Pool C -- 2014

[USee]

Who knew in late September when the regional air traffic control facility in Aurora was set on fire, cancelling hundreds of flights, that our Pool C picture would be affected. But Chicago had its game against West Region #10 cancelled as a result of that incident and it could have implications on both teams come selection Sunday.

It's not just those two teams either, USee.  Let's say Chicago and Pacific played and Pacific won the game.  That second loss probably takes Chicago out of the rankings which then impacts Bethel's profile profoundly.  8-2, 1-2 vs. RROs with one narrow win over St. Thomas and two pretty bad losses to Wartburg and St. John's makes Bethel much less attractive than they are with that 2-2 RRO record.   And if Chicago had won the game with Pacific, I'm not sure they'd get a lot more than a little SOS boost and whatever benefit of the doubt capital comes along with having played and beaten the NWC co-champion, but I think we might be taking Chicago's chances at initiation a little more seriously.

This illustrates my main issue with the RROs.  A win vs. #11 and #10 is valued wildly different.  Bethel also handled Concordia, who should be knocking on the doorstep of the regional rankings but if they're not #10 it doesn't count.   Perhaps each region should get to rank more or less teams depending on how strong the region is.

How do you determine "strong" in a way that isn't 1000 percent subjective and self-serving? 

I completely agree with your points about this particular shortcoming of the regional rankings system.  One thing that they could do to add a little bit of depth of the regional rankings and how they are considered is- and this is novel- let any team that has been ranked at any point during the regional rankings process count as a ranked opponent.  We'll call it "once ranked, always ranked" and it will be glorious.

Genius! Let's use our vast influence to get it implemented! 

[ExTartanPlayer]

I don't think SLU falls out as their Coach is on the ERC. Besides 7-2 is still pretty good and SLU's SOS is very high (.6143) now after playing HOB. Plus they have the H2H over MoState who beat Montclair (last week's #8) H2H. I'm guessing SLU stays.

Dropping SLU now would be ridiculous.  I'd even argue they should remain as high as #7 (possibly dropping behind Ithaca).

I'm all for reevaluating a team's full body of work when polling & ranking, but if being 7-1 with a loss to Norwich & win over Morrisville State was a #6-worthy resume last week and kept them ahead of MIT, Lycoming, and the other contenders, it certainly doesn't make sense to move them beneath those teams after a two-point loss to regional #2 Hobart.  That's the worst kind of "dropping teams that lose and raising teams that win regardless of quality of result" movement.

Summarized: if SLU was #6 and MIT was #7 last week, and the only new data is Hobart 29, SLU 27 + MIT 55, Maine Maritime 37, I see no rational argument for dropping SLU beneath MIT this week.  Lycoming beat a 3-6 team by a point, Montclair lost, etc.  No reasonable argument for moving anyone, save Ithaca, ahead of them (and if Morrisville St. jumps SLU, then I'll really blow a gasket).

[K-Mack]

This board this time of year is one of my favorite things. I will often read a post, have a reaction, and the next post will say the same thing I would have said.

One thing I didn't see mentioned in the separation between picking the 32 teams and then matching them. TLU would probably be in on the merits, but I honestly don't believe if it were close, they'd get put in to save a flight. Remember that the committee is a bunch of coaches and commissioners who want to see the process work and get the best teams in, because some day in theory it would affect them. (Raeburn is obviously going to have to recuse himself for much of the Pool C chat)

The penny-pinchers are separate from the committee. There was at least one year where we know the matchups got changed from the bracket the committee made and the NCAA approved because there was an unneccessary flight in there, which suggests to me that even though the committee probably knows the impact of its decisions, the penny pinching happens in the matchup phase, not in the team selection phase.

[K-Mack]

A Framingham loss will help the South Region contenders.

For the 8 at-large bids, and assuming no surprises this weekend, here are my picks.

Wesley is in at Pool B1.
Centre will be undefeated and earns a bid, B2/C.
Texas Lutheran (also B2/C is a one-loss to UMHB. This is a bus ride for the first round.  TLU has the credientials to be at least the 8th best at large team.)
I like the UMU/John Carroll loser.
I like the Widener/Del Valley loser.
Wabash (especially if H-SC clinches the ODAC)

I have these on the table with two bids left:

Bethel (with losses to Wartburg and the Johnnies), then UW-Oshkosh.
Framingham State  (B/C)
Muhlenberg, then Thomas More (a loss to Wesley and to W&J.)
Carroll, then Chicago.

Of that group, Bethel gets in. Playing Wartburg and Chicago in addition to the MIAC really helps. The Royals could have as many as five results vs. RROs.

There are a lot of teams who could benefit from an apple-cart upsetting upset or two.

[crufootball]

Who knew in late September when the regional air traffic control facility in Aurora was set on fire, cancelling hundreds of flights, that our Pool C picture would be affected. But Chicago had its game against West Region #10 cancelled as a result of that incident and it could have implications on both teams come selection Sunday.

It's not just those two teams either, USee.  Let's say Chicago and Pacific played and Pacific won the game.  That second loss probably takes Chicago out of the rankings which then impacts Bethel's profile profoundly.  8-2, 1-2 vs. RROs with one narrow win over St. Thomas and two pretty bad losses to Wartburg and St. John's makes Bethel much less attractive than they are with that 2-2 RRO record.   And if Chicago had won the game with Pacific, I'm not sure they'd get a lot more than a little SOS boost and whatever benefit of the doubt capital comes along with having played and beaten the NWC co-champion, but I think we might be taking Chicago's chances at initiation a little more seriously.

This illustrates my main issue with the RROs.  A win vs. #11 and #10 is valued wildly different.  Bethel also handled Concordia, who should be knocking on the doorstep of the regional rankings but if they're not #10 it doesn't count.   Perhaps each region should get to rank more or less teams depending on how strong the region is.

How do you determine "strong" in a way that isn't 1000 percent subjective and self-serving? 

I completely agree with your points about this particular shortcoming of the regional rankings system.  One thing that they could do to add a little bit of depth of the regional rankings and how they are considered is- and this is novel- let any team that has been ranked at any point during the regional rankings process count as a ranked opponent.  We'll call it "once ranked, always ranked" and it will be glorious.

Am I making things up or didn't D3 used to have that?

[MonroviaCat]

Who knew in late September when the regional air traffic control facility in Aurora was set on fire, cancelling hundreds of flights, that our Pool C picture would be affected. But Chicago had its game against West Region #10 cancelled as a result of that incident and it could have implications on both teams come selection Sunday.

It's not just those two teams either, USee.  Let's say Chicago and Pacific played and Pacific won the game.  That second loss probably takes Chicago out of the rankings which then impacts Bethel's profile profoundly.  8-2, 1-2 vs. RROs with one narrow win over St. Thomas and two pretty bad losses to Wartburg and St. John's makes Bethel much less attractive than they are with that 2-2 RRO record.   And if Chicago had won the game with Pacific, I'm not sure they'd get a lot more than a little SOS boost and whatever benefit of the doubt capital comes along with having played and beaten the NWC co-champion, but I think we might be taking Chicago's chances at initiation a little more seriously.

This illustrates my main issue with the RROs.  A win vs. #11 and #10 is valued wildly different.  Bethel also handled Concordia, who should be knocking on the doorstep of the regional rankings but if they're not #10 it doesn't count.   Perhaps each region should get to rank more or less teams depending on how strong the region is.

How do you determine "strong" in a way that isn't 1000 percent subjective and self-serving? 

I completely agree with your points about this particular shortcoming of the regional rankings system.  One thing that they could do to add a little bit of depth of the regional rankings and how they are considered is- and this is novel- let any team that has been ranked at any point during the regional rankings process count as a ranked opponent.  We'll call it "once ranked, always ranked" and it will be glorious.

Am I making things up or didn't D3 used to have that?

Yes---Wally forgot his sarcasm /sarcasm coding.

[wally_wabash]

I missed this last week and I'm not finding anything in the obvious locations- is the NCAA putting out the regional data sheets with the rankings this year?  I've seen them do this in other sports. 

[crufootball]

Who knew in late September when the regional air traffic control facility in Aurora was set on fire, cancelling hundreds of flights, that our Pool C picture would be affected. But Chicago had its game against West Region #10 cancelled as a result of that incident and it could have implications on both teams come selection Sunday.

It's not just those two teams either, USee.  Let's say Chicago and Pacific played and Pacific won the game.  That second loss probably takes Chicago out of the rankings which then impacts Bethel's profile profoundly.  8-2, 1-2 vs. RROs with one narrow win over St. Thomas and two pretty bad losses to Wartburg and St. John's makes Bethel much less attractive than they are with that 2-2 RRO record.   And if Chicago had won the game with Pacific, I'm not sure they'd get a lot more than a little SOS boost and whatever benefit of the doubt capital comes along with having played and beaten the NWC co-champion, but I think we might be taking Chicago's chances at initiation a little more seriously.

This illustrates my main issue with the RROs.  A win vs. #11 and #10 is valued wildly different.  Bethel also handled Concordia, who should be knocking on the doorstep of the regional rankings but if they're not #10 it doesn't count.   Perhaps each region should get to rank more or less teams depending on how strong the region is.

How do you determine "strong" in a way that isn't 1000 percent subjective and self-serving? 

I completely agree with your points about this particular shortcoming of the regional rankings system.  One thing that they could do to add a little bit of depth of the regional rankings and how they are considered is- and this is novel- let any team that has been ranked at any point during the regional rankings process count as a ranked opponent.  We'll call it "once ranked, always ranked" and it will be glorious.

Am I making things up or didn't D3 used to have that?

Yes---Wally forgot his sarcasm /sarcasm coding.

Haha I thought there might be sarcasm but I wasn't sure, was there a stated reason to leaving that data off'?

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

I missed this last week and I'm not finding anything in the obvious locations- is the NCAA putting out the regional data sheets with the rankings this year?  I've seen them do this in other sports.

Hmm... I just looked at last week's and didn't see it. Great question someone else might be able to answer while I go searching . That being said, it is a rather easy number to come up with in football (versus basketball which uses a multiplier), so here is D3football's page with SOS data: http://www.d3football.com/seasons/2014/schedule?tmpl=sos-template

[AO]

Haha I thought there might be sarcasm but I wasn't sure, was there a stated reason to leaving that data off'?

Scheduling quirks.  If team A might have been ranked highly after week 9 but then lost 2 games which dropped them to 18th, wins against Team A shouldn't be a "top 10 win".

[AO]

I missed this last week and I'm not finding anything in the obvious locations- is the NCAA putting out the regional data sheets with the rankings this year?  I've seen them do this in other sports.

Hmm... I just looked at last week's and didn't see it. Great question someone else might be able to answer while I go searching . That being said, it is a rather easy number to come up with in football (versus basketball which uses a multiplier), so here is D3football's page with SOS data: http://www.d3football.com/seasons/2014/schedule?tmpl=sos-template

I'm sure D3football can get it right, but I'd prefer that the NCAA prove that their numbers are correct.

[wally_wabash]

I missed this last week and I'm not finding anything in the obvious locations- is the NCAA putting out the regional data sheets with the rankings this year?  I've seen them do this in other sports.

Hmm... I just looked at last week's and didn't see it. Great question someone else might be able to answer while I go searching . That being said, it is a rather easy number to come up with in football (versus basketball which uses a multiplier), so here is D3football's page with SOS data: http://www.d3football.com/seasons/2014/schedule?tmpl=sos-template

Oh, I use the D3football.com SOS page for that information.  I was just curious in general about the data sheets since I've seen them released with other rankings.   

[K-Mack]

I guess I didn't read far enough ahead and this did get addressed.

I don't like an 8 seed vs. a 7 when a 2 plays a 3, but otherwise I can live with it too.

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.

This is a lot more important to me than who plays who in what round.  I really don't mind the necessary evil of minimizing flights once the 32 teams are selected that much.  If that means any Texas team has to play UMHB, fine.  If that means Husson plays at MIT in the first round this year, even though both teams are low seeds, I'm fine with that, too. 

But as kiko said, including TLU over Centre (for example) because they pair nicely with UMHB is a thing to be avoided.

[crufootball]

Haha I thought there might be sarcasm but I wasn't sure, was there a stated reason to leaving that data off'?

Scheduling quirks.  If team A might have been ranked highly after week 9 but then lost 2 games which dropped them to 18th, wins against Team A shouldn't be a "top 10 win".

I guess that makes sense, but as others have seemed to point out you would think that it could at least be a secondary criteria option to show that Team A was at least good enough to be consider a top team in a region. 

As a UMHB fan I will be very interested to see what happens in the HSU-LC game this weekend since a loss surely takes HSU out of the rankings and I don't see how LC jumps in despite their only D3 loses being to regional ranked teams.

[K-Mack]

I don't think SLU falls out as their Coach is on the ERC. Besides 7-2 is still pretty good and SLU's SOS is very high (.6143) now after playing HOB. Plus they have the H2H over MoState who beat Montclair (last week's #8) H2H. I'm guessing SLU stays.

Coaching being on the committee could hurt as much as help, as some people might be overly critical so as not to appear unfairly favorable.

Re: Regional rankings stopping at 10, it's obviously not balanced, but the rankings have to stop somewhere. Maybe they could rank out to 12 and 15, with a decreasing point system for wins over teams farther out. But maybe that would be unnecessarily complicated.