin College
7.  Randolph-Macon  8-1 8-1                   ODAC  at HSC
8.  Millsaps  7-2 7-2                                 SCAC  versus Provisional BSC
9.  Hampden-Sydney  6-2 7-2                 ODAC  versus RMC
10.  Waynesburg  6-1 7-2                        Pool C             versus Westminster

USAC -- NCWC

West 
1.  Wisconsin-Whitewater  8-0 8-1        Pool A  WIAC
2.  St. John's (Minnesota)  8-0 9-0         MIAC at Bethel
3.  Central (Iowa)  8-0 9-0                     IIAC  at Wartburg
4.  St. Norbert  9-0 10-0                        Pool A  MWC
5.  Bethel (Minnesota)  8-1 8-1              MIAC  hosts SJU
6.  Wartburg  8-1 8-1                             IIAC hosts SJU
7.  Occidental  7-1 7-1                            SCIAC at Whittier
8.  Redlands  6-1 7-1                             SCIAC at Cal Lutheran
9.  Whitworth  7-1 7-2                           Pool B/C            at Puget Sound
10.  Wisconsin-Eau Claire  4-2 7-2         Pool C              versus UW-Stout

The NCAA Division III Football Committee has released this week's regional polls. The top 10 teams by region, with in-region and overall records through Saturday, October 27, are listed above:

[Mr. Ypsi]

...so long as the committee members are adhering to the rules.  And if they're not, there are a whole lot of bright people watching this closely who are ready to call the committee out for blatant oversights of said criteria. 

And the calling out did what for MapQuestGate of the recent past?

Tell me the following is not a real possibility:

You and I are on the committee (okay, that's not possible) with 8 other people.
Team A is 8-1 on the board.  Team B is 8-1 on the board.  The other criteria are fairly even.  But YOU & I know that Team A is really 8-2 (loss to Geneva).  While that game doesn't REALLY count, with all other things being equal, I know Team A has another loss.  So, I vote for Team B.

The two teams, on established criteria are a virtual draw.  Team B got selected on a subjective, human factor based on a non-official piece of information.  Bias.

I disagree. Non-regional games are part of the secondary criteria. It's an official piece of information.

Pat, does that include non-d3 non-regional games?  Are provisional d3s treated differently than NAIAs, d2s, etc.?

[Pat Coleman]

Again, referring to the link already posted:

First- and second-year provisionals are not treated any differently, as far as we can tell. These games would be considered here, in the secondary criteria.

• Results versus common non-Division III opponents.
• Overall win-loss percentage.

[Bob.Gregg]

Again, referring to the link already posted:

First- and second-year provisionals are not treated any differently, as far as we can tell. These games would be considered here, in the secondary criteria.

• Results versus common non-Division III opponents.
• Overall win-loss percentage.

They ARE treated differently by the NCAA, and the Regional committees, in that they are not included in the In-Region records.

And. in my example, if Team B didn't also play Geneva, there is no common non-D-III opponent.

So, I guess if they (games vs. provisionals) aren't OFFICIALLY treated differently, it would only be on the overall win-loss percentage, even though that's not really a D-III game.  But that distinction isn't indicated any where.

Okay, if that's what it is, that's what it is.  I just wish I could read that somewhere.

[Pat Coleman]

Bob, re-read for a second:

You said: "Are provisional d3s treated differently than NAIAs, d2s, etc.?"

I said: "First- and second-year provisionals are not treated any differently, as far as we can tell."

[Bob.Gregg]

Pat, I did re-read, and it was Mr. Ypsi asking the quoted question.

However, I maintain, with NCAA Rankings as my first piece of evidence, that they ARE treated differently.  I trust that your "as far as we can tell" takes effect AFTER that different treatment.