FB: Southern Athletic Association

[Ron Boerger]

One problem is that the NCAA's guidance is vague.  "Here are a bunch of primary criteria, but God forbid we give any guidance as to which of them is most important."  That leaves it up to the regional committees themselves and they do things differently, and same for the national committee when the leadership constantly turns over.   And the national committee is not delegated the authority to tell the regionals what they should care about, apparently.

[Ralph Turner]

Yes to crufootball...

How will this year's committee value the criteria?

On the island, some time we win.
Some time we lose.

[Ralph Turner]

With respect to the BSC situation, I recall reading that BSC did not outline how it would repay the loan in the documents sent to the State Treasurer.

[jekelish]

With respect to the BSC situation, I recall reading that BSC did not outline how it would repay the loan in the documents sent to the State Treasurer.

On a similar note, I have not seen it confirmed anywhere so it's probably at least a little bit rooted in speculation, but someone I know who is in such circles told me this morning they were told BSC won't make it to 2024 because of all of this, as they basically remained open this semester spending money they THOUGHT they were getting, but because of the most recent developments, will never actually receive. I hope they can pull out a miracle, because that absolutely sucks of everyone who not only attends BSC, but the faculty and staff as well.

[jknezek]

The bonus D3FB ATN Podcast is well worth a listen if you have an interest in how the Pool C rankings are determined.  Spoiler alert: one of the first questions answered has to do with whether or not the national committee can override the order of teams provided by a regional committee.

I am not sure I have ever used this term but does anyone else get a gaslighting vibe ever time we hear from the national chairs. I feel like they say these things that brand new D3 fans can take but if you have followed for very long at all the statements just don't add up to a consistent logic?

What did he say that doesn't add up to you?

One of his last statements before the midway break "When you start to understand the process, it really makes more sense, if you are fan of a team you might still hold to that it doesn't make much, but if you really look back, it has really been fairly consistent at what we have looked in order to determine playoff teams".

I won't claim to be an expert, I would like to think I am an educated homer but almost every year I hear from you, Pat, Frank, etc. of how this is never consistent. I also won't pretend this is an easy process for them, this year especially is going to very challenging with only 4 at large picks but I have almost no doubt that there will be at least one thing that very educated and non biased people like yourself will tell us, well that isn't they way the national committee did things last year or the year before.

I think a lot depends on how you understand his sentence. The factors that they use are very consistent. The weighting of those factors can vary, but they are always looking at the same things. So yes, the committee changes every year, so the importance of SoS vs RvRR, or just flat out win percentage, play slightly different roles, but they consistently look at those metrics. So it just depends on your interpretation of "fairly consistent", which is a nebulous term anyway.

[Ron Boerger]

With respect to the BSC situation, I recall reading that BSC did not outline how it would repay the loan in the documents sent to the State Treasurer.

On a similar note, I have not seen it confirmed anywhere so it's probably at least a little bit rooted in speculation, but someone I know who is in such circles told me this morning they were told BSC won't make it to 2024 because of all of this, as they basically remained open this semester spending money they THOUGHT they were getting, but because of the most recent developments, will never actually receive. I hope they can pull out a miracle, because that absolutely sucks of everyone who not only attends BSC, but the faculty and staff as well.

BSC officials were quoted in one of the AL.com stories as saying they had to know by Oct. 31 so they could make a decision on continuing past this semester.  We'll see if they were just saying that in an attempt to force a favorable decision next week, because otherwise they're down by a TD on their 25-yard line with 2 seconds to go.  Hopefully they can pull an Alabama Miracle out of their hat. 

[crufootball]

The bonus D3FB ATN Podcast is well worth a listen if you have an interest in how the Pool C rankings are determined.  Spoiler alert: one of the first questions answered has to do with whether or not the national committee can override the order of teams provided by a regional committee.

I am not sure I have ever used this term but does anyone else get a gaslighting vibe ever time we hear from the national chairs. I feel like they say these things that brand new D3 fans can take but if you have followed for very long at all the statements just don't add up to a consistent logic?

What did he say that doesn't add up to you?

One of his last statements before the midway break "When you start to understand the process, it really makes more sense, if you are fan of a team you might still hold to that it doesn't make much, but if you really look back, it has really been fairly consistent at what we have looked in order to determine playoff teams".

I won't claim to be an expert, I would like to think I am an educated homer but almost every year I hear from you, Pat, Frank, etc. of how this is never consistent. I also won't pretend this is an easy process for them, this year especially is going to very challenging with only 4 at large picks but I have almost no doubt that there will be at least one thing that very educated and non biased people like yourself will tell us, well that isn't they way the national committee did things last year or the year before.

I think a lot depends on how you understand his sentence. The factors that they use are very consistent. The weighting of those factors can vary, but they are always looking at the same things. So yes, the committee changes every year, so the importance of SoS vs RvRR, or just flat out win percentage, play slightly different roles, but they consistently look at those metrics. So it just depends on your interpretation of "fairly consistent", which is a nebulous term anyway.

Either way it just a little frustration to hear that we just aren't getting it and mixing that with the notion that any win is treated the same no matter the score and it doesn't matter if you beat the #1 team or #8, just doesn't sound like great logic to build off of.

[wally_wabash]

The bonus D3FB ATN Podcast is well worth a listen if you have an interest in how the Pool C rankings are determined.  Spoiler alert: one of the first questions answered has to do with whether or not the national committee can override the order of teams provided by a regional committee.

I am not sure I have ever used this term but does anyone else get a gaslighting vibe ever time we hear from the national chairs. I feel like they say these things that brand new D3 fans can take but if you have followed for very long at all the statements just don't add up to a consistent logic?

What did he say that doesn't add up to you?

One of his last statements before the midway break "When you start to understand the process, it really makes more sense, if you are fan of a team you might still hold to that it doesn't make much, but if you really look back, it has really been fairly consistent at what we have looked in order to determine playoff teams".

I won't claim to be an expert, I would like to think I am an educated homer but almost every year I hear from you, Pat, Frank, etc. of how this is never consistent. I also won't pretend this is an easy process for them, this year especially is going to very challenging with only 4 at large picks but I have almost no doubt that there will be at least one thing that very educated and non biased people like yourself will tell us, well that isn't they way the national committee did things last year or the year before.

That's fair.  I think we kind of instinctually want to use the criteria as a series of filters and use that kind of logic to rank or select teams.  And just as soon as we think we've cracked the code, we get a new result that doesn't fit.  I've certainly had that frustration over the years.  I think what I've come to learn, or at least accept, is that there isn't one singular code to crack or one algorithmic way to apply the criteria.  They don't work in series that way. 

The primary criteria are simple, how to use them, much less so.  I think what I apprecate most from this week's chat with the chair is the explanation of how he's trying to harmonize the RACs, through the non-voting RAC chairs, to be as consistent from region to region about how they focus the data through the criteria.  I think this is an important step.  It's not new, I know other national committee chairs have also approached the RAC function this way, but the effort is appreciated and, if successful, I think will get us to the right four teams selected. 

[D3Navy]

Worth revisiting the Mississippi Miracle:

https://twitter.com/NCAADIII/status/1717903993333027039

[BSCpanthers]

With respect to the BSC situation, I recall reading that BSC did not outline how it would repay the loan in the documents sent to the State Treasurer.

The Treasurer claims this, the school has said they have laid out how and when they would repay the loan.  Don't know which one is telling the truth. Due to the treasurers behavior makes me believe the school over Boozer(treasurer).

[jknezek]

With respect to the BSC situation, I recall reading that BSC did not outline how it would repay the loan in the documents sent to the State Treasurer.

The Treasurer claims this, the school has said they have laid out how and when they would repay the loan.  Don't know which one is telling the truth. Due to the treasurers behavior makes me believe the school over Boozer(treasurer).

I'm pretty sure the school laid it out and the Treasurer probably feels there is no way it will happen. Frankly I suspect the Treasurer is correct, which is why a loan was the last resort. B-SC wanted a grant. They settled for a loan.

But how are you going to repay $30mm? You can't even make payroll. And frankly, you've rarely done anything financially correct in 20 years. B-SC 's track record does not inspire confidence, regardless of the plan they submitted.

I'm actually ok with granting B-SC the money, I think the school probably is in the taxpayer's interest in the long run, but I have no doubt that should the money be loaned, it's unlikely to ever return. I suspect the Treasurer, by his actions throughout the whole process, doesn't think the money is in the taxpayer's interest.

[Etchglow]

With respect to the BSC situation, I recall reading that BSC did not outline how it would repay the loan in the documents sent to the State Treasurer.

On a similar note, I have not seen it confirmed anywhere so it's probably at least a little bit rooted in speculation, but someone I know who is in such circles told me this morning they were told BSC won't make it to 2024 because of all of this, as they basically remained open this semester spending money they THOUGHT they were getting, but because of the most recent developments, will never actually receive. I hope they can pull out a miracle, because that absolutely sucks of everyone who not only attends BSC, but the faculty and staff as well.

If they were operating this year by dipping into reserves they thought they would be able to replinish via loan and the other gifts that were pledged if they were able to get the loan then it would make sense when the treasurer pointed out that they didn't have the assets remaining to secure the loan.  As we learned in the Depp vs Heard trial, just because you pledge something doesn't mean that you'll actually pay it...

[cush]

I just wonder if there is any plan for the BSC campus if the school does close. It would be pretty foolish for the state to just have the school become vacant

[jknezek]

I just wonder if there is any plan for the BSC campus if the school does close. It would be pretty foolish for the state to just have the school become vacant

There is no plan because the state won't own it. Whoever B-SC 's creditors are, maybe the bank the Treasurer has a problem with, will take control. Likely auctioned. But who the heck is going to buy it but the government is beyond me. It's really not a part of town you want to be in, so housing is out. There isn't much industry over there. The quarry next door won't need it. Legion Field certainly doesn't need it.

Frankly UAB making an honors campus or Auburn opening a Birmingham campus might be the best bets. But I suspect it will just add to the area's blight, sadly.

[tigerguy]

Looks like it's now all but guaranteed to be a rematch of Trinity vs HSU first round in San Antonio. Or is there a chance Hardin Simmons creeps ahead of Trinity in regional rankings so that they get a home game?