Pool C -- 2014

[art76]

In a perfect world, if I had a couple million to donate for travel purposes, my bracket would be as follows:

Region 1

1. Whitewater
8. Husson

4. Washington & Jefferson
5. St. John's

3. Wheaton (Ill.)
6. Centre

2. Johns Hopkins
7. Trine

Region 2

1. Mary Hardin-Baylor
8. Lakeland

4. St. John Fisher
5. Delaware Valley

3. Linfield
6. Montclair State

2. Hobart
7. CNU

Region 3

1. Mount Union
8. Lakeland

4. Wittenburg
5. North Central

3. Bethel
8. Hampden-Sydney

2. John Carroll
7. Franklin

Region 4

1. Wesley
8. MIT

4. Widener
5. Chapman

3. Wabash
6. Texas Lutheran

2. Wartburg
7. Illinois College

Whew! Poor Lakeland has to play both Mary Hardin-Baylor and Mount Union in the first round.   

Yeah, if money were no object this would be a lot easier that's for sure.

[Mr. Ypsi]

I'm pretty sure the NCAA does indeed seed teams - they just refuse to reveal to us peons what the seeds are.

[wabndy]

I'm pretty sure the NCAA does indeed seed teams - they just refuse to reveal to us peons what the seeds are.

The last time I saw a seeded tournament bracket, they had some crazy texas sub-bracket with a 2. UMHB playing a 3. Trinity in the first round.  Chalk this one up 100% to the NCAA's image minders not wanting to appear cheap. That being said, we have seen some improvements such as expanded bracket and no obvious 1 vs 2 island matchups.

[wabndy]

Trivia item.  Total number of teams per football region (per d3football.com - not that the NCAA would be a reliable source): North 53, East 70, South 57, West 64.  The smallest region (north) is easily looking at 2 Pool C bids and quite possibly 3.

[K-Mack]

I don't see Widener and DVC in the same bracket since the NCAA seems to avoid regular season match ups repeated in the playoffs.

They avoid conference rematches in Round 1 when possible considering the 500-mile rule, which is not the same as avoiding regular-season rematches in the playoffs.

[K-Mack]

Second Try

Here's how I would put the bracket together with the teams that Wally has selected:

Region 2

1. Mary Hardin-Baylor
7. Texas Lutheran

3. St. John Fisher
4. Delaware Valley

6. Centre
8. Hampden-Sidney

2. Linfield
5. Chapman

I don't think that there's any way the NCAA would set up 2 flights like that in the 2nd round when they could just have 1. If Linfield was unbeaten there's argument about how unfair it would be but since they lost I have much less of a problem sending Linfield to Texas in round 2.

When I made my bracket I basically came up with 4 team pods then paired those up into brackets of 8. I didn't even attempt to decide which quarter would face which in the semifinals.

And all you'd have to do is point to 2011 when Linfield was undefeated and got flown to Wesley (who had 1 loss) in round 2.....fairness has nothing to do with it!   

I've noticed that the committees sometimes, perhaps as a small form of rebellion, have gone by the flights mandate in Round 1 but have not shown a lot of concern for who has to fly in Rounds 2-4.

[ITH radio]

Makes sense KM.

The Committee chair admitted to us in our interview last season they take a top 8, take 1&2 in each bracket and then build from there. Seedings are used, just not published since the 500 mile rule may necessitate non-traditional (3v6, 4v5 etc) matchups.

[jknezek]

Makes sense KM.

The Committee chair admitted to us in our interview last season they take a top 8, take 1&2 in each bracket and then build from there. Seedings are used, just not published since the 500 mile rule may necessitate non-traditional (3v6, 4v5 etc) matchups.

Those would be traditional match ups. But we get what you're saying...  1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4v5... it's when you get the 1v3/4 that it gets annoying. Or second round 1v2/3...

[AO]

Makes sense KM.

The Committee chair admitted to us in our interview last season they take a top 8, take 1&2 in each bracket and then build from there. Seedings are used, just not published since the 500 mile rule may necessitate non-traditional (3v6, 4v5 etc) matchups.

Did he also say "THE TRUTH ABOUT SEEDINGS!!!??? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"

[smedindy]

That Concordia - Chicago team was kind of scoffed at by a lot of folks, then they up and did that to Bethel. I think Bethel played down to their competition just a smidge.

Even after the Bethel near miss, they were just 89th in Massey and 199th in Massey SOS. That, of course, matters not to the NCAA. They were second in the regional rankings in the North because that year everyone decided to lose a game except for you know who...

[ITH radio]

Makes sense KM.

The Committee chair admitted to us in our interview last season they take a top 8, take 1&2 in each bracket and then build from there. Seedings are used, just not published since the 500 mile rule may necessitate non-traditional (3v6, 4v5 etc) matchups.

Those would be traditional match ups. But we get what you're saying...  1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4v5... it's when you get the 1v3/4 that it gets annoying. Or second round 1v2/3...

Right, I meant the like the 2 vs 5 or other "annoying" matchups

[wally_wabash]

Makes sense KM.

The Committee chair admitted to us in our interview last season they take a top 8, take 1&2 in each bracket and then build from there. Seedings are used, just not published since the 500 mile rule may necessitate non-traditional (3v6, 4v5 etc) matchups.

Honestly, that's a poor reason to not publish seedings.  We're savvy enough to understand the travel constraints in the first round. 

Given a choice between seeing seedings or the post-Week 11 rankings though, gimme the rankings all day.  I want to see those so bad and there's no good reason whatsoever to keep those secret. 

[Mr. Ypsi]

Sure there's a good reason - it's the NCAA!

The only two more corrupt sports' organizations are the IOC and FIFA.

[K-Mack]

For the record, I don't think there's any way that 10-0 Centre gets all the way through Pool B and Pool C without being selected.  That's too much time on the table and eventually the committee is going to have to decide whether they want to be the group that sets the precedent for cutting a 10-0 team out of the tournament.  They won't do it.

To be honest, why should they? 10-0 is all the reason we need to see if a team should keep playing until they lose.

[wally_wabash]

For the record, I don't think there's any way that 10-0 Centre gets all the way through Pool B and Pool C without being selected.  That's too much time on the table and eventually the committee is going to have to decide whether they want to be the group that sets the precedent for cutting a 10-0 team out of the tournament.  They won't do it.

To be honest, why should they? 10-0 is all the reason we need to see if a team should keep playing until they lose.

I'm on your side, Keith.  10-0 is hard to do no matter what league you play in.  I think 10-0 should be an automatic ticket to the field.