Official 2010 PLAYOFFS reaction thread

[sflzman]

I can't believe Wesley (my alma mater) is the # 1 overall seed . If they get to the semifinals they won't have to travel to Whitewater or Mt. Union for a change. I think the way they gutted out their season and how they over came devastating injuries, they will get to the finals and have a great chance of winning it all.  Go Wolverines!!!
On a side note could someone tell me how St. Lawrence got in with a 5-5 record??

They won their conference.  Automatic qualifier.

D1 'March Madness' sometimes has teams with actual losing records for the same reason.

In the d3 women's soccer tournament, there was a team that got in with a record of 4-12-3....

[KitchenSink]

Did they get a #1 seed, too?

[bleedpurple]

Did they get a #1 seed, too?

Yes. Monster strength of schedule! 

[retagent]

Not to go overboard patting ourselves on the back, but I would think that the people who post on these boards are maybe the most knowledgeable people about who's who, and what's what in D III Football. I did not see one post in any thread (I may have missed it) that didn't presuppose that Mt Union and UWW would get #1 seeds in one bracket or another. The arguments meandered about who would get the other two. I think that says all you need to know about the lack of sanity in the selection process.

I know that what we have here is preferable to the BCS madness. It doesn't mean that it couldn't be better.

[jknezek]

What would a better system look like? To be honest, short of using only known quantitative measures like the NFL playoffs, there is always going to be human input. And it gets real hard to pick only quantitative measures in a "league" that has dozens of teams with no common opponents let alone H2H results. The vast majority of complaints that I've read are about seedings with very few complaints about who received the non-AQ bids. That tells me the committee pretty much did it right. As for the seedings... well, at least the teams get to play it out on the field, and that's what is really important.

As for me, I'd be tempted to go to a quantitative system, but that's because I'm a numbers guy. Rank the conferences and conference winners of the hardest conferences get the highest seeds in ascending order. No non-AQ gets a home game, and the weakest AQ conferences go on the road. Does this give the best TEAMS home games? For the most part yes. Some non-AQs would be somewhat shafted, but that's what you get for failing in your conference. How you rank the conferences, of course, would become the big debate and I'm sure some of the AQs from conference 17 on would be unhappy. Especially if you had a really good team year in and year out in a weak conference. But at least you'd have a known system to point to for why, as opposed to simply saying "the committee felt this was best."

This system also limits the impact of non-conference games, something I know a lot of people think is a mistake. But for the vast majority of DIII teams winning the conference is more of a goal than winning the playoffs simply because they aren't competitive with the top 3 or 4 teams. This is one way to throw AQs from conferences 10-16 a nice bone for taking care of business and prioritizing being a conference champion before you start thinking of being national champion.

Overall though, I don't think the current system needs much tweaking and I'd be pretty happy leaving it alone. I'm just thankful we have the tournament, especially a truly inclusive 32 team tournament, and we get to see the best team crowned based on results, not votes.

[raiderguy]

I'm just curious how a 10-0 team in the best (rated) conference in DIII got a number 5 overall seed..essentially. And I don't want to hear about SOS, b/c like you said...everybody in the region refuses to schedule UWW.

Here is the 2010 Handbook...

http://web1.ncaa.org/web_files/champ_handbooks/football/2010/10_3_football.pdf

1) On what page is the conference rating?

2) On what page is the explanation of how the conference rating is used to select and seed teams?

3) On what page is the explanation of how the committee should handle teams that can't find in-region non-conference games?

"Would you turn to the chapter that deals with code reds, please....".   

I am looking for the page that shows me where the mess hall is?

[hazzben]

Did they get a #1 seed, too?

Yes. Monster strength of schedule! 

+ k  That was a good laugh

[wesleydad]

ok, after a day of reading complaint after complaint about who is the # 1 overall seed and #1 in each region, i am confused by one thing that some of the posters have been doing.  what did wesley or ncc do to be personally attacked as programs by some posters?  all either team did was play the games and win them.  neither one pettitioned to be a #1 seed.  if you have an issue with the process or the committee so be it, but the personal attacks seem to be rather juvenile at the least.  if you dont think they deserve to be #1, then say so, but to insult the programs makes no sense to me.  what i know is that wesley will show up to play whomever gets sent to dover and i am sure that ncc will do the same.  at least the arguments about who should or shouldnt be dont matter in the end, it will be decided on the field.  thanks goodness, because if you listen to some, the only 2 teams that matter are uwww and mount.

[Blutarsky]

ok, after a day of reading complaint after complaint about who is the # 1 overall seed and #1 in each region, i am confused by one thing that some of the posters have been doing.  what did wesley or ncc do to be personally attacked as programs by some posters?  all either team did was play the games and win them.  neither one pettitioned to be a #1 seed.  if you have an issue with the process or the committee so be it, but the personal attacks seem to be rather juvenile at the least.  if you dont think they deserve to be #1, then say so, but to insult the programs makes no sense to me.  what i know is that wesley will show up to play whomever gets sent to dover and i am sure that ncc will do the same.  at least the arguments about who should or shouldnt be dont matter in the end, it will be decided on the field.  thanks goodness, because if you listen to some, the only 2 teams that matter are uwww and mount.

Maybe, because UWW and Mount are the one's who HAVE mattered for the past, oh, several national championships??  I don't see where wesley was being "personally attacked".......just go win one.

[Unbiasedd3fan]

It appears to someone who simply enjoys the vitality and honest effort of non-scholarship athletes, that the NCAA/ESPN System - whatever that might be - has overextended it's absolute arrogance in endeavoring to control how the process works.  I have always heard and read how difficult the various conferences are and many have stated how tough the conferences UWW and Mt. Union are in.  The other teams are good, but strength of schedule over the past five years indicates something also.  I cannot imagine another Division having a defending national champion or runner-up with such records and not having home field.

It will interesting to watch, but sadly obviously manipulated.  With all due respect to the other schools, I hope to once again see an all purple Stagg Bowl, just so Mt Union and UWW can celebrate their fine accomplishments this season and the past five years.  

[ncc_fan]

I think Pat's asking the wrong question on the front page.  It should be

Which of these teams should have gotten a No. 1 seed?"
A.  UST and NCC
B.  UST and UWW
C.  NCC and UWW

[Toby Taff]

Maybe, because UWW and Mount are the one's who HAVE mattered for the past, oh, several national championships??  I don't see where wesley was being "personally attacked".......just go win one.

I guess the point is this is not last year or the year before or the year before and based on this years SoS other teams have earned a shot at a #1 seed.  i don't like the BCS because of the subjectivity, why do I want to bring that to D3?  And this is from a fan whose team gets hosed every year 2 teams from the conference make the playoffs.

[wesleydad]

blutarsky, obviously you havent been reading different posts.  both wesley and ncc have been attacked for doing nothing but being chosen as #1 seeds.  not surprising to me though, that you dont see it.  it is the arrogance of a few of the fans for both teams that gets annoying after awhile.  most of the posters from both teams, some of which i know personally from being at the national championships the last couple of years represent their schools with class when they post.  Just go win one, wow that is a great explanation as to why neither one should be #1 this year.

[wally_wabash]

Maybe, because UWW and Mount are the one's who HAVE mattered for the past, oh, several national championships??  I don't see where wesley was being "personally attacked".......just go win one.

I guess the point is this is not last year or the year before or the year before and based on this years SoS other teams have earned a shot at a #1 seed.  i don't like the BCS because of the subjectivity, why do I want to bring that to D3?  And this is from a fan whose team gets hosed every year 2 teams from the conference make the playoffs.

While the handbook gives us some very objective criteria, the committee has chosen to apply said criteria extremely subjectively.  Based on the criteria that are published, we really don't even need a selection committee.  Anybody can sit down and crunch the numbers and rather easily pick the top six teams from the Pool C eligibles.  A computer could do it.  The committe is there, and I've heard K-Mack make this point in a couple of places around the site this week, to apply the criteria and make adjustments when things don't quite make sense.  One example of where they did this correctly is the Montclair/Rowan situation.  The numbers would have placed Rowan before Montclair, but the numbers are not so overwhelmingly in Rowan's favor as to negate the h2h result.  The h2h won out, correctly, and it would seem that an adjustment in the rankings was made to accommodate that. 

Anybody who even remotely has their finger on the pulse of D-III football knows that UWW and UMU live in their own little world right now.  They ROUTINELY make excellent teams look really bad.  So the SOS is a little down for UWW.  There's only so much UWW can do about that SOS.  They can't go win games for UW-RF (actually, they probably could if they sent a busload of reserves to RF for gameday).  I like using the criteria to guide the selection and seeding criteria, but those human brains in that room on selection Sunday have to be able to apply, when necessary, a little bit of a common sense correction factor to what the numbers spit out at them. 

[Toby Taff]

While the handbook gives us some very objective criteria, the committee has chosen to apply said criteria extremely subjectively.  Based on the criteria that are published, we really don't even need a selection committee.  Anybody can sit down and crunch the numbers and rather easily pick the top six teams from the Pool C eligibles.  A computer could do it.  The committe is there, and I've heard K-Mack make this point in a couple of places around the site this week, to apply the criteria and make adjustments when things don't quite make sense.  One example of where they did this correctly is the Montclair/Rowan situation.  The numbers would have placed Rowan before Montclair, but the numbers are not so overwhelmingly in Rowan's favor as to negate the h2h result.  The h2h won out, correctly, and it would seem that an adjustment in the rankings was made to accommodate that.  

Anybody who even remotely has their finger on the pulse of D-III football knows that UWW and UMU live in their own little world right now.  They ROUTINELY make excellent teams look really bad.  So the SOS is a little down for UWW.  There's only so much UWW can do about that SOS.  They can't go win games for UW-RF (actually, they probably could if they sent a busload of reserves to RF for gameday).  I like using the criteria to guide the selection and seeding criteria, but those human brains in that room on selection Sunday have to be able to apply, when necessary, a little bit of a common sense correction factor to what the numbers spit out at them.  

The objective criteria are always subjectively applied.  I do in fact have a good feel for the pulse of D3 football and think, as most do, that UWW and UMU will most likely be in Salem, but that doesn't change my opinion.  it appears that the committee went with SoS as the primary seeding criteria.  I think that's great.  It was a criterium applied rather than a hey we know they are the best so...I've seen brackets over the years that seemed to heavily favor one team or another and when the complaints come it is always you still have to beat everyone you play.  So UWW and UMU have to win them all, they just don't get them all at home.      Improve you SoS and you get the #1, maybe.  We in the ASC have dealt with that scenario more than once.