2019 Pool C

[art76]

So a 1 loss Pool C team gets 3 home games, and a 1 loss Pool A team gets 1 home game? How do you know that UWW was ranked higher than SJU in the Final Regional Rankings? Have they been published?

Yes.

Again, labeling teams as Pool A or Pool C is superfluous and doesn't have any bearing on seeding or site selection.

Cool. So where are the final Regional Rankings found?

[wally_wabash]

So a 1 loss Pool C team gets 3 home games, and a 1 loss Pool A team gets 1 home game? How do you know that UWW was ranked higher than SJU in the Final Regional Rankings? Have they been published?

Yes.

Again, labeling teams as Pool A or Pool C is superfluous and doesn't have any bearing on seeding or site selection.

Cool. So where are the final Regional Rankings found?

Right there in the link I posted. 

[art76]

So a 1 loss Pool C team gets 3 home games, and a 1 loss Pool A team gets 1 home game? How do you know that UWW was ranked higher than SJU in the Final Regional Rankings? Have they been published?

Yes.

Again, labeling teams as Pool A or Pool C is superfluous and doesn't have any bearing on seeding or site selection.

Cool. So where are the final Regional Rankings found?

Right there in the link I posted.

Plain as the nose on my face - Thanx, Wally!

[Pat Coleman]

Something that important might well be something we put on D3football.com, for sure.

[Ralph Turner]

Done!

I miss the bracket challenge that we used to have on the website.

Here are my picks:

UMHB, Berry, UWW, Wart; Wheaton, UWO, Chap, SJU; Salisbury, Union, Muhl, Brock; UMU, NCC, Wesley, BC

UMHB, UWW, Wheaton, SJU; Salisbury, Muhl, UMU, Wesley.

UMHB, Wheaton, Salisbury, UMU.

UMHB, UMU.

UMHB 16 UMU 13

[Ralph Turner]

Pool C squads go 4-1, only loss is Redlands to UMHB

UMHB 43 Redlands 14

UWW 35 Monmouth 10

Wartburg 41 Hope 3

NCC 51 Wabash 14

Wesley 58 Framingham State 14

Thought you would have posted the update by now, but Pool C was 2-2 this weekend, with both UWW and NCC left on opposite sides of the bracket and could not meet until the Stagg.

NCC 59 UMU 52

UWW 41 Wartburg 28

Del Valley 45  Wesley 10

Week #3 Pool C 2-0

NCC 31 Del Valley 14

UWW 26 UMHB 7

[USee]

I seem to recall there being some folks who argued the last team in the field, or any pool C team really has no realistic chance to win the Stagg. I may be misremembering this discussion but if that's the case, this year may be the year that 2 Pool C's end up playing for the Stagg.

[Ralph Turner]

I seem to recall there being some folks who argued the last team in the field, or any pool C team really has no realistic chance to win the Stagg. I may be misremembering this discussion but if that's the case, this year may be the year that 2 Pool C's end up playing for the Stagg.

Respectfully, I think that is the case.

I think that the consensus on this forum is that we are about 2-3 Pool C teams shy of what we need to an appropriate field of competitive teams in the football Pool C bids, that there were 2-3 teams left on the board who were worthy Pool C candidates this year.

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

I seem to recall there being some folks who argued the last team in the field, or any pool C team really has no realistic chance to win the Stagg. I may be misremembering this discussion but if that's the case, this year may be the year that 2 Pool C's end up playing for the Stagg.

Respectfully, I think that is the case.

I think that the consensus on this forum is that we are about 2-3 Pool C teams shy of what we need to an appropriate field of competitive teams in the football Pool C bids, that there were 2-3 teams left on the board who were worthy Pool C candidates this year.

This was a brutal year in pool C. Susquehanna could easily have made some noise as well... their only loss was in OT at Muhlenberg who is still alive.

[smedindy]

I seem to recall there being some folks who argued the last team in the field, or any pool C team really has no realistic chance to win the Stagg. I may be misremembering this discussion but if that's the case, this year may be the year that 2 Pool C's end up playing for the Stagg.

We're talking in a normal year about the 2 loss teams, not this year where we had a perfect storm of too many good teams and not enough slots. This will happen.

[wally_wabash]

I seem to recall there being some folks who argued the last team in the field, or any pool C team really has no realistic chance to win the Stagg. I may be misremembering this discussion but if that's the case, this year may be the year that 2 Pool C's end up playing for the Stagg.

I don't think I've said that Pool C teams don't have a chance to win the championship.  I have repeatedly said things like this:

To date, even with the limited number of at-large bids, I don't think anybody can reasonably point to one single instance where the size of the field excluded a team that would be considered a contender to win the tournament.

My position on the issue has not changed through three rounds of this tournament. 

[bluestreak66]

I seem to recall there being some folks who argued the last team in the field, or any pool C team really has no realistic chance to win the Stagg. I may be misremembering this discussion but if that's the case, this year may be the year that 2 Pool C's end up playing for the Stagg.

I don't think I've said that Pool C teams don't have a chance to win the championship.  I have repeatedly said things like this:

To date, even with the limited number of at-large bids, I don't think anybody can reasonably point to one single instance where the size of the field excluded a team that would be considered a contender to win the tournament.

My position on the issue has not changed through three rounds of this tournament.

I respectfully disagree on this point. I do believe based on the way Mulhenberg has handled their first three rounds that Susquehanna could have made some noise in this tournament. I don't think Mulhenberg winning the championship is totally far fetched at this point, and if they do, there will have been a 9-1 team whose only loss was in OT to the champions excluded from the playoffs. I do generally agree that never before has a true potential contender been left out, but there is a part of me that feels like this may have been the year.

[wally_wabash]

I seem to recall there being some folks who argued the last team in the field, or any pool C team really has no realistic chance to win the Stagg. I may be misremembering this discussion but if that's the case, this year may be the year that 2 Pool C's end up playing for the Stagg.

I don't think I've said that Pool C teams don't have a chance to win the championship.  I have repeatedly said things like this:

To date, even with the limited number of at-large bids, I don't think anybody can reasonably point to one single instance where the size of the field excluded a team that would be considered a contender to win the tournament.

My position on the issue has not changed through three rounds of this tournament.

I respectfully disagree on this point. I do believe based on the way Mulhenberg has handled their first three rounds that Susquehanna could have made some noise in this tournament. I don't think Mulhenberg winning the championship is totally far fetched at this point, and if they do, there will have been a 9-1 team whose only loss was in OT to the champions excluded from the playoffs. I do generally agree that never before has a true potential contender been left out, but there is a part of me that feels like this may have been the year.

I understand the sentiment.  Making noise in the tournament and winning the tournament are different things.  I'm talking very specifically about teams that can win that have been left out, and I don't think that's happened this year or in any year. 

Are we sure Susquehanna is even the best team that didn't qualify?  The Top 25 doesn't think so. 

[AO]

I seem to recall there being some folks who argued the last team in the field, or any pool C team really has no realistic chance to win the Stagg. I may be misremembering this discussion but if that's the case, this year may be the year that 2 Pool C's end up playing for the Stagg.

I don't think I've said that Pool C teams don't have a chance to win the championship.  I have repeatedly said things like this:

To date, even with the limited number of at-large bids, I don't think anybody can reasonably point to one single instance where the size of the field excluded a team that would be considered a contender to win the tournament.

My position on the issue has not changed through three rounds of this tournament.

I respectfully disagree on this point. I do believe based on the way Mulhenberg has handled their first three rounds that Susquehanna could have made some noise in this tournament. I don't think Mulhenberg winning the championship is totally far fetched at this point, and if they do, there will have been a 9-1 team whose only loss was in OT to the champions excluded from the playoffs. I do generally agree that never before has a true potential contender been left out, but there is a part of me that feels like this may have been the year.

I understand the sentiment.  Making noise in the tournament and winning the tournament are different things.  I'm talking very specifically about teams that can win that have been left out, and I don't think that's happened this year or in any year. 

Are we sure Susquehanna is even the best team that didn't qualify?  The Top 25 doesn't think so.

Even if Muhlenberg goes on to win the title this year that doesn't necessarily mean they would have beaten Mount Union.  Susquehanna's odds to the win the tournament wouldn't improve that much either.  It's not zero, but it's still very unlikely.   

[HSCTiger74]

I seem to recall there being some folks who argued the last team in the field, or any pool C team really has no realistic chance to win the Stagg. I may be misremembering this discussion but if that's the case, this year may be the year that 2 Pool C's end up playing for the Stagg.

I don't think I've said that Pool C teams don't have a chance to win the championship.  I have repeatedly said things like this:

To date, even with the limited number of at-large bids, I don't think anybody can reasonably point to one single instance where the size of the field excluded a team that would be considered a contender to win the tournament.

My position on the issue has not changed through three rounds of this tournament.

I respectfully disagree on this point. I do believe based on the way Mulhenberg has handled their first three rounds that Susquehanna could have made some noise in this tournament. I don't think Mulhenberg winning the championship is totally far fetched at this point, and if they do, there will have been a 9-1 team whose only loss was in OT to the champions excluded from the playoffs. I do generally agree that never before has a true potential contender been left out, but there is a part of me that feels like this may have been the year.

I understand the sentiment.  Making noise in the tournament and winning the tournament are different things.  I'm talking very specifically about teams that can win that have been left out, and I don't think that's happened this year or in any year. 

Are we sure Susquehanna is even the best team that didn't qualify?  The Top 25 doesn't think so.

Even if Muhlenberg goes on to win the title this year that doesn't necessarily mean they would have beaten Mount Union.  Susquehanna's odds to the win the tournament wouldn't improve that much either.  It's not zero, but it's still very unlikely.

  Maybe I'm slow but I'm not sure what your point is here. How Muhlenberg (or SJU or UWW) would have done against Mt. Union is irrelevant, because North Central already knocked them out. Are you equating that to the irrelevance of the Susquehanna speculation, since they didn't even make the field?