Pool C -- 2011

[smedindy]

It's not "reserving slots for the elite," Sir.  I said earlier that Salve would've deserved a bid at 9-1 in Endicott's shoes this year.  Salve is hardly "elite."  You need to evaluate these things on a case-by-case basis.  Endicott's scheduling is AWFUL.  WNEC's is, too.  The OAC has no choice in scheduling Mount Union.  The WIAC has no choice in scheduling Whitewater.  So, you are essentially requiring OAC teams and WIAC teams to go undefeated in games other than the monsters in their conferences.  There is no such monster in the NEFC.  You are allowing the NEFC a free pass of a loss in doing so, based on your statements.  You can try to distance yourself as much as you want.  We're so far from elitism in the brackets now with 25 Pool A bids and 6 Pool C bids, it's no longer funny.  It's having adverse effects on scheduling policies now for teams that CAN control their schedules.

It takes two to schedule, though.

Remember, we're dealing with trying to jigsaw together non-conference games where teams have limited slots and limited weeks to put them together. The OAC is easy - one non-conference game. And frankly, the NEFC and the ECFC are different because they're football only leagues, not a full-blown conference like the OAC or WIAC. Leaving the OAC over football affects every other sport.

[Mr. Ypsi]

This is what happens when the bracket show gets delayed, YPSI. Though I think this conversation would be better sitting around the room with adult beverages. By hour two we'd all agree on something. Maybe Ralph's point about D-2. Maybe about the NESCAC. Something!

I agree - especially about the adult beverages!

[smedindy]

That's the bowls. How about regular season schedules. Any reliable rumors from disgruntled insiders or just sour grapes from 8-2 or 7-3 teams?

Scheduling is pretty tough when you have conferences that have only one week and some that have multiple weeks.

I'm sorry, but what additional proof would you need of who's avoiding whom?  It's consistent with the scheduling policies we witness.  It's now up to you to tell me the proof you have that the NEFC is NOT avoiding those teams, with the exception of Salve.  Can you?  Didn't think so.

You're the one with the inside dope. Not a bowl schedule. I'm just saying its difficult to put together schedules with limited availability, and with contract that can be set up many years in advance and run for multiple years.

[Frank Rossi]

It's not "reserving slots for the elite," Sir.  I said earlier that Salve would've deserved a bid at 9-1 in Endicott's shoes this year.  Salve is hardly "elite."  You need to evaluate these things on a case-by-case basis.  Endicott's scheduling is AWFUL.  WNEC's is, too.  The OAC has no choice in scheduling Mount Union.  The WIAC has no choice in scheduling Whitewater.  So, you are essentially requiring OAC teams and WIAC teams to go undefeated in games other than the monsters in their conferences.  There is no such monster in the NEFC.  You are allowing the NEFC a free pass of a loss in doing so, based on your statements.  You can try to distance yourself as much as you want.  We're so far from elitism in the brackets now with 25 Pool A bids and 6 Pool C bids, it's no longer funny.  It's having adverse effects on scheduling policies now for teams that CAN control their schedules.

It takes two to schedule, though.

Remember, we're dealing with trying to jigsaw together non-conference games where teams have limited slots and limited weeks to put them together. The OAC is easy - one non-conference game. And frankly, the NEFC and the ECFC are different because they're football only leagues, not a full-blown conference like the OAC or WIAC. Leaving the OAC over football affects every other sport.

This is irrelevant to the discussion, except to the idea that the OAC and WIAC are locked in with the monsters on top for the foreseeable future.  The NEFC and ECFC are not.  You know, Endicott can't sit there and say, "We were undefeated except for that BIG, BAD WNEC team."  OAC and WIAC teams deserve that same free pass you're giving Endicott here; perhaps a larger one since Endicott's OOC scheduling is actually inside their own conference.  The OAC and WIAC could choose to double-schedule OAC and WIAC teams to eliminated all extra-conference play, like Endicott chose.  They didn't.  At least we can draw some level of comparisons by this.  We can't do so from Endicott.

[Frank Rossi]

That's the bowls. How about regular season schedules. Any reliable rumors from disgruntled insiders or just sour grapes from 8-2 or 7-3 teams?

Scheduling is pretty tough when you have conferences that have only one week and some that have multiple weeks.

I'm sorry, but what additional proof would you need of who's avoiding whom?  It's consistent with the scheduling policies we witness.  It's now up to you to tell me the proof you have that the NEFC is NOT avoiding those teams, with the exception of Salve.  Can you?  Didn't think so.

You're the one with the inside dope. Not a bowl schedule. I'm just saying its difficult to put together schedules with limited availability, and with contract that can be set up many years in advance and run for multiple years.

A bowl schedule is being influenced by the New England teams' gripes about the New York opponents.  Avoid this argument all you want.  There's no contract involved here.  It's a free opportunity to step outside the conference.  They're asking for it not to happen.  Salve will probably want to play a New York team, and I hope the ECAC Committee grants them that.  The other teams, though, are not going to do it.  It's time for someone to flex their muscle in the direction of the New England teams to force them to branch out a bit for the sake of the entire Division.

[pg04]

You can't reserve spots for just the elite. It doesn't work.

But giving pool C bids to crap conferences that, as a whole, doesn't schedule any meaningful OOC games does?

I thought we were looking for the best 32 teams?

They definitely aren't looking for the best 32 teams, so you are incorrect there.  It's more about chances than picking the best. 

[smedindy]

The WIAC actually plays a non-conference conference game. The WIAC has a lot of scheduling problems in football, which is a whole 'nuther argument. Stout played Black Hills St., Jamestown and UW-Oshkosh as their non-league games.

Frankly, you should be thrilled the NEFC doesn't take two playoff spots, like they could. They're actually helping get more "C" teams in the mix.

[smedindy]

That's the bowls. How about regular season schedules. Any reliable rumors from disgruntled insiders or just sour grapes from 8-2 or 7-3 teams?

Scheduling is pretty tough when you have conferences that have only one week and some that have multiple weeks.

I'm sorry, but what additional proof would you need of who's avoiding whom?  It's consistent with the scheduling policies we witness.  It's now up to you to tell me the proof you have that the NEFC is NOT avoiding those teams, with the exception of Salve.  Can you?  Didn't think so.

You're the one with the inside dope. Not a bowl schedule. I'm just saying its difficult to put together schedules with limited availability, and with contract that can be set up many years in advance and run for multiple years.

A bowl schedule is being influenced by the New England teams' gripes about the New York opponents.  Avoid this argument all you want.  There's no contract involved here.  It's a free opportunity to step outside the conference.  They're asking for it not to happen.  Salve will probably want to play a New York team, and I hope the ECAC Committee grants them that.  The other teams, though, are not going to do it.  It's time for someone to flex their muscle in the direction of the New England teams to force them to branch out a bit for the sake of the entire Division.

The bowl schedule is irrelevant to the regular season scheduling issue. The bowl schedule doesn't affect THIS argument.

The NEFC and ECFC HELPS all of D-3. It HELPS to keep these schools' football programs. It HELPS them recruit male students. It HELPS get male students engaged. It HELPS in growing the D-3 football footprint.

[Pat Coleman]

A 2-loss team doesn't have an argument, whilst a 1-loss team can come to the debate table.

In all honesty, there's no reason it shouldn't. The goal is to get the best six at-large teams, not the best six 8-1 and 9-1 teams. There's no reason one of those best six can't be an 8-2 team.

http://www.d3football.com/playoffs/2011/two-loss-teams-need-not-apply

[Ralph Turner]

I don't wish Pool B on anybody.  Poor Huntingdon. They were left out of the acquisition of the GSAC by the USA South. With an even-numbered conference in the SAA and the even-numbered new USA South, I don't know where they will find their games in October and November.

As for the "two-loss logjam", we can almost always reserve that scenario for a balanced conference race in any sport.  It may even happen in hoops later this year, just like the logjam in WIAC Men about 2-3 years ago.

As for not scheduling a hard opponent in OOC, then that just dooms Wesley.  If the E8 needs affiliates to keep the AQ, I am sure Wesley would love to have a home and some predictable D-III foes in October and November.

The advantage of a strong OOC opponent is for the teams that think that they will earn a bid and want to host in the playoffs.  North Central had a better chance of hosting the bracket with a quality win over a strong Redlands.  Redlands' win over NCC gave them a strong case for the Pool C bid.

[smedindy]

A 2-loss team doesn't have an argument, whilst a 1-loss team can come to the debate table.

In all honesty, there's no reason it shouldn't. The goal is to get the best six at-large teams, not the best six 8-1 and 9-1 teams. There's no reason one of those best six can't be an 8-2 team.

http://www.d3football.com/playoffs/2011/two-loss-teams-need-not-apply

I'm not saying I agree with it. I'm just being very realistic.

[WashedUp]

MIAC:  10-team conference, 9 conference games, 1 OOC.

MIAC only has 9 football teams (Macalester is independent).  So 8 conference games, 2 OOC.

[Pat Coleman]

A 2-loss team doesn't have an argument, whilst a 1-loss team can come to the debate table.

In all honesty, there's no reason it shouldn't. The goal is to get the best six at-large teams, not the best six 8-1 and 9-1 teams. There's no reason one of those best six can't be an 8-2 team.

http://www.d3football.com/playoffs/2011/two-loss-teams-need-not-apply

I'm not saying I agree with it. I'm just being very realistic.

As was our projection, but that doesn't mean it's the right way to go.

[smedindy]

But again, I can't see presidents and athletics directors of small colleges in New England forming football conferences for the sole purpose of denying SJF or Wheaton a Pool "C" bid!

[bashbrother]

I actually agree that the at-large bids,  should go to the BEST teams in quality that did not make the tourney.....  whether they have two losses or not.  Baldwin Wallace and Wheaton deserve to be in this tourney.  Just not as a #7 seed in the North  ;