BB: Top Teams in West Region

[CrashDavisD3]

I am a UTT fan, and even though they won 33 games and were co-champs of the east division of the ASC, they do not deserve a Pool C bid. In the conference tournament they lost 3 of 5 games. Two of those games were to unranked opponents, McMurry and HSU. (However, it can be argued that all the teams that made it to the second round of the conference playoffs were really good teams.) It is too bad that a team with 33 wins is not even in the equation. If Linfield is in the discussion then UTT should be. Linfield is no more deserving in my opinion. Bottom line, neither team should be in the mix as there are others more deserving, such as P-P.



TexasBB

I am amazed each year teams with more than 30 wins do not get Pool C bids but teams with 15 losses and sometime more do and finish 3rd place or lower in the conference get in.

I have no problems if the TEAM wins on the field for Pool A bids with what ever losses they have and POOR SOS and POOR RPI but not for Pool B/C.



The process is broke....

[dp643]

The process is definitely broken if Linfield gets a Pool C. The west region is terrible this year and everything 5 on down should be sitting at home during the regional tournament. 2 teams should be flown in and that is that. Anything otherwise its ridiculous.

[ILVBB]

I have a problem with the statement "the west is terrible this year." What we know is that there are few teams with stellar records. It may mean that there are few great teams; it also may mean there is a degree of parity. What is wrong is a system which is based upon formula's which do not work in the west because of logisitics. Let the eastern establishment run the program for their benefits; this is what is wrong with D3.

[dp643]

Ok, maybe terrible was a harsh word, but the west isnt near as good as it has historically been this year. Like I pointed out numerous times, half the teams in the ASC tournament this year were at 500 or worse. 2 of the final 3 teams were under .500. This is from a league that consistently fills its 8 team tournament with teams that have 25+ wins with at least 6 of its teams.

You can call it parity, and to an extent you may be right. But this isnt good parity.

[El Hombre]

I am a UTT fan, and even though they won 33 games and were co-champs of the east division of the ASC, they do not deserve a Pool C bid. In the conference tournament they lost 3 of 5 games. Two of those games were to unranked opponents, McMurry and HSU. (However, it can be argued that all the teams that made it to the second round of the conference playoffs were really good teams.) It is too bad that a team with 33 wins is not even in the equation. If Linfield is in the discussion then UTT should be. Linfield is no more deserving in my opinion. Bottom line, neither team should be in the mix as there are others more deserving, such as P-P.

TexasBB

TexasBB -
A couple of points . . .

First, I agree that based on the criteria, there are several teams more deserving than Linfield.  Just look at the data that ranks the West region teams by each "selection criteria" mandated by the NCAA manual.  Pomona and Pacific are the first in line for Pool C bids, followed by a group of others, of which your team (Texas-Tyler) is part of.  And they are more deserving than Linfield.

Secondly, I commend you for standing on principle and displaying the honesty and integrity in standing up for another team (albeit not your own) based on the criteria.  It's nice to see someone not try to "spin" it so their team comes out ahead.  Let's hope the NCAA follows your lead so we all have restored faith in the system, especially the student athletes.   

P.S.  +1 karma (if I knew how!)

[idalogger]

I have no dog in this hunt, having had a son play for UPS the past 4 years who graduates this weekend.  But having seen every one of the teams in this in-region debate play (Linfield, Pacific, PLU, P-P) I think it is ludicrous that Linfield in even included in the discussion. Perhaps it's because of their reputation, but the Cats finished 4th in the NWC. Pacific should be in the discussion - they tied for the conference championship, after all. If Linfield is chosen, the rest of the league will be justifiably outraged.

A Rauh - Dittrick (Pacific's ace) matchup would be terrific.

The bottom -feeders in the NWC are light years ahead of Caltech, IMO.

I sincerely hope that justice is done in this situation.

[El Hombre]

I have no dog in this hunt, having had a son play for UPS the past 4 years who graduates this weekend.  But having seen every one of the teams in this in-region debate play (Linfield, Pacific, PLU, P-P) I think it is ludicrous that Linfield in even included in the discussion. Perhaps it's because of their reputation, but the Cats finished 4th in the NWC. Pacific should be in the discussion - they tied for the conference championship, after all. If Linfield is chosen, the rest of the league will be justifiably outraged.

A Rauh - Dittrick (Pacific's ace) matchup would be terrific.

The bottom -feeders in the NWC are light years ahead of Caltech, IMO.

I sincerely hope that justice is done in this situation.

Here's an idea - if the NCAA (or committee) wants Linfield to play for some reason, then make it an 8-team regional and let the best battle it out!  And yes - a Rauh versus Dittrick matchup would be great!  The scouts would love it too!

[Ralph Turner]

Here's my take on Strength of Schedule, motivated by arguments that people have made above. 
Linfield had 22 D3 wins. Pomona-Pitzer had 25 D3 wins, four of which were against Cal Tech.
I'm going to put them on common footing by looking at their best 22 D3 wins (so Pomona-Pitzer loses 3 of their wins against Cal Tech).
Next, I look at the winning percentage of the teams they beat. Beat a team with a higher winning percentage, we'll call it a higher quality win. 
And because Pomona-Pitzer played most of its games against SCIAC opponents, I'm docking every SCIAC team 4 wins (for Cal Tech, though one could argue that some of the NWC teams aren't much better...)
Now I'll order these winning percentages, and take partial sums.  (sum of your worst k wins as k moves from 1 to 22).
Now I'll plot these on the same graph.  It looks like this:

Pomona-Pitzer in orange and Linfield in purple.
Despite starting behind (due to the 0% winning percentage of Cal Tech for the first game), Pomona-Pitzer's quality win sum is running away from Linfield's. Using opponents winning percentage as our metric, strength of schedule is strongly favored towards Pomona-Pitzer.  Of course,  this isn't in the handbook as a primary criterion. But we can call it "drilling into the numbers".   
Given that I've only penalized SCIAC teams for playing a bad opponent (four times!), I'd guess that now bringing in opponents opponents winning percentage isn't going to help Linfield's case any (though that would be too time consuming) 
Pomona's wins are more impressive than Linfield's.

Richard, if you have the time and inclination, I would appreciate if you would go to the appendix in the Baseball Handbook and re-run the OWP/OOWP numbers according the criteria that are used across all D-III teams sports.

http://www.d3baseball.com/playoffs/2012/2012-baseball-championships-manual.pdf

Thank you. That will do more to help us understand whose data are "more" accurate.

[Ralph Turner]

I am a UTT fan, and even though they won 33 games and were co-champs of the east division of the ASC, they do not deserve a Pool C bid. In the conference tournament they lost 3 of 5 games. Two of those games were to unranked opponents, McMurry and HSU. (However, it can be argued that all the teams that made it to the second round of the conference playoffs were really good teams.) It is too bad that a team with 33 wins is not even in the equation. If Linfield is in the discussion then UTT should be. Linfield is no more deserving in my opinion. Bottom line, neither team should be in the mix as there are others more deserving, such as P-P.

TexasBB

TexasBB -
A couple of points . . .

First, I agree that based on the criteria, there are several teams more deserving than Linfield.  Just look at the data that ranks the West region teams by each "selection criteria" mandated by the NCAA manual.  Pomona and Pacific are the first in line for Pool C bids, followed by a group of others, of which your team (Texas-Tyler) is part of.  And they are more deserving than Linfield.

Secondly, I commend you for standing on principle and displaying the honesty and integrity in standing up for another team (albeit not your own) based on the criteria.  It's nice to see someone not try to "spin" it so their team comes out ahead.  Let's hope the NCAA follows your lead so we all have restored faith in the system, especially the student athletes.   

P.S.  +1 karma (if I knew how!)

Karma delivered!

[OshDude]

After finally digging into things with a bigger shovel, the order of my top five Pool C's in the West would be: Trinity, Pacific, Linfield, Pomona-Pitzer, Pacific Lutheran. Not sure how well that plays with the crowd – especially the LC and P-P parts for whatever reasons – but it's logical to my eyes.

Texas Tyler, Chapman, George Fox and a few others would follow in some order.

[CrashDavisD3]

After finally digging into things with a bigger shovel, the order of my top five Pool C's in the West would be: Trinity, Pacific, Linfield, Pomona-Pitzer, Pacific Lutheran. Not sure how well that plays with the crowd – especially the LC and P-P parts for whatever reasons – but it's logical to my eyes.

Texas Tyler, Chapman, George Fox and a few others would follow in some order.

So the West would look like this below with your viewpoint. The West only deserves 1 Pool C based upon the numbers NATIONALLY. So if the right thing is done next weekend Trinity will be only team in the WEST to get a Pool C fid

Pool A
CTX, La Verne, Whitworth

Pool C
Trinity, Pacific, Linfield

If things were right Linfield would be eliminated by a higher Pool C from another region then.

[El Hombre]

After finally digging into things with a bigger shovel, the order of my top five Pool C's in the West would be: Trinity, Pacific, Linfield, Pomona-Pitzer, Pacific Lutheran. Not sure how well that plays with the crowd – especially the LC and P-P parts for whatever reasons – but it's logical to my eyes.

Texas Tyler, Chapman, George Fox and a few others would follow in some order.

Ricky -
Can you please justify your ranking of Linfield over Pomona using the NCAA selection criteria listed in the handbook? 
Listed below is the side-by-side comparison of the two teams using the selection criteria mandated by the NCAA (thanks to Ralph Turner).  Based on the criteria, there is NO JUSTIFICATION (unless the selection criteria was NOT adhered to, and other factors were used to select the rankings).


COMPARISON (thanks to Ralph Turner):

"The West Regional Playoffs will be held at Linfield College next week.

The West Region Ranking showing Linfield (Lin) appearing for the first time this season in the Regional Rankings and being slotted ahead of Pomona-Pitzer (P-P) is hard to comprehend by the criteria in the Handbook:

Let's do a side-by-side comparing the criteria in the Handbook . . .

Win-loss percentage against regional opponents.

P-P .676 Lin .647 Advantage P-P

Strength of schedule against in-region competition (from the D3Baseball.com front page at time of this posting listed as "NCAA"):

P-P .510 Lin .509 Advantage P-P


In-region head-to-head:

No meetings this year between P-P and Linfield


In-region results vs. common regional opponents:

P-P 10-4 Lin 7-5 Advantage P-P

P-P vs Whitworth 1-0; UPS 1-1; Chapman 2-1; CMS 4-0; Cal Lu 2-2.

Lin vs Whitworth 1-2; UPS 3-0; Chapman 2-2; CMS 0-1; Cal Lu 1-0.


In-region RESULTS versus regionally ranked teams:

P-P 3-2 .600 Linfield 4-3 .571 (Advantage P-P which has a higher%)

P-P Whitworth 1-0; LaVerne 2-2

Lin Whitworth 1-2; Pac Lu 3-1


Conference postseason contests are included.

Neither conference had a post-season tournament.

By the criteria, Pomona-Pitzer should be ranked ahead of Linfield.

This is unacceptable.

[CrashDavisD3]

Linfield over Pomona - Why

OTHER FACTORS
Top 10 reasons
1) Linfield is hosting West Regional and Pomona is not
2) Linfield has won Regionals in the past Pomona has not
3) Linfield has Coach Scott Brosius and Pomona does not
4) Linfield is considered a better program than Pomona
5) Linfield did not have to play Cal Tech to lower their SOS Pomona did
6) Linfield plays at beautiful ballpark with real distances to their fences Pomona does not
7) Linfield is in Oregon and Pomona is not
8) Linfield played Chapman 4 times in 2012. Pomona did not
9) Linfield lost 3 times to George Fox.Pomona did not 
10) Linfield is a 4th place team in their conference. Pomona is not 

[El Hombre]

Ricky / Ralph -
Can someone ask Anthony Holman to look into this matter?
Based on his statements from his interview with Ricky Nelson, he should be very interested . . .

Especially his last statement regarding transparency - that will be important in helping to resolve this matter.

RESPONSES FROM ANTHONY HOLMAN (NCAA): 
AH: " . . . All of our Division III sports have criteria that each of our sport committees are bound by and use in terms of selection criteria, which includes things like won/loss percentage, strength of schedule, things like that, that the committee will review when they're making selections for the national tournament."

AH: ". . . And part of the staff's charge is to make sure that the committee is following those prescribed policies and procedures that have been outlined."


AH: " . . . I'm pretty involved in terms of providing data, stats and guidance, and making sure that the committee is being consistent in their review, making sure they're adhering to our policies and procedures. But the selection is really the charge of the committee. I'm just making sure that we're doing it by the book."

AH:  . . . "But I think for the most part everything that – the decisions that are made really have to be validated by the numbers that we're providing because that's the charge that's been given to us by the championships committee and consistent with the D-III philosophy."

AH: "What I would like to say is that – I would appreciate if you share with the readers – we made an effort to be certainly more transparent."

[BigPoppa]

I am still convinced that neither Linfield nor P-P gets a bid.