Pool C -- 2015

[D3MAFAN]

Until proven otherwise I am going to grade programs and conferences based on how they have done in the playoffs over the past 5 years.  There may be good teams that come up every few years because of a strong senior class or a very good transfer (HSC with the QB who came over from the SEC as an example).  But there are a very few good programs that deserve the respect of everyone in D3 until they show on the field in successive seasons that things are trending down. 

These programs are Mount Union, Whitewater, MHB, Wesley, and Linfield.  There are 4 conferences where the winner deserves the same level of respect - CCIW, WIAC, OAC, and MIAC - teams from these conferences have been very competitive in the playoffs especially the conference winner.

I have a very hard time giving any team from the East a Pool C bid no matter their record because frankly the region has been terrible in the playoffs (outside of Wesley).  Until the East AQ teams consistently both go deep AND be competitive in each round they should be limited to the AQ only.

Regional Rankings as a metric seem to be worthless given how weak is the East combined with how many D3 programs are in the area.  Too much room for the East Coast bias come selection time.

The same can be said for using Strength of Schedule.  Put the conference champ of any East conference in the MIAC and they are going to finish #2 at best (except for Wesley).  We can't compare SOS when it is obvious that the teams in one region are simply not as good as the other regions.  (Obvious in terms of Top 25 rankings, preseason rankings by D3 experts, and past playoff results.

😂😁😂😀😅

[wabndy]

Until proven otherwise I am going to grade programs and conferences based on how they have done in the playoffs over the past 5 years. 

Thats great, and reasonable, in your personal grade book.  I don't disagree with any of it.  But if I understand you, I think you are assuming that the the playoffs are esoterically supposed to be the place where the "top" 32 teams duke it out and #33 is left on the couch.  Or conversely that Pool C at least should be based exclusively among the six 1 loss teams and the primary criteria is a 5 year rolling average of their past playoff performance.  If you are saying that UMHB (the 5 year rolling UMHB - not the 2015 UMHB) is undoubtedly a top 10 team and on any given Saturday would be a clear favorite against 5 of of the other top ten teams, I'd probably agree with you there too.  That kind of argument however is perfect on a board to discuss this site's top 25 poll.  It doesn't really fit here.


The current Pool C selection criteria do, frankly, a masterful job of keeping as many teams relevant and as many student athletes engaged in the playoff hunt as long as possible.  It has evolved from a long and bloody history of 4, 8, 16, and 28 team fields that were rife with abuse of backroom horse trading and revenge seeking.  It even gives a nod to last year's playoff performance as a final tiebreaker criteria.  Most of all it allows a playoff field to be settled on the field, encourages tough competitive scheduling, and gives each and every team in the country a clear road to Salem in week 1.  What it sounds like you are basically calling for is saying that the grandees of D3 football (consistent national semi-finals participants) get an automatic pass to Pool C if they pick up a loss in the regular season.  That kind of rule, whether written or unwritten, is the great dividing line between the D1 and D3 game.  Its the kind of rule (or rule of thumb) that D1 power conferences (and ESPN) put in to protect their revenue streams and keep the key college football media markets happy and engaged.  I think if you'll step back, swallow the lump that comes with losing a close one to a conference rival, you'll agree that what we have works best for D3.

[wally_wabash]

Regional Rankings as a metric seem to be worthless given how weak is the East combined with how many D3 programs are in the area.  Too much room for the East Coast bias come selection time.

East coast bias!!  Hahahaha.  You're aware that 6/8 of the selection committee are not from the East region, right?   You know this, RIGHT? 

[02 Warhawk]

I have a very hard time giving any team from the East a Pool C bid no matter their record because frankly the region has been terrible in the playoffs (outside of Wesley).  Until the East AQ teams consistently both go deep AND be competitive in each round they should be limited to the AQ only.

LOL.  Here, let me show you how one of those matchups went when an East Pool C team played an OAC Pool C team in the first round.  At the OAC team's place, no less.  A week after the OAC team lost by 8 points to Mount Union.

http://www.d3football.com/seasons/2013/boxscores/20131123_4kt8.xml

Not sure if I agree with Walla completely, but your cherry picked "one of those matchups" isn't exactly disproving what Walls is saying.

Plus I don't agree that the OAC is a power conference in DIII. Mount carries that conference, and they don't get much competition until the semis (and sometimes not till the Stagg Bowl).

[ExTartanPlayer]

Regional Rankings as a metric seem to be worthless given how weak is the East combined with how many D3 programs are in the area.  Too much room for the East Coast bias come selection time.

East coast bias!!  Hahahaha.  You're aware that 6/8 of the selection committee are not from the East region, right?   You know this, RIGHT?

I never got a response from walla last time I asked him about this, incidentally.

I think East Coast Bias is an old old wooden ship from the Civil War era.

[SaintsFAN]

I was waiting for this circular logic to pop up.  UMHB is still really good because they lost only by 3 to Hardin-Simmons who we know is really good because they beat UMHB.  Not buying this one. 

Maybe- and I know this is radical- but maybe we've been kinda wrong about UMHB all along in 2015.  I don't know the answer.  I do know that when they lose, that's a fair question to ask.

Hardin-Simmons was really good before the Mary Hardin-Baylor game.  They weren't just undefeated, they were blowing teams out. You could have made a convincing argument before that game took place that Hardin-Simmons should be ranked right with MHB.   It wasn't a giant upset.

HSU wasn't doing anything that Johns Hopkins wasn't.  Yes, they blew out a few 2 win teams in Waylond Baptist, Howard Payne and Sul Ross State.  But they won by 8 at Texas Lutheran (without their stud RB) and won at Trinity by 24.  Their profile, until beating Mary Hardin-Baylor was very comparable to the other teams in the mid to upper teens - The voters have been right about HSU. 

Not a giant upset like Buff State over Whitewater but it was big enough to vault HSU into the Top 10 in a week where Pat/Keith were asking what happens to their position with a blowout or what point spread constitutes a good loss.

[ExTartanPlayer]

I have a very hard time giving any team from the East a Pool C bid no matter their record because frankly the region has been terrible in the playoffs (outside of Wesley).  Until the East AQ teams consistently both go deep AND be competitive in each round they should be limited to the AQ only.

LOL.  Here, let me show you how one of those matchups went when an East Pool C team played an OAC Pool C team in the first round.  At the OAC team's place, no less.  A week after the OAC team lost by 8 points to Mount Union.

http://www.d3football.com/seasons/2013/boxscores/20131123_4kt8.xml

Not sure if I agree with Walla completely, but your cherry picked "one of those matchups" isn't exactly disproving what Walls is saying.

Plus I don't agree that the OAC is a power conference in DIII. Mount carries that conference, and they don't get much competition (considering they can't play themselves).

Oh, I fully agree that it's a single cherry-picked example.  But he's painted with an extremely broad brush that the East region's been terrible in the playoffs while also granting the OAC an official Golden Ticket...and that's pretty silly considering that it was only two years ago that we watched one of those teams from the terrible East region win a road playoff game at a team from the OAC.  I'm not offering this as definitive proof of any region being better than any other region, or any conference being better than any other conference...in fact, that's exactly the sort of thing I am arguing against.  We can't just say "This Region is better than That Region" or "This Conference is better than That Conference" - because there's a very recent example that directly contradicts his chosen definition of the haves and have-nots.

[AO]

I was waiting for this circular logic to pop up.  UMHB is still really good because they lost only by 3 to Hardin-Simmons who we know is really good because they beat UMHB.  Not buying this one. 

Maybe- and I know this is radical- but maybe we've been kinda wrong about UMHB all along in 2015.  I don't know the answer.  I do know that when they lose, that's a fair question to ask.

Hardin-Simmons was really good before the Mary Hardin-Baylor game.  They weren't just undefeated, they were blowing teams out. You could have made a convincing argument before that game took place that Hardin-Simmons should be ranked right with MHB.   It wasn't a giant upset.

HSU wasn't doing anything that Johns Hopkins wasn't.  Yes, they blew out a few 2 win teams in Waylond Baptist, Howard Payne and Sul Ross State.  But they won by 8 at Texas Lutheran (without their stud RB) and won at Trinity by 24.  Their profile, until beating Mary Hardin-Baylor was very comparable to the other teams in the mid to upper teens - The voters have been right about HSU. 

Not a giant upset like Buff State over Whitewater but it was big enough to vault HSU into the Top 10 in a week where Pat/Keith were asking what happens to their position with a blowout or what point spread constitutes a good loss.

They were playing completely different schedules, so of course they were doing things that were different.  I'm more impressed by wins over Trinity (TX) and Texas Lutheran than I am by wins over anybody in the centennial conference.  It's not that Johns Hopkins has done anything wrong, I just don't have any reason to expect them to break into the top-ten or 2nd tier based upon their results this season.

[jknezek]

They were playing completely different schedules, so of course they were doing things that were different.  I'm more impressed by wins over Trinity (TX) and Texas Lutheran than I am by wins over anybody in the centennial conference. It's not that Johns Hopkins has done anything wrong, I just don't have any reason to expect them to break into the top-ten or 2nd tier based upon their results this season.

Why?

[wally_wabash]

I think East Coast Bias is an old old wooden ship from the Civil War era.

Points for this. 

[Bombers798891]

it gives us greater confidence to select a team that has proven year after year after year that they will be competitive in the playoffs.

Except that a "team" isn't a constant. It's comprised of a group of individuals who change from year to year, in countless ways. Some players leave, some players join, some players get better, some players get worse. And you're competing with 200+ teams who have all done the same.

This is true in the NFL maybe, but here in D3 we seem to have a remarkable stability among the top teams.

Really?

Tell me, how's Darius Wilson doing for MHB this year? LiDarral Bailey, he was amazing, so he's still great, right? How are those WRs doing? You know,  Geoff Myles, Caleb Moore, Jon Ross?

What about that amazing offensive line?  I assume the law firm of Duncan, Holt, Cantu, Booker, and Ostos is keeping Bailey upright?

Let's not forget the defense. Javics Jones still a terror? Brodrick Crain? Silvio Diaz? They still doing well for the Cru?

Please provide me with the updates on those players.

[SaintsFAN]

I was waiting for this circular logic to pop up.  UMHB is still really good because they lost only by 3 to Hardin-Simmons who we know is really good because they beat UMHB.  Not buying this one. 

Maybe- and I know this is radical- but maybe we've been kinda wrong about UMHB all along in 2015.  I don't know the answer.  I do know that when they lose, that's a fair question to ask.

Hardin-Simmons was really good before the Mary Hardin-Baylor game.  They weren't just undefeated, they were blowing teams out. You could have made a convincing argument before that game took place that Hardin-Simmons should be ranked right with MHB.   It wasn't a giant upset.

HSU wasn't doing anything that Johns Hopkins wasn't.  Yes, they blew out a few 2 win teams in Waylond Baptist, Howard Payne and Sul Ross State.  But they won by 8 at Texas Lutheran (without their stud RB) and won at Trinity by 24.  Their profile, until beating Mary Hardin-Baylor was very comparable to the other teams in the mid to upper teens - The voters have been right about HSU. 

Not a giant upset like Buff State over Whitewater but it was big enough to vault HSU into the Top 10 in a week where Pat/Keith were asking what happens to their position with a blowout or what point spread constitutes a good loss.

They were playing completely different schedules, so of course they were doing things that were different.  I'm more impressed by wins over Trinity (TX) and Texas Lutheran than I am by wins over anybody in the centennial conference.  It's not that Johns Hopkins has done anything wrong, I just don't have any reason to expect them to break into the top-ten or 2nd tier based upon their results this season.

Exactly and before last week who had HSU in that 2nd tier in the top 10?  Not many ... I doubt there were many in the fan polls who had them in the Top 10. 

Further, to Wallys point:  What if this is the one season in 15 where MHB just isn't the monster they usually are? 

[02 Warhawk]

I have a very hard time giving any team from the East a Pool C bid no matter their record because frankly the region has been terrible in the playoffs (outside of Wesley).  Until the East AQ teams consistently both go deep AND be competitive in each round they should be limited to the AQ only.

LOL.  Here, let me show you how one of those matchups went when an East Pool C team played an OAC Pool C team in the first round.  At the OAC team's place, no less.  A week after the OAC team lost by 8 points to Mount Union.

http://www.d3football.com/seasons/2013/boxscores/20131123_4kt8.xml

Not sure if I agree with Walla completely, but your cherry picked "one of those matchups" isn't exactly disproving what Walls is saying.

Plus I don't agree that the OAC is a power conference in DIII. Mount carries that conference, and they don't get much competition (considering they can't play themselves).

Oh, I fully agree that it's a single cherry-picked example.  But he's painted with an extremely broad brush that the East region's been terrible in the playoffs while also granting the OAC an official Golden Ticket...and that's pretty silly considering that it was only two years ago that we watched one of those teams from the terrible East region win a road playoff game at a team from the OAC.  I'm not offering this as definitive proof of any region being better than any other region, or any conference being better than any other conference...in fact, that's exactly the point I am arguing against.  We can't just say "This Region is better than That Region" or "This Conference is better than That Conference" - because there's a very recent example that directly contradicts his chosen definition of the haves and have-nots.

Yes, there are exceptions to everything. But looking at the past 10, 20, 30 years of the playoffs, there's a trend on which regions/conferences do the best in the playoffs. I think you can say which conferences are stronger...Pat and Keith do it every year in Kickoff. I don't think anyone knows D3 better than those two.

Fun stuff...nothing like time in the office with some good 'ole Pool C talk. 

[02 Warhawk]

I was waiting for this circular logic to pop up.  UMHB is still really good because they lost only by 3 to Hardin-Simmons who we know is really good because they beat UMHB.  Not buying this one. 

Maybe- and I know this is radical- but maybe we've been kinda wrong about UMHB all along in 2015.  I don't know the answer.  I do know that when they lose, that's a fair question to ask.

Hardin-Simmons was really good before the Mary Hardin-Baylor game.  They weren't just undefeated, they were blowing teams out. You could have made a convincing argument before that game took place that Hardin-Simmons should be ranked right with MHB.   It wasn't a giant upset.

HSU wasn't doing anything that Johns Hopkins wasn't.  Yes, they blew out a few 2 win teams in Waylond Baptist, Howard Payne and Sul Ross State.  But they won by 8 at Texas Lutheran (without their stud RB) and won at Trinity by 24.  Their profile, until beating Mary Hardin-Baylor was very comparable to the other teams in the mid to upper teens - The voters have been right about HSU. 

Not a giant upset like Buff State over Whitewater but it was big enough to vault HSU into the Top 10 in a week where Pat/Keith were asking what happens to their position with a blowout or what point spread constitutes a good loss.

They were playing completely different schedules, so of course they were doing things that were different.  I'm more impressed by wins over Trinity (TX) and Texas Lutheran than I am by wins over anybody in the centennial conference.  It's not that Johns Hopkins has done anything wrong, I just don't have any reason to expect them to break into the top-ten or 2nd tier based upon their results this season.

Exactly and before last week who had HSU in that 2nd tier in the top 10?  Not many ... I doubt there were many in the fan polls who had them in the Top 10. 

Further, to Wallys point:  What if this is the one season in 15 where MHB just isn't the monster they usually are?

I think we all can agree that MHB may not be as good as we thought AND HS is better than we thought. I don't think it's 100% one or the other.

[wally_wabash]

They were playing completely different schedules, so of course they were doing things that were different.  I'm more impressed by wins over Trinity (TX) and Texas Lutheran than I am by wins over anybody in the centennial conference. It's not that Johns Hopkins has done anything wrong, I just don't have any reason to expect them to break into the top-ten or 2nd tier based upon their results this season.

Why?

Agreed.  I'm not sure what we're basing the superiority of Trinity and TLU to other teams in the CC or MAC or whatever other league we're disparaging today on.  I mean TLU did play an oddly close game with 2014 UMHB (not the same as 2015 UMHB) that was played through rain and over two days.  So that's definitely representative of normal.  BTW, TLU only got that extra shot at UMHB last year because -and I hope we all remember this because it was tremendous- Louisiana College's coach lost his mind at the end of their game with TLU last year and blew the game for his team. 

Remember this:


It looks like we superimposed a coach onto a spot on the field that coaches shouldn't be on.  But no.  That actually happened and it's a foul and TLU got a playoff game because of it.