Pool C -- 2011

[Upstate]

And unless you have concrete proof of 'ducking' then it's not fair, right or just to accuse a team of it. Scheduling is hard at best and difficult at worst. I'm really disappointed with intelligent fans accusing other teams of ducking teams without regard to travel costs, conference schedules, other schedules and rivalries.

To me it's antagonistic (or sour grapes) and doesn't move forward a relevant discussion of Pool C, of which there are several things to discuss.

To wit:

Illinois College's schedule may not have been the best. They did schedule a natural CCIW opponent, but their conference is weak. I don't think Wheaton would be a natural opponent for them in any year, and when they scheduled Millikin they probably thought they needed that game to prep for Monmouth which realistically would have been the only way to make the playoffs. And Millikin is just down Route 36 from them.

So are you calling Pat a liar or a rumor monger?

[smedindy]

No.

I am saying they may not have 'ducked' a team. It's their institutional prerogative to just schedule nine games. From what I read, it was Widener that bailed. And having eight games was always a challenge.

But in general, there have been quite a few pejoratives about the schedules of some teams, when it may or may not be in their total control.

[HSCTiger74]

No.

I am saying they may not have 'ducked' a team. It's their institutional prerogative to just schedule nine games. From what I read, it was Widener that bailed. And having eight games was always a challenge.

But in general, there have been quite a few pejoratives about the schedules of some teams, when it may or may not be in their total control.

Smed, I admire your persistance in trying to have a reasoned discussion, but the way I see it this subject is Upstate's horse and he's going to ride it until it's dead. Then he's going to beat it for a while.

[Upstate]

No.

I am saying they may not have 'ducked' a team. It's their institutional prerogative to just schedule nine games. From what I read, it was Widener that bailed. And having eight games was always a challenge.

But in general, there have been quite a few pejoratives about the schedules of some teams, when it may or may not be in their total control.

Lets see here...

Pat says there's quite a bit of irony in the Bart/Wesley game because Bart had a chance to play Wesley & Bart declined and decided to stay w/ 8 games...

Doesn't get any more cut and dry than that...

[PA_wesleyfan]

 I will say it again. Hobart did not want to play Wesley!!! I have no idea what Hobart has said about it and frankly I don't care. I  know my information on the subject to be true. One department head said yes and someone else said no!! Upstate and I have gone over this before . The E 8 teams have also avoided Wesley with open dates. As have many other programs. I wouldn't be surprised if Frostburg St. doesn't try top drop them 

[Frank Rossi]

I will say it again. Hobart did not want to play Wesley!!! I have no idea what Hobart has said about it and frankly I don't care. I  know my information on the subject to be true. One department head said yes and someone else said no!! Upstate and I have gone over this before . The E 8 teams have also avoided Wesley with open dates. As have many other programs. I wouldn't be surprised if Frostburg St. doesn't try top drop them

We discussed it briefly with the Hobart AD and Head Coach on "In the HuddLLe" last night.  You guys are helping me realize how relevant our show really was this week!

[PA_wesleyfan]

frank
do you have link to it

[Pat Coleman]

Smed -- Widener/Wesley wasn't the game at issue, it's the Hobart/Wesley non-game. I think most people understand, including coaches, that change in conference requirements take precedence. It's choosing to play nobody, rather than Wesley ... that says something.

[Frank Rossi]

frank
do you have link to it

http://inthehuddlle.com -- choose the 11/13/11 show.

[smedindy]

Smed -- Widener/Wesley wasn't the game at issue, it's the Hobart/Wesley non-game. I think most people understand, including coaches, that change in conference requirements take precedence. It's choosing to play nobody, rather than Wesley ... that says something.

Ah, Ok.

That's one thing, I guess. But it all stemmed from others claiming "ducking" of games when they had a full schedule already.

Just thought it was part and parcel of the same discussion.

Carry on!

[Upstate]

I will say it again. Hobart did not want to play Wesley!!! I have no idea what Hobart has said about it and frankly I don't care. I  know my information on the subject to be true. One department head said yes and someone else said no!! Upstate and I have gone over this before . The E 8 teams have also avoided Wesley with open dates. As have many other programs. I wouldn't be surprised if Frostburg St. doesn't try top drop them

The only time Fisher has had a chance to play Wesley was when they already had Salisbury AND Mount Union on the schedule so let's not act like they weren't afraid of them...

[PA_wesleyfan]

  Upstate

   Wasn't bringing up old wars. Just using as an example of scheduling difficulties

[K-Mack]

But, that's no reason to arbitrarily exclude conference champs, even if there's not much of a chance they can win the whole thing.

Not only that (from 15 pages ago btw, I clicked on new posts and this is what I got), but how do you determine which conferences can win the whole thing?

There was a time Ithaca was the dominant program nationally, then the needle moved to Rowan and Mount Union, then UW-W joined the fray.

The 1994 champ was from the MIAA. Ten years later (and since) that was one of D-IIIs weakest conferences.

There was a time the SCIAC was thought to be so weak it didn't have a team in the playoffs from 1994 until it earned an AQ. Then Oxy went on the road and beat a MIAC champ the year after St. John's won it all from the MIAC. Now we've seen the SCIAC compete with beat North Central, Linfield and other championship-caliber programs.

There have been years when the SCAC and ODAC have sent teams to the Stagg Bowl, and other years when their champs have been drubbed in the first round.

The old 16-team system relied solely on the impressions of the regional advisory committees and shut the door on teams from a fairly decent conferences. The best example is Emory & Henry going 10-0 in 1998 but being behind Catholic, Western Maryland, Lycoming and Trinity -- the South Region powers of that era -- and not getting in. Three years later the ODAC champ was in the Stagg Bowl.

The great thing about this system is that it allows teams to define the strength of conferences through their play, not through opinions. We all think we know which teams/conferences will win in the postseason and which won't -- but isn't it better to know?

[K-Mack]

Direct specific questions for the Committee Chair for tonight's "In the HuddLLe" to the East Region Fan Poll Post Patterns -- Note the question by starting the post with ****

We go live at 7:30pm ET and expect the Director Solomen to join us in the second half of the 90-minute show.

The question I have is...if Wabash and Mount Union meet in round 3, where will the game be played? I wouldn't mind seeing Mount Union have to win a playoff game on the road in 2011.

A couple years ago -- or was it last year -- they would have had to go to St. Thomas, but Bethel beat them.

UW-W has been on the road a few times, but UMU, like, never. Someone has to go to Alliance and beat them IMO.

[HSC85]

But, that's no reason to arbitrarily exclude conference champs, even if there's not much of a chance they can win the whole thing.

Not only that (from 15 pages ago btw, I clicked on new posts and this is what I got), but how do you determine which conferences can win the whole thing?

There was a time Ithaca was the dominant program nationally, then the needle moved to Rowan and Mount Union, then UW-W joined the fray.

The 1994 champ was from the MIAA. Ten years later (and since) that was one of D-IIIs weakest conferences.

There was a time the SCIAC was thought to be so weak it didn't have a team in the playoffs from 1994 until it earned an AQ. Then Oxy went on the road and beat a MIAC champ the year after St. John's won it all from the MIAC. Now we've seen the SCIAC compete with beat North Central, Linfield and other championship-caliber programs.

There have been years when the SCAC and ODAC have sent teams to the Stagg Bowl, and other years when their champs have been drubbed in the first round.

The old 16-team system relied solely on the impressions of the regional advisory committees and shut the door on teams from a fairly decent conferences. The best example is Emory & Henry going 10-0 in 1998 but being behind Catholic, Western Maryland, Lycoming and Trinity -- the South Region powers of that era -- and not getting in. Three years later the ODAC champ was in the Stagg Bowl.

The great thing about this system is that it allows teams to define the strength of conferences through their play, not through opinions. We all think we know which teams/conferences will win in the postseason and which won't -- but isn't it better to know?

Very well said.  This sums up D3 athletics and really points out why it is different from the BCS.  The Division I basketball tournament even stuggles with this.  VCU is a case in point.  Many people went ballistic when they were invited into the tournament and they go to the final four.