D3 Top 25 Fan Poll

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

So, um, I just noticed this in the Pre-Championship Manual:

Teams from the same conference may not play each other in the first-round of competition.

It appears that the all-SCIAC round one matchup is no longer an option.

That must have been added in recently because last year the Hardins had a round 1 rematch.

[Inkblot]

So, um, I just noticed this in the Pre-Championship Manual:

Teams from the same conference may not play each other in the first-round of competition.

It appears that the all-SCIAC round one matchup is no longer an option.

That must have been added in recently because last year the Hardins had a round 1 rematch.

Yep. I checked last year's handbook and in the same spot it said:

Teams from the same conference may play each other in order to maintain geographic proximity

[Mr. Ypsi]

So, um, I just noticed this in the Pre-Championship Manual:

Teams from the same conference may not play each other in the first-round of competition.

It appears that the all-SCIAC round one matchup is no longer an option.

That must have been added in recently because last year the Hardins had a round 1 rematch.

Yep. I checked last year's handbook and in the same spot it said:

Teams from the same conference may play each other in order to maintain geographic proximity

But as Pat Coleman noted on another board, the section is headed: "Should", not "Must".

Until we see the implementation, I wouldn't yet celebrate the end of "Island rematches".

[wally_wabash]

The change in syntax is significant though, yes?  I mean, why change that language in that way if you're still resigned to pairing ASC teams in the first round?  This feels deliberate and something done with an understanding between the national committee and whoever gives their suggested bracket the green light. 

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

D3 Football Map


2019 WEEK 6 TOP 25 FAN POLL

Rank	Team	Points	Prev
1)	Mary Hardin-Baylor (5)	197	1
2)	Mount Union (3)	195	2
3)	St John's	180	4
4)	UW-Whitewater	175	3
5)	Wheaton	172	5
6)	Muhlenberg	159	6
7)	Berry	148	7
8)	Salisbury	126	15
9)	North Central	119	10
10)	Ithaca	118	11
11)	Bethel	111	8
12)	Delaware Valley	91	12
13)	Wartburg	90	17
14)	Susquehanna	89	13
15)	St Thomas	84	16
16)	Chapman	83	T20
17)	Johns Hopkins	72	18
18)	John Carroll	65	19
19)	Wesley	60	9
20)	UW-Platteville	46	T20
21)	Union	34	25
22)	Cortland	31	T22
23)	Case Western Reserve	29	NR
T24)	Redlands	25	14
T24)	Whitworth	25	24

Dropped Out: #T22 Linfield

Also Receiving Votes: Linfield 21, Hardin-Simmons 19, Texas Lutheran 10, Illinois Wesleyan 6, Hobart 5, UW-La Crosse 5, Wittenberg 4, Hope 2, WPI 2, Baldwin Wallace 1, Bridgewater 1

Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

  1)   Mary Hardin-Baylor    197     ( 1,  1,  1,  1,  1,  2,  2,  2)
  2)   Mount Union           195     ( 1,  1,  1,  2,  2,  2,  2,  2)
  3)   St John's             180     ( 3,  3,  3,  3,  3,  4,  4,  5)
  4)   UW-Whitewater         175     ( 3,  4,  4,  4,  4,  4,  5,  5)
  5)   Wheaton               172     ( 3,  3,  4,  5,  5,  5,  5,  6)
  6)   Muhlenberg            159     ( 5,  6,  6,  6,  6,  6,  6,  8)
  7)   Berry                 148     ( 6,  7,  7,  7,  7,  7,  8, 11)
  8)   Salisbury             126     ( 7,  8,  9,  9, 10, 11, 14, 14)
  9)   North Central         119     ( 8,  8,  9,  9,  9, 13, 13, 20)
10)   Ithaca                118     ( 8,  8,  9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 22)
11)   Bethel                111     ( 7,  7,  9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 25)
12)   Delaware Valley        91     ( 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 20, --)
13)   Wartburg               90     (10, 10, 13, 14, 14, 16, 17, 24)
14)   Susquehanna            89     ( 9, 11, 14, 15, 15, 16, 19, 20)
15)   St Thomas              84     (11, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 19)
16)   Chapman                83     (12, 12, 12, 14, 15, 17, 21, 22)
17)   Johns Hopkins          72     (12, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 21, 24)
18)   John Carroll           65     (11, 13, 13, 18, 18, 21, 23, --)
19)   Wesley                 60     (15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18, 22, --)
20)   UW-Platteville         46     (14, 17, 18, 19, 21, 21, --, --)
21)   Union                  34     (10, 19, 19, 23, 25, --, --, --)
22)   Cortland               31     (15, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25, 25, --)
23)   Case Western Reserve   29     (16, 20, 20, 22, 23, --, --, --)
T24)   Redlands               25     (17, 19, 21, 23, 25, --, --, --)
T24)   Whitworth              25     (13, 18, 22, --, --, --, --, --)

26)   Linfield               21     (14, 20, 24, 25)
27)   Hardin-Simmons         19     (18, 22, 23, 24, 24)
28)   Texas Lutheran         10     (22, 23, 23)
29)   Illinois Wesleyan       6     (20)
T30)   Hobart                  5     (21)
T30)   UW-La Crosse            5     (21)
32)   Wittenberg              4     (22)
T33)   Hope                    2     (24)
T33)   WPI                     2     (24)
T35)   Baldwin Wallace         1     (25)
T35)   Bridgewater             1     (25)

[Captainred81]

I like where Berry and Salisbury are.  I'm thinking Berry could 'jump the hump' this year and maybe win 2 or postseason games. 

[desertcat1]

I like where Berry and Salisbury are.  I'm thinking Berry could 'jump the hump' this year and maybe win 2 or postseason games.

"How do you like me know?"

They / berry could drop out ? 

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

D3 Football Map


2019 WEEK 7 TOP 25 FAN POLL

Rank	Team	Points	Prev
T1)	Mary Hardin-Baylor (4)	196	1
T1)	Mount Union (4)	196	2
3)	St John's	180	3
4)	UW-Whitewater	175	4
5)	Wheaton	172	5
6)	Muhlenberg	159	6
7)	Salisbury	137	8
8)	North Central	136	9
9)	Ithaca	135	10
10)	Bethel	118	11
11)	Wartburg	99	13
T12)	Delaware Valley	98	12
T12)	Susquehanna	98	14
14)	Chapman	93	16
15)	Wesley	83	19
16)	John Carroll	79	18
17)	Cortland	71	22
18)	UW-Platteville	60	20
19)	Case Western Reserve	45	23
20)	Union	41	21
T21)	Hardin-Simmons	38	NR
T21)	Redlands	38	T24
23)	St Thomas	27	15
T24)	Berry	26	7
T24)	Linfield	26	NR

Dropped Out: #17 Johns Hopkins, #T24 Whitworth

Also Receiving Votes: Texas Lutheran 20, Whitworth 20, Illinois Wesleyan 8, Bridgewater 7, Baldwin Wallace 5, UW-Oshkosh 5, WPI 5, Hope 2, Brockport 1, UW-La Crosse 1

Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

T1)   Mary Hardin-Baylor   196     ( 1,  1,  1,  1,  2,  2,  2,  2)
T1)   Mount Union          196     ( 1,  1,  1,  1,  2,  2,  2,  2)
  3)   St John's            180     ( 3,  3,  3,  3,  3,  4,  4,  5)
  4)   UW-Whitewater        175     ( 3,  4,  4,  4,  4,  4,  5,  5)
  5)   Wheaton              172     ( 3,  3,  4,  5,  5,  5,  5,  6)
  6)   Muhlenberg           159     ( 5,  6,  6,  6,  6,  6,  6,  8)
  7)   Salisbury            137     ( 6,  7,  7,  9,  9, 10, 11, 12)
  8)   North Central        136     ( 7,  8,  8,  8,  9, 10, 11, 11)
  9)   Ithaca               135     ( 7,  7,  7,  7,  8,  8, 10, 19)
10)   Bethel               118     ( 7,  8,  8,  9, 10, 10, 14, 24)
11)   Wartburg              99     ( 9,  9, 12, 12, 12, 14, 20, 21)
T12)   Delaware Valley       98     ( 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19)
T12)   Susquehanna           98     ( 9, 11, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 20)
14)   Chapman               93     (10, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 18, 19)
15)   Wesley                83     (12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 17, 24)
16)   John Carroll          79     (10, 11, 12, 15, 17, 19, 20, 25)
17)   Cortland              71     (11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 22, 23)
18)   UW-Platteville        60     (12, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, --)
19)   Case Western Reserve  45     (14, 16, 17, 21, 22, 23, 24, --)
20)   Union                 41     (13, 15, 16, 23, 23, 25, --, --)
T21)   Hardin-Simmons        38     (18, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, --, --)
T21)   Redlands              38     (16, 18, 18, 22, 22, 23, 25, --)
23)   St Thomas             27     (16, 17, 18, --, --, --, --, --)
T24)   Berry                 26     (19, 21, 22, 23, 23, 24, 24, --)
T24)   Linfield              26     (13, 17, 22, --, --, --, --, --)

T26)   Texas Lutheran        20     (20, 20, 21, 24, 25)
T26)   Whitworth             20     (13, 19)
28)   Illinois Wesleyan      8     (18)
29)   Bridgewater            7     (21, 25, 25)
T30)   Baldwin Wallace        5     (21)
T30)   UW-Oshkosh             5     (23, 24)
T30)   WPI                    5     (21)
33)   Hope                   2     (24)
T34)   Brockport              1     (25)
T34)   UW-La Crosse           1     (25)

[bleedpurple]

The change in syntax is significant though, yes?  I mean, why change that language in that way if you're still resigned to pairing ASC teams in the first round?  This feels deliberate and something done with an understanding between the national committee and whoever gives their suggested bracket the green light.

Question/concern regarding the possible elimination of conference foes playing in the first round. Does this potential mandate come with increased overall funding?  If not, will the change lesson the creativity of all the brackets across the board as a measure to "tighten up" and make up for the increase cost of implementing the change?  Now, people may still be in favor of the change and that's a reasonable position. However, in my mind, the news would be better news if money came with the proclamation.  If not, the predictability and repetition of the rest of the pods may be a bit over the top because of the change.

[MRMIKESMITH]

The change in syntax is significant though, yes?  I mean, why change that language in that way if you're still resigned to pairing ASC teams in the first round?  This feels deliberate and something done with an understanding between the national committee and whoever gives their suggested bracket the green light.

Question/concern regarding the possible elimination of conference foes playing in the first round. Does this potential mandate come with increased overall funding?  If not, will the change lesson the creativity of all the brackets across the board as a measure to "tighten up" and make up for the increase cost of implementing the change?  Now, people may still be in favor of the change and that's a reasonable position. However, in my mind, the news would be better news if money came with the proclamation.  If not, the predictability and repetition of the rest of the pods may be a bit over the top because of the change.

I thought about this as well. Without increasing the funding, you are going to see more of the Eastern/Mid-Atlantic Pod teams playing each other until the Semi-finals. What you may find is one of the West Coast/Texas Pod winners flying somewhere in the 2nd round to fill-out the "travel pod". The NCAA has always been about the money and I don't see that changing. Barring  some strange teams winning conferences from varying locations, we are going to see this. This may upset quite a few West/North Region fans regarding playing a team they should play maybe 3rd round or Semi's in the 2nd or 3rd round, respectively.

[Captainred81]

A) I was obviously wrong about Berry.  Although, sometimes it takes a loss to get a team straight.  if they make it to the playoffs, they could be dangerous. 

B) There are so many scenarios in the playoffs that could happen to avoid flights.  If UMHB beats HSU this weekend, and then beats TLU later, that will most asuuredly leave 1 school from TX in the playoffs.  Also, it will open a space for potentially Chapman and Redlands to get in.  I think then you have 2 flights in the first rounds (similar to past years), and one flight destined for the 2nd round (also similar to years past).  Last year, by my calculations, there were 6 flights total, and that included a first round match up with UMHB and HSU.  If they had used this new rule, they would have added 2 more flights and potentially 3.  I guess the question is, how much of they budget do they use year over year?  I imagine that some years they come in under budget, which is always the goal, but it means maybe they could afford a few more flights.  I guess time will tell.  All I know for sure, is that I appreciate the fact that conference opponents may not have to play each other in the first round. 

[wally_wabash]

The change in syntax is significant though, yes?  I mean, why change that language in that way if you're still resigned to pairing ASC teams in the first round?  This feels deliberate and something done with an understanding between the national committee and whoever gives their suggested bracket the green light.

Question/concern regarding the possible elimination of conference foes playing in the first round. Does this potential mandate come with increased overall funding?  If not, will the change lesson the creativity of all the brackets across the board as a measure to "tighten up" and make up for the increase cost of implementing the change?  Now, people may still be in favor of the change and that's a reasonable position. However, in my mind, the news would be better news if money came with the proclamation.  If not, the predictability and repetition of the rest of the pods may be a bit over the top because of the change.

I think Jim Catanzaro and the national committee don't pursue this at the competitive expense of the rest of the bracket.  That group does their damndest to put together the best possible bracket given- and this is really important- the published selection and seeding criteria.  I don't think you had to read too hard between the lines in various post-bracket interviews with the Chair to know that there were things in last year's bracket that were not their first choice. 

[hazzben]

The change in syntax is significant though, yes?  I mean, why change that language in that way if you're still resigned to pairing ASC teams in the first round?  This feels deliberate and something done with an understanding between the national committee and whoever gives their suggested bracket the green light.

Question/concern regarding the possible elimination of conference foes playing in the first round. Does this potential mandate come with increased overall funding?  If not, will the change lesson the creativity of all the brackets across the board as a measure to "tighten up" and make up for the increase cost of implementing the change?  Now, people may still be in favor of the change and that's a reasonable position. However, in my mind, the news would be better news if money came with the proclamation.  If not, the predictability and repetition of the rest of the pods may be a bit over the top because of the change.

I think Jim Catanzaro and the national committee don't pursue this at the competitive expense of the rest of the bracket.  That group does their damndest to put together the best possible bracket given- and this is really important- the published selection and seeding criteria.  I don't think you had to read too hard between the lines in various post-bracket interviews with the Chair to know that there were things in last year's bracket that were not their first choice.

Agreed Wally. I'm reading this as a positive outcome until I see evidence otherwise. The interviews were really helpful in getting a sense of how hard they work to create the right bracket, but also how much their hands can be tied at times.