Pool C -- 2014

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Lots of folks seem to be using "because they pair nicely with Mary Hardin-Baylor" as a reason for putting TLU in the field.  (Not *the* reason, but *a* reason.)

I seem to remember a selection chair in the past say they pick the field, then start to look at pairings.  In other words, these processes are not interrelated.  Perhaps this is an old wives' tale.  But it would suggest that TLU's geography wouldn't be a consideration when their criteria are assessed as a Pool B or C candidate.

Can any of the poobahs confirm that this is how the selection process works?

Correct... I can't tell you how many times committee chairs have pointed out they don't look at the bracket until they select teams and at no time are teams selected or not selected because it would help bracket teams especially with travel islands. Furthermore, I have never seen an example of where this actually happened.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

When you say "choices" I just want to make sure to emphasize that it doesn't affect the choosing of teams, just the potential bracketing. The committees in all sports used to just be required to focus on first-round air flights but now have been told to focus on future rounds as well. The Endicott-Rowan winner going to UMHB last year was a prime example, as was Salisbury and St. John Fisher going to UW-Whitewater and St. Thomas a few years ago.

Expect brackets to look more like they did a few years ago, with more schools kept within 500 miles of each other beyond the first round.

This is certainly the mantra people need to follow. The division had a surplus and extra money for a few years, that tide has changed and even the money from the Turner/CBS deal is now getting smaller each year. Plan for no flights and be happy with any.

I thought it was just that the rate of annual increase was less than the average annual increase in travel costs?  The new CBS/Turner deal is not back loaded and was a 41% increase.

From everything I have been told:
- The former CBS deal with backloaded... the current Turner/CBS deal is frontloaded. You can hear Dan Dutcher say those exact words in the interview I conducted with him in September and Pat already linked to in this converation.
- Just because there is more money from the TV deal doesn't mean there is more money. For starters, Division III only gets 3.18% and the costs of conducting all championships in Division III has been steadily climbing for a number of years. The most costly have been travel and administrative (like referee fees, for example). Also, they allowed things to get a bit out of control in the past with flights and that hurt as well.

[Pat Coleman]

When you say "choices" I just want to make sure to emphasize that it doesn't affect the choosing of teams, just the potential bracketing. The committees in all sports used to just be required to focus on first-round air flights but now have been told to focus on future rounds as well. The Endicott-Rowan winner going to UMHB last year was a prime example, as was Salisbury and St. John Fisher going to UW-Whitewater and St. Thomas a few years ago.

Expect brackets to look more like they did a few years ago, with more schools kept within 500 miles of each other beyond the first round.

This is certainly the mantra people need to follow. The division had a surplus and extra money for a few years, that tide has changed and even the money from the Turner/CBS deal is now getting smaller each year. Plan for no flights and be happy with any.

I thought it was just that the rate of annual increase was less than the average annual increase in travel costs?  The new CBS/Turner deal is not back loaded and was a 41% increase.

This is correct -- smaller in comparison to how the costs are rising, but a larger overall number.

[hazzben]

Do you think the West could so something so a 9-1 Carroll makes the board somehow?

I'd be really surprised by this. They aren't ranking Mac, who beat Carroll. And they aren't ranking St. Scholastica, who is undefeated.

Mac is likely getting left off because of that horrible Hamline loss. And there's a lot of quality 1 and two loss teams that I think everyone thinks would handle Carroll.

If they get ranked (big if), I don't think they ever even make it to the board for consideration. The 'West' committee usually doesn't pull shenanigans with its rankings (cough...east...cough) 

[AO]

When you say "choices" I just want to make sure to emphasize that it doesn't affect the choosing of teams, just the potential bracketing. The committees in all sports used to just be required to focus on first-round air flights but now have been told to focus on future rounds as well. The Endicott-Rowan winner going to UMHB last year was a prime example, as was Salisbury and St. John Fisher going to UW-Whitewater and St. Thomas a few years ago.

Expect brackets to look more like they did a few years ago, with more schools kept within 500 miles of each other beyond the first round.

This is certainly the mantra people need to follow. The division had a surplus and extra money for a few years, that tide has changed and even the money from the Turner/CBS deal is now getting smaller each year. Plan for no flights and be happy with any.

I thought it was just that the rate of annual increase was less than the average annual increase in travel costs?  The new CBS/Turner deal is not back loaded and was a 41% increase.

From everything I have been told:
- The former CBS deal with backloaded... the current Turner/CBS deal is frontloaded. You can hear Dan Dutcher say those exact words in the interview I conducted with him in September and Pat already linked to in this converation.
- Just because there is more money from the TV deal doesn't mean there is more money. For starters, Division III only gets 3.18% and the costs of conducting all championships in Division III has been steadily climbing for a number of years. The most costly have been travel and administrative (like referee fees, for example). Also, they allowed things to get a bit out of control in the past with flights and that hurt as well.

I suppose I could also just ask Dr. Cureton about it next time I see him.  Completely forgot he was vice chair of the president's council.  I'd think he'd be a good advocate for the road to the Stagg considering he played college football. 

[bman]

Lots of folks seem to be using "because they pair nicely with Mary Hardin-Baylor" as a reason for putting TLU in the field.  (Not *the* reason, but *a* reason.)

I seem to remember a selection chair in the past say they pick the field, then start to look at pairings.  In other words, these processes are not interrelated.  Perhaps this is an old wives' tale.  But it would suggest that TLU's geography wouldn't be a consideration when their criteria are assessed as a Pool B or C candidate.

Can any of the poobahs confirm that this is how the selection process works?

Correct... I can't tell you how many times committee chairs have pointed out they don't look at the bracket until they select teams and at no time are teams selected or not selected because it would help bracket teams especially with travel islands. Furthermore, I have never seen an example of where this actually happened.

If it ever happened, it would have been Trinity placed against East Texas Baptist in 2003.  Those were teams that should never have played each other in round 1...

[ExTartanPlayer]

Correct... I can't tell you how many times committee chairs have pointed out they don't look at the bracket until they select teams and at no time are teams selected or not selected because it would help bracket teams especially with travel islands. Furthermore, I have never seen an example of where this actually happened.

If it ever happened, it would have been Trinity placed against East Texas Baptist in 2003.  Those were teams that should never have played each other in round 1...

I think you're missing the point.

The example here is the hypothetical selection of 2014 TLU as an at-large team specifically to give UMHB a travel partner, but both of the 2003 teams were automatic qualifiers; neither team was selected to help with travel.  They were certainly paired against one another to help with travel, which we've all acknowledged as a necessary evil after the field of teams has been selected.  For a parallel to your 2003 example, Husson is probably going to play at MIT in round 1.  Those are probably two of the bottom six or so teams in the field as a whole, but MIT might be the only team in the field within 500 miles.

[Ralph Turner]

Ralph,

Your picks seem plausible except for the North. The first issue is Carroll is considered being in the West region for ranking purposes. Given that North Central and Heidleberg are both ranked ahead of Chicago and Carroll doesn't even appear in the rankings, what makes you think either of those will jump those other 2 loss teams in their regions? I don't see that happening.

My bad. You are right about the North Central & Heidelberg issue in the North Region.  I think that both are still left on the table, with Chicago and Carroll sittng several teams off the table in line.

(I will be surprised if the North gets 3 Pool C bids.)

[WarhawkDad]

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.

Because of the #2 ranking of UMHB, they will probably make sure that UWW and Mount Union end up on the same side of the bracket and meet in a semi-final.
I disagree with the prior statement from KMack in the present bracketing.  The wording in the Manual has seemed to change to forcing a "clustering" of teams by geography, and the only way to create balance in brackets after clustering is to heed the 500-mile rule.  It seems to be a more strict set of sentences than what I previously remember.  The 2011 budget-busting bracketing may have forced more Round 2 and Round 3 flight awareness.

Okay, well Rowan played at UMHB in Round 2 last year, and H-SC played at Linfield, then in Round 2 SJFC went to UMHB and Linfield and Whitewater played. A more flight-conscious arrangement would have put the UMHB/Redlands Round 1 game in the path of the Linfeld/PLU game, and they weren't even in the same quadrant.

So whatever point you're trying to make might be correct, but it doesn't refute my original observation.

I know I am pulling out a post from a couple days ago but I've said this before a couple times: Everything that the NCAA has said suggests this year will be different.

Which could also mean that UWW and Mount Union could be bracketed into the same semi-final, creating a new Stagg pairing regardless. 

WHD

[Ralph Turner]

Lots of folks seem to be using "because they pair nicely with Mary Hardin-Baylor" as a reason for putting TLU in the field.  (Not *the* reason, but *a* reason.)

I seem to remember a selection chair in the past say they pick the field, then start to look at pairings.  In other words, these processes are not interrelated.  Perhaps this is an old wives' tale.  But it would suggest that TLU's geography wouldn't be a consideration when their criteria are assessed as a Pool B or C candidate.

Can any of the poobahs confirm that this is how the selection process works?

Correct... I can't tell you how many times committee chairs have pointed out they don't look at the bracket until they select teams and at no time are teams selected or not selected because it would help bracket teams especially with travel islands. Furthermore, I have never seen an example of where this actually happened.

If it ever happened, it would have been Trinity placed against East Texas Baptist in 2003.  Those were teams that should never have played each other in round 1...

That game was back in the days of the old "Texas Sub-bracket".
Another way to look at the bracketing from a geographic perspective is..

Who deserves to host a first round game?
Who deserves to host a second round game?
etc...

Is MIT hosting Husson really preventing a vastly superior team from hosting?
Somewhere in these rankings there is minimal difference/distinction between the actual strengths of the ordinals.

[wally_wabash]

Which could also mean that UWW and Mount Union could be bracketed into the same semi-final, creating a new Stagg pairing regardless. 

WHD

I don't think that has to happen.  Projecting all the way out the semifinals is probably dangerous anyway, but either way, if the committee is planning for the top seeds to get to the semis and are worried about travel four weeks into the tournament, Wesley is driveable to Alliance and UMHB is either going to have to fly or be flown to no matter what.  I'd bank on Whitewater and UMHB on one side, Wesley and Mount Union on the other side. 

I'm not sure what the official mileage calculator is for the NCAA (probably sponsorship dollars available there!), but google maps tells me UMU and UWW are 502 miles apart which equals a flight.  So I think you're safe either way. 

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

Which could also mean that UWW and Mount Union could be bracketed into the same semi-final, creating a new Stagg pairing regardless. 

WHD

I don't think that has to happen.  Projecting all the way out the semifinals is probably dangerous anyway, but either way, if the committee is planning for the top seeds to get to the semis and are worried about travel four weeks into the tournament, Wesley is driveable to Alliance and UMHB is either going to have to fly or be flown to no matter what.  I'd bank on Whitewater and UMHB on one side, Wesley and Mount Union on the other side. 

I'm not sure what the official mileage calculator is for the NCAA (probably sponsorship dollars available there!), but google maps tells me UMU and UWW are 502 miles apart which equals a flight.  So I think you're safe either way.

NCAA Calculator says UWW and Mount are 507 miles apart.

[wally_wabash]

Which could also mean that UWW and Mount Union could be bracketed into the same semi-final, creating a new Stagg pairing regardless. 

WHD

I don't think that has to happen.  Projecting all the way out the semifinals is probably dangerous anyway, but either way, if the committee is planning for the top seeds to get to the semis and are worried about travel four weeks into the tournament, Wesley is driveable to Alliance and UMHB is either going to have to fly or be flown to no matter what.  I'd bank on Whitewater and UMHB on one side, Wesley and Mount Union on the other side. 

I'm not sure what the official mileage calculator is for the NCAA (probably sponsorship dollars available there!), but google maps tells me UMU and UWW are 502 miles apart which equals a flight.  So I think you're safe either way.

NCAA Calculator says UWW and Mount are 507 miles apart.

Misisng an opportunity there.  The NCAA Mileage Calculator powered by Mapquest.  That could totally fund an extra flight or two.   

[smedindy]

Misisng an opportunity there.  The NCAA Mileage Calculator powered by Mapquest.  That could totally fund an extra flight or two.   

I like Google Maps!!

/true 'dat
//double true

[jknezek]

Which could also mean that UWW and Mount Union could be bracketed into the same semi-final, creating a new Stagg pairing regardless. 

WHD

I don't think that has to happen.  Projecting all the way out the semifinals is probably dangerous anyway, but either way, if the committee is planning for the top seeds to get to the semis and are worried about travel four weeks into the tournament, Wesley is driveable to Alliance and UMHB is either going to have to fly or be flown to no matter what.  I'd bank on Whitewater and UMHB on one side, Wesley and Mount Union on the other side. 

I'm not sure what the official mileage calculator is for the NCAA (probably sponsorship dollars available there!), but google maps tells me UMU and UWW are 502 miles apart which equals a flight.  So I think you're safe either way.

NCAA Calculator says UWW and Mount are 507 miles apart.

Misisng an opportunity there.  The NCAA Mileage Calculator powered by Mapquest.  That could totally fund an extra flight or two.   

No. We can't do that. The NCAA never exploits things for profit...