Pool C -- 2015

[emma17]

Based on how I think the seeds are: 
If St. Thomas makes the Stagg they will have to get through physical games with St. John's, Wabash and Linfield.
If Linfield make the Stagg they will have to get through physical games with Salisbury, Hardin-Simmons or UMHB (I'm going with UMHB) and St. Thomas.
If UWO makes the Stagg they will have to get through physical games with Wheaton or UWW and Mt. Union. 
If Mt makes the Stagg they will have to get through ?? and a physical game with UWO.

Leaving aside the piece about "physical games" - it's just hard to figure out exactly what that means, and I like your "who is playing a team that actually has a chance of beating the #1 seed" a little better - I would agree that this year, Mount appears to have the easiest path to the final of the four #1 seeds. 

Mount Union's quarterfinal opponent of Wesley/Hopkins certainly looks less daunting than UST's prospective quarterfinal opponent of Wabash, Linfield's prospective game against HSU/UMHB, and UWO's potential game against Wheaton/UWW. 

The Johnnie-Tommie rematch in the second round is also the toughest that any #1 seed will face.  It's tempting to say that Linfield drew a potentially tough second-rounder with Salisbury, but Mount's second-round opponent (Albright) beat Salisbury, so if you're giving Linfield that bonus point for playing a tough second-round game, Mount deserves one too.  I don't think either team is likely to struggle much with their respective opponents, although that's a dangerous assumption to make when you're playing Salisbury's option game (just because it can throw you if you don't play against anyone like that).

Given the choice of "which path looks the easiest to you?" I certainly expect that fans of the respective #1 seeds, given the choice of the four quadrants put together, would choose the Mount quadrant.

"Physical Games". I realize it's hard to clearly define the term.  It's not only about yards gained running vs. passing, it's more about an approach to the game.
Having watched Wesley a bit, even though I have seen some impressive rushing stats in some games, I wouldn't consider them a physical team.  I haven't seen Albright play, but in looking at their stats they seem more of a passing team. 
When I suggest Salisbury has a chance over Linfield and I don't give the same credit to Albright, it's because:
1.  Salisbury runs a very unique offense, which is difficult to practice against.  They almost always have that as an advantage.   
2.  Salisbury is what I consider a physical team, while it appears Albright is more of a passing team.  Thus, the game will likely take more of a physical toll on the player's bodies, and that all adds up.
3.  If Mt was playing Salisbury, I'd give Mt credit.  I don't see the challenge Albright brings to Mt or Linfield the same as I see the challenge Salisbury would bring to both. 
   

[wally_wabash]

Why does passing the ball disqualify you from being "physical"?  I don't think that has to be the case. 

[jknezek]

Why does passing the ball disqualify you from being "physical"?  I don't think that has to be the case.

It doesn't. But when you consider blocking schemes, the offensive line soaks up a pressing D-line when pass blocking, a rushing team tends to push forward on the D-line. You'd have to ask guys who played, but I think on the defensive line it is more wearying, and punishing, to get smashed into, leaned on, blocked down, cut down, and shoved back play after play than it is to take the initiative and rush forward.

Every Olineman I ever talked to preferred run blocking. Going on the offensive is more exciting, and easier on your body, than going on the defensive. We don't really talk about pass blocking being "punishing", but when you are getting run at, time after time, it takes a huge toll. Option and run heavy teams, in my unscientific experience, tend to score more points in the second half just for this reason.

Now with the advent of hurry up spread offenses it has become physically tiring to play a passing offense, but I don't think it's as physically punishing as playing a heavy run team.

[wabndy]

Pat - i'm loathe to start new discussion boards without a consensus - but considering the experience in years past - what do you feel about just doing a 2015 playoffs discussion board?  Seems like discussion either ramble on here or folks just retreat to their home conference boards.
--------------------------------------
Second question  - I was kind of surprised that all of the excellent bracketologists here and on Rossi's radio show just assumed that 9-1 Wesley would be getting a top 8 seed without much discussion there.  I'm frankly happy because I think Wabash basically grabbed that final top 8 position and presumably will host a second round game with a round 1 win.   Even with the loss, was Wesley given the short shrift in potentially having to travel to Baltimore for round two?

[D3MAFAN]

Pat - i'm loathe to start new discussion boards without a consensus - but considering the experience in years past - what do you feel about just doing a 2015 playoffs discussion board?  Seems like discussion either ramble on here or folks just retreat to their home conference boards.
--------------------------------------
Second question  - I was kind of surprised that all of the excellent bracketologists here and on Rossi's radio show just assumed that 9-1 Wesley would be getting a top 8 seed without much discussion there.  I'm frankly happy because I think Wabash basically grabbed that final top 8 position and presumably will host a second round game with a round 1 win.   Even with the loss, was Wesley given the short shrift in potentially having to travel to Baltimore for round two?

Baltimore is probably 2 hours or less from Dover, DE, pretty much a home game.

[wally_wabash]

Second question  - I was kind of surprised that all of the excellent bracketologists here and on Rossi's radio show just assumed that 9-1 Wesley would be getting a top 8 seed without much discussion there.  I'm frankly happy because I think Wabash basically grabbed that final top 8 position and presumably will host a second round game with a round 1 win.   Even with the loss, was Wesley given the short shrift in potentially having to travel to Baltimore for round two?

I'm going to say no.  Both teams are #1 in their regional rankings, Hopkins is 10-0 to Wesley's 9-1 and Hopkins won their league (not a criteria, I know).  If you're a #3 seed, that puts you on the road in round 2 (probably).  I think it's fair. 

Let's look at the teams that look like #2 seeds here:
Wabash (10-0, NCAC champion)
Hardin-Simmons (9-1, ASC co-champion)
Wheaton (10-0, CCIW champion)
Johns Hopkins (10-0, CC champion)

I think if there's a team in there that Wesley may have been able to be slotted in front of, it would have been Hardin-Simmons, but Hardin-Simmons is subject to the geography and traditional seeded matchups get messed with there, so it's not like they could have swapped HSU and Wesley. 

If the committee put a premium on winning your league when it comes to seeding teams, I don't have a problem with that. 

[ExTartanPlayer]

Second question  - I was kind of surprised that all of the excellent bracketologists here and on Rossi's radio show just assumed that 9-1 Wesley would be getting a top 8 seed without much discussion there.  I'm frankly happy because I think Wabash basically grabbed that final top 8 position and presumably will host a second round game with a round 1 win.   Even with the loss, was Wesley given the short shrift in potentially having to travel to Baltimore for round two?

I'm going to say no.  Both teams are #1 in their regional rankings, Hopkins is 10-0 to Wesley's 9-1 and Hopkins won their league (not a criteria, I know).  If you're a #3 seed, that puts you on the road in round 2 (probably).  I think it's fair. 

I know Wesley was #1 in the RR's and Salisbury was #3 so the RAC had made this decision for them, but I'll just point out that Albright and Salisbury both would have the right to be mighty salty about Wesley getting a second home game when Salisbury has the same record (EDIT: oops, my bad) with a h2h win over Wesley and Albright has the same record as Wesley with a favorable common-opponent result against #2 in the region.  Even as it is, I think both Salisbury and Albright are within their rights to feel jobbed that Wesley is "only" going to have to play at Johns Hopkins in the second round while Albright goes to Alliance and Salisbury flies to Oregon.

Viewed from that perspective, no, Wesley did not get short shrift.  If anything they got a favor.

EDIT: sorry, I goofed.  When I posted this I totally blanked on Salisbury having the loss to Christopher Newport.  My apologies.  I'm leaving this as I had originally written it for posterity, but I retract the above about Salisbury.

[art76]

Just posting some observations - similar to what I've done in past years.

Taking the D3 Top 25 rankings, extending them all the way out to teams receiving votes, so that teams not receiving votes get a 38th ranking, here's what we get for the initial pairings:

4 St. Thomas
37 LaVerne

18 Dubuque
10 St. John's

9 Thomas More
16 Washington and Lee

34 Albion
7 Wabash

2 Linfield
22 Whitworth

21 Salisbury
25 Cortland

35 Huntingdon
38 Hendrix

13 Mary Hardin-Baylor
12 Hardin-Simmons

1 Mount Union
36 St. Lawrence

38 Norwich
20 Albright

11 Wesley
30 Franingham State

33 Western New England
8 Johns Hopkins

3 Oshkosh
38 St. Scholastica

26 Ohio Northern
27 Franklin

5 Whitewater
28 St. Norbert

38 Lakeland
6 Wheaton

In the four quadrants, if you add up the total of the rankings, in theory, the lower the score, the tougher the bracket is as a whole.

St. Thomas quadrant = 135
Linfield quadrant = 168
Mount Union quadrant = 177
Oshkosh quadrant = 171

The Tommies have it harder this year than the other three quadrants, just even casually glancing at the bracket with the rankings next to the names. There are no teams in the twenties, and you have to expect that both teams in the thirties are not getting past the first round.

Linfield plays nobody higher than a 12th ranking until they meet up with the Tommies - if that happens.

Mount Union meets nobody higher than 20th until the third round when they might see number 8 or number 11, depending on which of them wins.

Oshkosh is similar to the Mount Union quadrant, in that they don't face anyone ranked higher than 26th until they meet up with number 5 or 6 in the third round.

Linfield has the easiest bracket looking at things this way. But, and it's a big but, we all know teams on paper do not always equal the teams on the fields.

[Ralph Turner]

Let's revisit this before 2nd & 3rd rounds.

Geographic proximity wreaks havoc with the Linfield bracket.

[wesleydad]

Just posting some observations - similar to what I've done in past years.

Taking the D3 Top 25 rankings, extending them all the way out to teams receiving votes, so that teams not receiving votes get a 38th ranking, here's what we get for the initial pairings:

4 St. Thomas
37 LaVerne

18 Dubuque
10 St. John's

9 Thomas More
16 Washington and Lee

34 Albion
7 Wabash

2 Linfield
22 Whitworth

21 Salisbury
25 Cortland

35 Huntingdon
38 Hendrix

13 Mary Hardin-Baylor
12 Hardin-Simmons

1 Mount Union
36 St. Lawrence

38 Norwich
20 Albright

11 Wesley
30 Franingham State

33 Western New England
8 Johns Hopkins

3 Oshkosh
38 St. Scholastica

26 Ohio Northern
27 Franklin

5 Whitewater
28 St. Norbert

38 Lakeland
6 Wheaton

In the four quadrants, if you add up the total of the rankings, in theory, the lower the score, the tougher the bracket is as a whole.

St. Thomas quadrant = 135
Linfield quadrant = 168
Mount Union quadrant = 177
Oshkosh quadrant = 171

The Tommies have it harder this year than the other three quadrants, just even casually glancing at the bracket with the rankings next to the names. There are no teams in the twenties, and you have to expect that both teams in the thirties are not getting past the first round.

Linfield plays nobody higher than a 12th ranking until they meet up with the Tommies - if that happens.

Mount Union meets nobody higher than 20th until the third round when they might see number 8 or number 11, depending on which of them wins.

Oshkosh is similar to the Mount Union quadrant, in that they don't face anyone ranked higher than 26th until they meet up with number 5 or 6 in the third round.

Linfield has the easiest bracket looking at things this way. But, and it's a big but, we all know teams on paper do not always equal the teams on the fields.

Art, nice job.  I was thinking the same thing about the Linfield bracket on paper.  How much better if at all is the HSU/UMHB game compared to the likely Wesley/Hopkins game.  Rankings say the Wesley game is better.  Perception of some says that the HSU game is better.  So does that mean that Mount has a tougher 1/4 final game than Linfield if this is how it plays out.  I am not sure that after round 2 this will change much since Wesley and Hopkins are ranked ahead of HSU/UMHB and 1 of them will be gone leaving a winner of a game with 2 teams in the 30's.  This is always fun to try and figure out who has it the easiest.

[USee]

Art,

That may be well and good but you would be hard pressed to say anyone has a harder path to Salem than Wheaton and St Norbert.  As a Wheaton fan I would swap places with any team in the St Thomas bracket (even though I really am excited for the chance to play UWW).

[art76]

Art,

That may be well and good but you would be hard pressed to say anyone has a harder path to Salem than Wheaton and St Norbert.  As a Wheaton fan I would swap places with any team in the St Thomas bracket (even though I really am excited for the chance to play UWW).

USee - I only "kind of" plotted out the top four seeds. I didn't think to go that next step to try to figure out who has the "toughest sled to push".

Edit - OK, that was pretty easy. Either Lakeland or St. Norbert would have to play Numbers 6, 5 and then 3 to get to the semi-finals - nobody has it tougher. However, if they both win their respective first games to meet in the second game, then the previous sentence is not true.

[Andy Jamison - Walla Walla Wildcat]

After watching JHU on Saturday I doubt they'd be more than a third place team in the NWC, MIAC, WIAC, ASC, or OAC. Past year's results show that the CC doesn't do well in the playoffs with the exception of one close Wesley loss. So their receiving a #2 seed is a matter of geography not on field competitiveness. I didn't see any playmakers for them that are next level guys which is what you have to have to win in the playoffs. Next level meaning guys that would start at the D2 or D1-AA schools and do well.

[Andy Jamison - Walla Walla Wildcat]

Agreed that we need a playoff specific thread...

[wally_wabash]

After watching JHU on Saturday I doubt they'd be more than a third place team in the NWC, MIAC, WIAC, ASC, or OAC. Past year's results show that the CC doesn't do well in the playoffs with the exception of one close Wesley loss. So their receiving a #2 seed is a matter of geography not on field competitiveness. I didn't see any playmakers for them that are next level guys which is what you have to have to win in the playoffs. Next level meaning guys that would start at the D2 or D1-AA schools and do well.

I don't think you're even trying to know what you're talking about.