Pool C -- 2014

[GillCJ1]

Well, good news for Centre.  There were definitely some surprises tonight, but I'm glad the committee at least got this one right.

[Boxer7806]

I don't think MIT meets the criteria to host. Husson probably does.

Suprised Muhlenberg got in over Framingham. Even with a regionally ranked win over a #10 seed (which is what we have to assume), I thought Framingham's SOS being significantly higher would get them over the hump. Shocked St. Thomas got in... I don't care if Bethel just lost to Augsburg, H2H has to mean more.

[Mr. Ypsi]

After I posted I noticed that TLU DID make the field.

I have heard rumors that MIT has a facilities problem for hosting.  I have no idea what the requirements are for football, but I know that schools are sometimes disqualified in basketball.

[smedindy]

They had 1100 at their field against Coast Guard. But, who knows.

[smedindy]

I don't think MIT meets the criteria to host. Husson probably does.

Suprised Muhlenberg got in over Framingham. Even with a regionally ranked win over a #10 seed (which is what we have to assume), I thought Framingham's SOS being significantly higher would get them over the hump. Shocked St. Thomas got in... I don't care if Bethel just lost to Augsburg, H2H has to mean more.

Not when the full H2H results are contradictory, like they are here. You beat a team, then you lose to a team the other team beat to me negates the H2H.

The lesson? Don't lose to Augsburg in Week 11.

[MonroviaCat]

After I posted I noticed that TLU DID make the field.

I have heard rumors that MIT has a facilities problem for hosting.  I have no idea what the requirements are for football, but I know that schools are sometimes disqualified in basketball.

no direct knowledge of the MIT situation but I know there are requirments to host--a few years ago Cal Lu beat Linfield at the start of the season by got shipped up to Linfield in the playoffs because Cal Lu's stadium (at that time--before they build the new one) did not have 'adequate security' (or so I was told) to host---I think there was not really a fence around the stadium which meant they couldn't really charge people admission......

[Boxer7806]

I don't think MIT meets the criteria to host. Husson probably does.

Suprised Muhlenberg got in over Framingham. Even with a regionally ranked win over a #10 seed (which is what we have to assume), I thought Framingham's SOS being significantly higher would get them over the hump. Shocked St. Thomas got in... I don't care if Bethel just lost to Augsburg, H2H has to mean more.

Not when the full H2H results are contradictory, like they are here. You beat a team, then you lose to a team the other team beat to me negates the H2H.

The lesson? Don't lose to Augsburg in Week 11.

I get that. But it doesn't mean I have to agree with it. I'm just under the train of thought if two teams are going up against each other for the final spot in a playoff field, H2H should be the determining factor. Well in this case the final seat at the discussion table.

[smedindy]

They weren't going up against each other at all. Bethel fell out of the rankings with that third loss or at least way down to #10 (though I think C-M got a slot too). St. Thomas moved ahead of them in the West Rankings and on the west board, they were no doubt behind St. Thomas and Oshkosh. Bethel was never going to get on the board, ever, as I see the West Rankings now that St. Thomas was selected.

Especially since Bethel lost to a team that the week before lost to Hamline, of all teams.

[02 Warhawk]

They weren't going up against each other at all. Bethel fell out of the rankings with that third loss or at least way down to #10 (though I think C-M got a slot too). St. Thomas moved ahead of them in the West Rankings and on the west board, they were no doubt behind St. Thomas and Oshkosh. Bethel was never going to get on the board, ever.

Exactly...like I just posted one page ago. H2H matchup went out the door as soon as bethel lost its third game.

[wally_wabash]

I don't think MIT meets the criteria to host. Husson probably does.

Suprised Muhlenberg got in over Framingham. Even with a regionally ranked win over a #10 seed (which is what we have to assume), I thought Framingham's SOS being significantly higher would get them over the hump. Shocked St. Thomas got in... I don't care if Bethel just lost to Augsburg, H2H has to mean more.

I don't assume Ursinus got ranked at all.  There's no reason at all to do so with other three loss teams out there that are better (Hampden Sydney, CNU, Louisiana College to name a few) plus a bunch of 2-loss teams that are also pretty clearly better choices (Rhodes, E&H, Guilford, Waynesburg-especially Waynesburg- to name a few of those). 

Muhlenberg fits a profile that last year's committee didn't like very much.  This year's committee with four new members may have been more amenable to the 9-1, .500-ish SOS, 0-1 vs RRO profile than last year.  But even then, I don't know why you would get Muhlenberg instead of Framingham.  Unless DelVal was ahead of Framingham and Muhlenberg went in before DelVal (which would also not be correct in my mind). 

But, and here's an important thing that really came to light for me during the mock show last night- There doesn't have to be a consensus on which of the four teams is the best one.  And it's not out of the question for Muhlenberg to have not been the top team on any of those ballots, but had enough 2nd/3rd place votes to wind up being the selection. 

[smedindy]

Muhlenberg is loved by Massey (12th when you remove the NESCAC teams). That's no doubt because the Centennial had a bunch of okay teams (only McDaniel was bad, Susquehanna gave both Muhlenberg and JHU a game) and they did OK in their loss to Johns Hopkins. They're a good team. But Massey's not in the criteria. And I think for limited data on 10-teams league one result can skew you about 15 rating points depending on how your league does in their lone non-conference game. The CC was 7-3 in non-conference.

Is Muhlenberg a better football team than Framinham? Maybe. It may be close. Should they have leapt Framingham in the selection, though? I dunno about that.

[Schwami]

Muhlenberg fits a profile that last year's committee didn't like very much.  This year's committee with four new members may have been more amenable to the 9-1, .500-ish SOS, 0-1 vs RRO profile than last year.  But even then, I don't know why you would get Muhlenberg instead of Framingham.  Unless DelVal was ahead of Framingham and Muhlenberg went in before DelVal (which would also not be correct in my mind). 

Unless Muhlenberg was still ranked ahead of Centre, and the committee was determined to get Centre in?

Muhlenberg always struck me as the team with the profile most comparable to a certain team that got left out last year.

[Boxer7806]

I don't think MIT meets the criteria to host. Husson probably does.

Suprised Muhlenberg got in over Framingham. Even with a regionally ranked win over a #10 seed (which is what we have to assume), I thought Framingham's SOS being significantly higher would get them over the hump. Shocked St. Thomas got in... I don't care if Bethel just lost to Augsburg, H2H has to mean more.

I don't assume Ursinus got ranked at all.  There's no reason at all to do so with other three loss teams out there that are better (Hampden Sydney, CNU, Louisiana College to name a few) plus a bunch of 2-loss teams that are also pretty clearly better choices (Rhodes, E&H, Guilford, Waynesburg-especially Waynesburg- to name a few of those). 

Muhlenberg fits a profile that last year's committee didn't like very much.  This year's committee with four new members may have been more amenable to the 9-1, .500-ish SOS, 0-1 vs RRO profile than last year.  But even then, I don't know why you would get Muhlenberg instead of Framingham.  Unless DelVal was ahead of Framingham and Muhlenberg went in before DelVal (which would also not be correct in my mind). 

But, and here's an important thing that really came to light for me during the mock show last night- There doesn't have to be a consensus on which of the four teams is the best one.  And it's not out of the question for Muhlenberg to have not been the top team on any of those ballots, but had enough 2nd/3rd place votes to wind up being the selection. 

Does that mean Muhlenberg passed the "eye test" over Framingham? Looking at both the resumes based on criteria, Framingham's looks better. Or are they valuing Muhlenberg's loss to John Hopkins more than Framingham's to Rowan? Or did Ursinius made the secret ranking at 10? I'm assuming from the bold/italic statement, that Ursinius did not make the rankings which I believe points to the committee valuing Muhlenberg's  RR result more than Framingham's. If thats the case, I don't like it, but at least I can understand it.

[smedindy]

They do have that right. Muhlenberg was competitive in a loss to the #3 team in the South. Framingham lost to Rowan, who may have been 8th or 9th in the East.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Frankly the whole AQ/B/C concept needs to be adjusted.  A team should have to be ranked in the Top 25 to receive an AQ not simply win its conference. I believe this was a measure that existed in NAIA football (at least my senior year at Linfield which was 1993).

This is exactly why Division III is not the NAIA. The NCAA, across levels and sports, has automatic bids. This is what we do. It gives everyone a chance to play for something.

This is baked into the Division III philosophy. It's not going away.

It's actually baked into all sports but FCS football which actually doesn't reward an NCAA trophy. ALL sports and championships in ALL divisions of the NCAA have autobids and polls mean nothing in terms of criteria.