Pool C -- 2012

[wally_wabash]

I'm not taking issue with the strength of schedule, we already know that Concordia would have been selected based upon that criteria.  I'm taking issue with the idea of a regionally ranked win for Bridgewater over Endicott.  The committee has the right to devalue that criteria if they rightly acknowledge that it doesn't mean as much in this particular case.

But it is a regional ranked win for Bridgewater State over Endicott.  That's not really a disputable thing. 

I'm really not sympathetic to Concordia-Moorhead for not being in this tournament.  NOBODY who got left out shot themselves in the foot more directly than did the Cobbers.  There's not a more gut wrenching way for a team to lose a game than that (mutliplied by roughly 100,000x since it is also THE reason that they aren't in the field), but that result just doesn't get swept under the rug because it was gut wrenching and doesn't happen every day.

It's not disputable but as Pat and Brad noted, it is something to be weighed by the committee members based on their subjective judgment.  Their judgment was poor.

I think the quarrel is with the East RAC and the way they ordered their teams. Which I agree with you is questionable.  I think the process can start to get dicey if the committee is free to totally disregard the regional rankings.

[emma17]

I'm not taking issue with the strength of schedule, we already know that Concordia would have been selected based upon that criteria.  I'm taking issue with the idea of a regionally ranked win for Bridgewater over Endicott.  The committee has the right to devalue that criteria if they rightly acknowledge that it doesn't mean as much in this particular case.

But it is a regional ranked win for Bridgewater State over Endicott.  That's not really a disputable thing. 

I'm really not sympathetic to Concordia-Moorhead for not being in this tournament.  NOBODY who got left out shot themselves in the foot more directly than did the Cobbers.  There's not a more gut wrenching way for a team to lose a game than that (mutliplied by roughly 100,000x since it is also THE reason that they aren't in the field), but that result just doesn't get swept under the rug because it was gut wrenching and doesn't happen every day.

It's not disputable but as Pat and Brad noted, it is something to be weighed by the committee members based on their subjective judgment.  Their judgment was poor.

And in that interview Brad specifically stated that their goal is to create the most competitive playoff field they can.  IF that truly is the goal, then a greater degree of subjectivity would help since winning percentage and SOS does not tell the whole story.  I do favor inclusion of the D3 rankings in some manner. 

I would love to have heard a discussion amongst the committee regarding Bridgewater vs. Concordia-Moorehead. 

[SaintsFAN]

Hey Mr. HSCOACH........Witt plays in the same WEAK Conf.!!!!!!.....playing the same WEAK teams AND have a lower SOS than OWU and always get talked about and put on a pedestal?!!!!!...Yes I ask this Friday and got no response and it doesn't suprise me!!!!!!....OWU SOS .511 and WITT .428?!!!!!!...what will the excuse be in the coming years when OWU pees on your Witt parade?!!!!!!.....I'm sure it will be officials or field conditions or we didn't get the right nutrients that day!!!!!....this whole process is a losers joke!!!!....you have a conference that does it 2 diff ways in four regends!!!!......continue to let the moroons run the ship and this is what we get!!!!!

Wow.  I go back to work for a few hours and I'm now a Witt fan?   Don't tell Mount or I'll lose my gig.

LOL -- we always suspected this of you, hscoach.  I'm going to enjoy working with Brienza next year in the Booth. 

[art76]

All right, curiosity got the better of me and I have put together a process or formula, if you will, for determining Pool C bids that is subjectively objective. And you have to bite on a couple of premises, which are these: First, that the D3 and AFCA polls for the top 25 are large enough pools of votes to statistically be valid. The second, and perhaps larger pill to swallow, is that the NCAA selection committee would ever allow the control of the selection to be so objectified and taken out of their hands.

So here's my proposal, take both of the polls and list out every team that gets at least one vote and rank them from 1 to however many teams there are in the last poll. For example, this year in the D3 poll there are 38 with Willamette being the final vote getter. There were also ties in the mix and those teams get the same score. Then add the two columns (one from each poll), divide by two to get the average. Voilà, you have an objective ranking of the best teams in the country. So for example, Mt. Union is the top team in both polls so they get 1+1 /2 =1 the top ranking.

So I did this for all the teams that were listed in each of the polls. If a team was not listed in the other poll, it got a maximum score. For example, Muhlenburg is listed in the AFCA poll but not the D3 poll, so their formula looked liked this: 39 (max in D3) plus 37 (AFCA) divided by 2 for a ranking of 38.

If two teams got tied average scores I simply used SoS to rank them. Then I removed all the Pool A and Pool B schools and here's what I came up with (with their average score behind them) as the top teams not in Pool A or Pool B:

Heidelberg 11
UW-Platteville 13
North Central 14
Wheaton 17
Wittenberg 19
Elmurst 20
Concordia-Moorehead 21

Yeah, it's a game changer. The biggest caveat to this whole scenario is that the selection committee would not be able to select using the last week's rankings, because they come out so late. (The AFCA poll is posted on Monday afternoons.)

While I recognize that this formula cannot be used by the selection committee as it is, you would think that someone, somewhere could come up with a better way of objectifying the Pool C bids to get "the best" remaining schools into the mix. (Some have heard me sing this song in the past.)

[sigma one]

This is way overly-simplistic.  If OWU had beaten Wabash, at home on Homecoming, no one would be involved in this discussion.  And 28-0 is not a nail-biter.  And with the score tied 0-0 at half, the opportunity was there.  That's the RRO they needed.  Maybe Wittenberg, too, but the conference didn't permit it.  I am certainly not a fan of the power-rated schedule that the NCAC has been using (thank goodness that ends), but the Battling Bishops got a break in not having Wittenberg on the schedue (though I know the argument is at least that OWU would have had the chance to face them), and didn't take advantage. 
     I hear the frustration loud and clear; remember Wabash being on the bubble, first team left on the table that time.  Small potatoes, but if OWU loses only 6 seniors, they have the chance to prove themselves next year when mano on mano occurs. 
     Yes, heartbreaking for those 6 who are leaving after sticking with it for four years, three of them disappointing.  You just can't predict what will happen when a lot of fine teams are hanging there and the committee has a several tough choices to make.  I am amazed every year that Pat and the others at d3fb, Wally, and one or two others so closely predict the field.  And whatever happens in the selection process, someone is always supremely ticked off.  How many times have we heard it's not the best 32 teams, or the most deserving.  Whether OWU was among the most deserving is questionable; fans' emotions understandable after a long wait.  Great to see passion and participation from the OWU fans.   

[Mr. Ypsi]

art,

You need to do your homework more carefully - NCC and Witt were both pool A teams!

[hazzben]

@art

And calling the combination of two human polls "objective" criteria is quite the leap in logic. They are, by their very definition, a subjective interpretation of objective results. Heck, North Central is ranked ahead of Wheaton, who killed them at the end of the season.

And while the regional rankings have their issues, I also have more faith in coaches and AD knowing their region than coaches and AD's voting in a national poll. I've found this out first hand doing the d3fan poll. I feel fairly confident about the West Region teams, but even there, how I sort out teams with H2H and common opponents is merely subjective opinion. But when I have to rank East and South teams in particular, I'm acutely aware of how much less 'expertise' I have.

[smedindy]

Letting the d3football.com polls decide or even allowing them to have a glimmer of the decision this is just calling for chaos. That will allow for even MORE gaming of the system no matter what the East may have done to goose up Bridgewater (if they did so).

I love Pat's Top 25 but it shouldn't be anywhere near the selection process. The issue is that there's not a lot of data points in football but there never will be.

The issue lies with the RACs getting themselves in sync. It definitely isn't giving favoritism to those ranked in a poll or conferences that MAY have done better in the past or have a reputation.

[wally_wabash]

I shudder at the idea of the AFCA poll being 50% of anything that contributes to important decisions. 

[HScoach]

Pollsters have agendas.   Not a good idea.

[K-Mack]

Your implication, AO, is also like past implications that some teams and leagues 'dodge' games. There are myriad factors in developing a schedule and as discussed before, a 'tough' schedule for three years down the road may not pan out for several reasons.

You're trying to reason with a dude who has a negative 884 karma.

That's basically what the karma figures are for, man, to save you the trouble.

[smedindy]

Your implication, AO, is also like past implications that some teams and leagues 'dodge' games. There are myriad factors in developing a schedule and as discussed before, a 'tough' schedule for three years down the road may not pan out for several reasons.

You're trying to reason with a dude who has a negative 884 karma.

That's basically what the karma figures are for, man, to save you the trouble.

I had free time today...

[art76]

art,

You need to do your homework more carefully - NCC and Witt were both pool A teams!

Dang - I tried to make sure I didn't do that - ugh.

And, I know it's subjective criteria that I'm trying to objectify. It seems to me, at least, that's what we all are trying to do - objectify/verify the process so that the better teams get in. Please don't throw me under the bus for merely suggesting a concept. There are way too many holes in it for it to ever be considered as it is - but is there something better that could be put together that can be done fairly?

I think that's all any of us really want here.

[desertcat1]

Your implication, AO, is also like past implications that some teams and leagues 'dodge' games. There are myriad factors in developing a schedule and as discussed before, a 'tough' schedule for three years down the road may not pan out for several reasons.

You're trying to reason with a dude who has a negative 884 karma.

That's basically what the karma figures are for, man, to save you the trouble.

Hey Big Guru,  are you kidding me?   I am a serial smiter by little guru's def, and i NEVER gave the guy a single negative smite?
Just because you don't see eye to eye.  everyone has their own O

[art76]

Oh, and if you were wondering who it really should have been in my scenario, here they are:

Heidelberg 11
UW-Platteville 13
Wheaton 17
Elmurst 20
Concordia-Moorehead 21
Bethel 22
Pacific Lutheran 24