The 2008 Playoffs Thread

[K-Mack]

Now that 3 of the 4 number 1 seeds lost in Round 2 this year, is it fair to state that next season, there should be no talk of the East not getting its own number 1 seed?  It seems the majority opinion has been that only an undefeated East team would deserve a Number 1, otherwise, MUC gets imported.  Well Cortland is still playing at 11-1, and I think would be a favorite to go to the final 4 against anyone other than MUC, had MUC not been imported.  Anyone of the other 3 number 1's apparently did not deserve the number 1 anymore than a one loss Cortland team did, and that should be remembered next year.

First off, how long you last in the playoffs isn't really germane to where you should have been seeded, since the committee can't work with with future information to determine seedings.

In the case of Millsaps, North Central and Willamette, they were all properly seeded based on what they did in the regular season, they just lost.

Even if length of stay in the postseason were the sole determinant to judge how strong a team is/was, there are a couple flaws with using that argument to bolster Cortland State. 1) It's kind of hard to use how far you got as a measure when teams are still playing. If Cortland goes on and wins it all, then yeah, hindsight would say they were as good as the other one seeds. But what if Franklin keeps on winning, might say it about them too.

2) Going through Plymouth State and Curry is not the same as having to play Muhlenberg and UHMB, or beating Aurora and Monmouth is not the same beating Oxy and losing to UW-W. All the teams still playing beat good teams and accomplished something no doubt, but I don't think the eight teams alive are necessarily the 8 best teams in the country, and even if they were, it wouldn't necessarily be because they are the last eight standing.

To the crux of your question though, it's not really fair to state that, no.

It's also not an East Region issue solely, since it was discussed that North Central, for instance, could have moved into the No. 1 slot in the West Region if that had been necessary.

The committee is not really charged with building one bracket for each of the four regions; they are charged with building four brackets with as few airplane flights in the first round as possible. It is wise, in that case, to build around the four teams most deserving of a top seed, and whenever possible, use geography to aid that cause.

I don't really see it as the East getting jobbed out of having a No. 1 seed in its own region like you seem to, because there are no regional birthrights to top seeds. They are earned just like every other slot in the field.

Obviously by nature of the AQs and such the field is going to be fairly well balanced with teams from the four regions. I think Cortland would have been a deserving No. 1 seed this season based on the schedule it played, but don't get undefeated confused as the sole determinant. Things worked out rather cleanly, but they could've been ugly.

Say in the case RPI was undefeated in the East playing mighty Endicott for its non-conference game while Mount Union, Willamette, North Central, Wabash, Case Western, Occidental, Trine, Monmouth, et. al. were all unbeaten too. And Cortland had lost to Ithaca just the same.

I wouldn't have had a problem with teams like Wabash, Case, Trine, Monmouth or RPI etc. getting bypassed for top seeds in favor of Willamette, North Central, Millsaps and Mount Union each having brackets built around them instead of making RPI a top seed and North Central or Willamette a No. 2 just to say an East team was a No. 1.

So I think it's perfectly logical to discuss this next year and into the future with the idea of seeding the brackets as best we can without breaking the flight rules.

Whether the committee will continue to make more than one team from the same region No. 1 seeds when they construct the not-officially-regional brackets is not something I can predict.

[K-Mack]

Not sure that's the best way to describe what happened in the West, where the top seed had to face the two other top teams in the bracket in the first two rounds. If that bracket had been properly seeded and matched up, they would still be playing, I feel confident.

ok, fair enough perhaps, but what about my question in general?  Should there be a blanket presumption next year that all undefeated teams outside the East are more deserving of a #1 seed over a 9-1 East Region team who perhaps lost only to another 9-1 team?

I understand what you're trying to ask. It's not a matter of East Region strength though.

It's a matter of a 10-0 team that stacks up well on the criteria being more deserving than any 9-1 team that stacks up similarly, and I don't think you're going to disagree with that.

What if the roles were reversed?

Let's say Montclair State, Delaware Valley and St. John Fisher all go undefeated (yes, pretend they beat MUC, or use Ithaca in this example) and no team in the South Region that plays similarly tough schedules goes unbeaten.

Would you contend that St. John Fisher should be the No. 3 seed in the East just so a 9-1 Bridgewater team can lord over the "South bracket?"

Wouldn't it be better to give MSU and SJF seeds no lower than No. 2 if they were both deserving, and build another bracket around Del Val?

[Ralph Turner]

In this year's playoffs and post-season Top 25, I don't want fans to forget Hardin-Simmons.  They lost on the road to UMHB by 2 (20-18) in the regular season and by a FG in the last seconds on the road in the first round of the playoffs (38-35).  How much is home field advantage worth?  3 points?

[K-Mack]

In this year's playoffs and post-season Top 25, I don't want fans to forget Hardin-Simmons.  They lost on the road to UMHB by 2 (20-18) in the regular season and by a FG in the last seconds on the road in the first round of the playoffs (38-35).  How much is home field advantage worth?  3 points?

It's the voters' duty to look at the playoffs beyond what round you were eliminated in for all teams, not just Texas ones

Other examples of teams that should come in pretty high despite going out early would be Willamette, depending on how far UWW goes, and ... maybe Trine ends up looking pretty good with a win against Franklin and a 14-0 loss to Wheaton. Cortland and Hobart played pretty good halves against MUC and could ride that for some votes if no one beats them.

[Ralph Turner]

I agree...

Willamette should ride UWW coattails if UWW runs the table.  Trine brought some respect to the MIAA.

Two great posts that I have seen are:

USee who remembered the Week #7 Top 25

and the UMHB fan who wanted to thank UW-SP for giving UMHB Home Field Advantage in this game!   

[usee]

The playoff teams I have seen live this year I would rank them:

Franklin
North Central
Trine
Wabash

I think Trine had the best defense of any of these teams but probably the second worst offense. Trine was a deserving playoff rep and much better than any MIAA rep I have seen in quite some time. they could beat many teams in the playoff field IMO.

[DanPadavona]

Keith, I think the basis for the frustration shared by my Eastern friend at Fisher is not so much based on who is/is not undefeated going into the playoffs, but the unfair expectations which seem to be placed upon the East to prove itself as worthy.

It seems to me the committee is placing Mount Union in the East because they don't feel a single team in the East is capable of being a Final 4 competitor.  And that the only way for us to "prove ourselves" is to beat Mount Union.  Well, Mount Union has lost only 5 games since 1996.  So from where I stand, the entire nation has to prove itself if one is measured against Mount Union's greatness.  Who in the Northern Region stacks up against Mount?  Nobody. 

I've studied D3 nationally for 2 decades.  I have immense respect for Western Region, which produces numerous strong teams between the WIAC representatives, St. John's, Linfield, etc.  If there is a region where top seeds should be distributed elsewhere, it is the West.  Any Western champion can play with Mount Union which was clear in last year's championship game.

In the South, you have UMHB and Hardin-Simmons.  As has been proven in the playoffs, the quality drops off significantly thereafter not withstanding the occasional Wesley or W&J run.  UMHB and HSU are special.  Nobody else strikes me as superior to Cortland, Ithaca, Rowan, Fisher, etc.

In the North, you have Mount Union.  What else do you have that is any better than the best of the East, or the best of the South after UMHB and Hardin-Simmons?  Nothing, as far as I can tell.  This year's undefeated top seeds didn't hold up come playoff time.

If the nation is waiting for the East to beat Mount Union to prove it can support a bracket, it is going to be waiting a long time.  Put Mount in the North, and the same argument can be made.  When is the last time Mount was beaten in the North bracket?  The early 90s?

[DanPadavona]

First off, how long you last in the playoffs isn't really germane to where you should have been seeded, since the committee can't work with with future information to determine seedings.

Actually it is.  It shows the committee overrated the top Northern seeds and the need to export Mount Union.  The committee should have a better idea of who is/isn't likely to win games.  Otherwise their only requirement is to sort teams by record which could be done by a trained monkey. 

[Ralph Turner]

Many of you have seen this, but I will share it for the rest of you.  Have a good week. 

BCS DECLARES GERMANY WINNER OF WORLD WAR II
US Ranked 4th

After determining the Big-12 championship game participants the BCS computers were put to work on other major contests and today the BCS declared Germany to be the winner of World War II.

"Germany put together an incredible number of victories beginning with the annexation of Austria and the Sudetenland and continuing on into conference play with defeats of Poland, France, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium and the Netherlands. Their only losses came against the US and Russia; however considering their entire body of work--including an incredibly tough Strength of Schedule--our computers deemed them worthy of the #1 ranking."

Questioned about the #4 ranking of the United States the BCS commissioner stated "The US only had two major victories--Japan and Germany. The computer models, unlike humans, aren't influenced by head-to-head contests--they consider each contest to be only a single, equally-weighted event."

German Chancellor Adolph Hitler said "Yes, we lost to the US; but we defeated #2 ranked France in only 6 weeks." Herr Hitler has been criticized for seeking dramatic victories to earn 'style points' to enhance Germany's rankings. Hitler protested "Our contest with Poland was in doubt until the final day and the conditions in Norway were incredibly challenging and demanded the application of additional forces."

The French ranking has also come under scrutiny. The BCS commented " France had a single loss against Germany and following a preseason #1 ranking they only fell to #2."

Japan was ranked #3 with victories including Manchuria, Borneo and the Philippines.

[Augie6]

First off, how long you last in the playoffs isn't really germane to where you should have been seeded, since the committee can't work with with future information to determine seedings.

Actually it is.  It shows the committee overrated the top Northern seeds and the need to export Mount Union.  The committee should have a better idea of who is/isn't likely to win games.  Otherwise their only requirement is to sort teams by record which could be done by a trained monkey. 

Not sure how you can say the committee overrated the top Northern seeds.  As Keith mentioned, the seedings are based on the results of the regular season.  In the regular season, NCC (#1 seed) beat Wheaton(#7 seed) at Wheaton by 23 points.  Trine (#2 seed) beat Franklin (#5 seed).  Since NCC smoked Wheaton and Trine beat Franklin, that would make the case against your argument that the committee did have a good idea of who was more likely to win games and justifies the seedings for the region.   The fact that Wheaton and Franklin played for the North Region championship doesn't mean the committee got the seedings wrong, it means that both of these teams got hot and played their best football at the right time of the year. 

I don't think there is anything unfair about MUC being exported to the East the past couple of years.  In 2007, MUC moving east did no favors to the other North region teams as UWW was moved into the North.  In 2008, you had no teams in the East that were undefeated.  Show me the case that says any of the one loss teams were more deserving of a #1 seed than NCC.  Putting MUC in any of the regions will make the rest of the teams in that region look weaker.  However, In 02, 05, and 06, MUC's toughest challenges in their championship runs came from teams in the North Region (Wheaton in 02 and Capital in 05 and 06).  In 02, MUC played John Carroll in the semis, and won 57 - 19.  JCU was exported to the East region as a #7 seed and won the region.   So I don't think it's realistic to say that there are no other teams in the North region that are better than the best of the East.  I think the playoffs in these years prove that's true. 

As a fan of a North Region team, I certainly understand your frustration in having MUC moved to the east the past two years.  However, IMO, I just don't think the facts support some of the comments made in your posts. 

[DanPadavona]

The John Carroll export was a one time deal.  If you want to bring that up, then you might also want to consider Ithaca's 1988 and 1991 D3 championships where they destroyed every team in their path...except for Eastern teams which gave them strong games.

John Carroll needed OT to beat Brockport, which was down to its 4th string quarterback.  To say John Carroll convincingly emerged from the Eastern Region bracket is a little bit of a stretch.

Outside of Mount Union, the North region has one meaningful win over the East in 2 decades.  And that game was in OT.

As far as which teams in the East deserved to be ranked higher than teams in the North...we'll answer that question this weekend.  If Wheaton gets blown off the field by Mount Union like they usually do, you'll have your answer.  Because for 2 consecutive seasons, the only teams besides UWW to give Mount Union a run are Ithaca and Cortland.

I stand by what I wrote, that the North bracket did not have a strong enough #1 or #2 to justify its bracket.  That went away when Mount Union moved East.  If they had moved a Western team into the North bracket again, I'd have no argument with Mount moving East.  NC and Trine did not hold up to playoff scrutiny.

[janesvilleflash]

Sounds logical, but wouldn't you be getting into flying teams?

[Pat Coleman]

The John Carroll export was a one time deal.  If you want to bring that up, then you might also want to consider Ithaca's 1988 and 1991 D3 championships where they destroyed every team in their path...except for Eastern teams which gave them strong games.

John Carroll needed OT to beat Brockport, which was down to its 4th string quarterback.  To say John Carroll convincingly emerged from the Eastern Region bracket is a little bit of a stretch.

And JCU's quarterback was on one knee, with a team playing its third consecutive road game, total of 16 hours each direction spread over three weeks. Those are fairly relevant "yeah buts" too.

[Small but Slow]

The committee has a difficult job determining the best 32 teams then trying to create the most competitive match-ups to create a tournament format to determine a true champion on the field.  "what-ifs" and "coulda beens" are always going to exist.  All a team can do is beat the teams they are matched against and take care of their business. 

[usee]

The John Carroll export was a one time deal.  If you want to bring that up, then you might also want to consider Ithaca's 1988 and 1991 D3 championships where they destroyed every team in their path...except for Eastern teams which gave them strong games.

John Carroll needed OT to beat Brockport, which was down to its 4th string quarterback.  To say John Carroll convincingly emerged from the Eastern Region bracket is a little bit of a stretch.

Outside of Mount Union, the North region has one meaningful win over the East in 2 decades.  And that game was in OT.

As far as which teams in the East deserved to be ranked higher than teams in the North...we'll answer that question this weekend.  If Wheaton gets blown off the field by Mount Union like they usually do, you'll have your answer.  Because for 2 consecutive seasons, the only teams besides UWW to give Mount Union a run are Ithaca and Cortland.

I stand by what I wrote, that the North bracket did not have a strong enough #1 or #2 to justify its bracket.  That went away when Mount Union moved East.  If they had moved a Western team into the North bracket again, I'd have no argument with Mount moving East.  NC and Trine did not hold up to playoff scrutiny.

There are no facts to base this opinion on. Are you saying that Ithaca, who lost to Mt Union 42-18 and Cortland, who lost 41-14, gave Mt Union a game and no one from the North did?? So if Wheaton loses this weekend 42-7 (which could happen) does that mean the east dominates the North?? Are you serious? You have to do better than that.

The East and the North don't get to play each other much aside from Mt Union (and they crush you just like they crush the North teams). So how many Stagg bowls has the east won? I'll answer...it's 6 since 1973. The West has 8 and the North has 21. Oh but wait....Mt Union is in the North. OK, pull out their 9 wins. Its still 12 North Championships to 8 west and the east is third at 6 (I gave the south 1 w West Georgia). 8 different North teams have won the Stagg, 6 different west teams and 3 different East teams.

I won't speculate on the strength of the North vs the East with a lack of hard data but I have a hard time saying the seedings aren't fair when Mt Union is playing teams that are geographically closer to them than any CCIW team.  Its also hard to follow your argument when you selectively use different time frames from 2 decades to 2 years. I think you have to look at the whole thing. Mt Union has been the story for the last 15 years and the East has had as much of a chance as any team to change that and they haven't. If you want to go back further than that the history books don't get much better for the East vs North story.