Bracketology Projection

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

So the Five and the Six stacked the bottom of the rankings to help the resumes of their top teams while the Two and the Three went straight win percentage followed by RRO/SOS, blocking a 2 loss team (Ithaca) from being considered. And with Susquehanna sneaking in Bethel was probably the last pool C picked.

I think that makes sense that maybe Ithaca did get to the table. Ithaca lost Union as a RRO win so they had an identical 1-2 as Bethel. Both with a 1 point loss to a region #1, Bethel with a 6 point loss to region #1 while Ithaca with a 3 point loss to region #4... Ithaca with a .043 SoS edge... personally I still take Ithaca but it's a lot tougher choice than previously thought.

[MonroviaCat]

So the Five and the Six stacked the bottom of the rankings to help the resumes of their top teams while the Two and the Three went straight win percentage followed by RRO/SOS, blocking a 2 loss team (Ithaca) from being considered. And with Susquehanna sneaking in Bethel was probably the last pool C picked.

I think that makes sense that maybe Ithaca did get to the table. Ithaca lost Union as a RRO win so they had an identical 1-2 as Bethel. Both with a 1 point loss to a region #1, Bethel with a 6 point loss to region #1 while Ithaca with a 3 point loss to region #4... Ithaca with a .043 SoS edge... personally I still take Ithaca but it's a lot tougher choice than previously thought.

maybe I'm missing it but where is Ithica's RRO win?

[AO]

So the Five and the Six stacked the bottom of the rankings to help the resumes of their top teams while the Two and the Three went straight win percentage followed by RRO/SOS, blocking a 2 loss team (Ithaca) from being considered. And with Susquehanna sneaking in Bethel was probably the last pool C picked.

I think that makes sense that maybe Ithaca did get to the table. Ithaca lost Union as a RRO win so they had an identical 1-2 as Bethel. Both with a 1 point loss to a region #1, Bethel with a 6 point loss to region #1 while Ithaca with a 3 point loss to region #4... Ithaca with a .043 SoS edge... personally I still take Ithaca but it's a lot tougher choice than previously thought.

All region #1s or #4s are not equal.  Hobart is not a regionally ranked win.  It's also probable that Ithaca never made it to the board.

[kiko]

So the Five and the Six stacked the bottom of the rankings to help the resumes of their top teams while the Two and the Three went straight win percentage followed by RRO/SOS, blocking a 2 loss team (Ithaca) from being considered. And with Susquehanna sneaking in Bethel was probably the last pool C picked.

I think that makes sense that maybe Ithaca did get to the table. Ithaca lost Union as a RRO win so they had an identical 1-2 as Bethel. Both with a 1 point loss to a region #1, Bethel with a 6 point loss to region #1 while Ithaca with a 3 point loss to region #4... Ithaca with a .043 SoS edge... personally I still take Ithaca but it's a lot tougher choice than previously thought.

All region #1s or #4s are not equal.  Hobart is not a regionally ranked win.  It's also probable that Ithaca never made it to the board.

Based on the final regional rankings, either Ithaca did get to the board or JHU was the last team in.

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

If Ithaca was 2-2 RRO then I would have said Hopkins had to be last in because no way they would be left out over Bethel, but without the RRO wins then their profile wasn't nearly as good so they could have been at the table before the end.

I think the region 5 committee gamed the system a bit... I just don't see how they slipped WashU in ahead of Chicago. Chicago had the better record and a head to head win over WashU. Almost identical SoS and neither team with a RRO win. They did that solely to boost Wheaton and make sure they got in.

[OzJohnnie]

So the Five and the Six stacked the bottom of the rankings to help the resumes of their top teams while the Two and the Three went straight win percentage followed by RRO/SOS, blocking a 2 loss team (Ithaca) from being considered. And with Susquehanna sneaking in Bethel was probably the last pool C picked.

I've seen you claim a couple times that region six gamed the system in defense, I suppose, of a potential claim that region five gamed the selections to favour Wheaton.  But I don't think this claim that region six gamed the system, like you believe region five cleverly did, stacks up.  There's not a team in region six who should be ranked above Gustavus or UWRF, unlike Chicago and WashU.

#2 in the SCIAC was Chapman with a 7-3 record, #1 in the UMAC was Greenville (Yeah, you'll have to look them up.  End of argument), and #2 in the NWC was George Fox at 6-3.  There was no team in region six that made any sort of case for ranking above Gustavus (8-2 with a 1-2 RR record) and River Falls (8-2, 0-1 RR).  Region six played it straight.  I find it curious you're so eager to admit that region five did not.

[USee]

No one has seen me say anyone "gamed" the system. I said there are committees that know how the system works and others that don't. Gustavus mysteriously appearing in the rankings last week after not being in there and jumping UWO was not working the system? I also never said every regional committee works the system the same way. You guys all think some criteria are more important than others. Your favorite criteria may not be the same with every committee. You guys aren't on the committee and neither am I. I don't know what criteria every region values and how they measure it. Did the Three do the system justice by putting RMC ahead of Hardin Simmons by putting Susquehana in at the bottom? I don't see any MIAC fans bemoaning that decision.

Wheaton deserved to be in and they are in. Hardin Simmons deserves to be in and they aren't. And if Johns Hopkins was the last team in (I think it was Bethel) then Ithaca never made it to the table. That's the system.

I think the committees are supposed to work with the criteria to get the best ranking they can get and make sure their best teams have a chance to be in the tournament. That's what every committee did. It worked for some and didn't for others. Happens every year.

[AO]

It also doesn't matter at the end of the day what the regional committees do as the national committee can make any change to the rankings that they want.

[wally_wabash]

If Ithaca was 2-2 RRO then I would have said Hopkins had to be last in because no way they would be left out over Bethel, but without the RRO wins then their profile wasn't nearly as good so they could have been at the table before the end.

I think the region 5 committee gamed the system a bit... I just don't see how they slipped WashU in ahead of Chicago. Chicago had the better record and a head to head win over WashU. Almost identical SoS and neither team with a RRO win. They did that solely to boost Wheaton and make sure they got in.

Strong agree that Hopkins had to be the last team in, but the selection order gets weird for me after UWL and BSC.  If the rest go Wheaton, Bethel, Hopkins, I don't really know why Bethel would not also go before Wheaton.  If Bethel's SOS and RROs are good enough to beat Hopkins, they ought to be good enough to beat Wheaton also.  So maybe the final three are Bethel, Wheaton, Hopkins.  Hard to say. 

WashU being ranked is pretty indefensible.  I have no problem with Wheaton being in the tournament, but ranking WashU and not Chicago stretches the criteria beyond its breaking point.  If they really needed WashU in there, they needed to make room for Monmouth and Chicago first. 

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

Ultimately, based on the final regional rankings (the one data point that had changes we didn't know until afterwards) I agree with all five of their choices.

Now it's just over 130 hours until the playoffs officially begin. Good luck to all on the road to Canton.

[Ralph Turner]

i like the UMHB pod. It will help define the western half of Region 3.

[IC798891]

I can't be upset that IC didn't get in.

They had two losses, which most years ends the discussion. They also had a 27-14 lead over Cortland they couldn't hold.

I think the one spot you could maybe quibble with was Hobart dropping out of the RR despite two RR results, including a win over the R1 4. But it's also true that we don't need to rank every LL team. And it's hard to rank Hobart without ranking Union too.

Either way, Ithaca was in the drivers' seat. A win over Cortland puts them in, and they were in control of that game. And as I said, with only 5 at large bids, two losses almost never gets you in. This system isn't perfect, but it almost always lets you in if you take care of what's in front of you. IC just couldn't finish off the Red Dragons (or the Engineers), and it cost them.

[HOPEful]

Ultimately, based on the final regional rankings (the one data point that had changes we didn't know until afterwards) I agree with all five of their choices.

I completely agree. I think there are valid arguments as to where some teams ended up in their regions. But based off the final regional rankings, the right 5 teams were chosen.

[George Thompson]

Thanks for starting the post. I am not ragging on you, but want to push this discussion farther along!

Please project the Regional Rankings of Region 6 after the regular season that get a Pool C bid for Howard Payne.

IMHO, this regional alignment is not "Just".

As I stated elsewhere, there have been 21 Stagg Bowl since the Pools were initiated. This Region has had 21 teams (counting St Thomas of the MIAC) in the Stagg!

The ASC should have been sent to Region 3 to balance the strength across the Division and in numbers of teams considered.

(Only Bridgewater (2001) from the ODAC and Trinity TX (2002), an affiliate in the SAA, have made the Stagg. That is before some D3 players were born!

Agree 100%.    And these playoff setups are awful!!     Hardin-Simmons should have been in the playoffs.    It seems that H-S and Linfield both always get the short end of the DIII playoffs.     The Upper Midwest and the East control the playoff selections.

George

[UfanBill]

I can't be upset that IC didn't get in.

They had two losses, which most years ends the discussion. They also had a 27-14 lead over Cortland they couldn't hold.

I think the one spot you could maybe quibble with was Hobart dropping out of the RR despite two RR results, including a win over the R1 4. But it's also true that we don't need to rank every LL team. And it's hard to rank Hobart without ranking Union too.

Either way, Ithaca was in the drivers' seat. A win over Cortland puts them in, and they were in control of that game. And as I said, with only 5 at large bids, two losses almost never gets you in. This system isn't perfect, but it almost always lets you in if you take care of what's in front of you. IC just couldn't finish off the Red Dragons (or the Engineers), and it cost them.

I believe I read somewhere that both the 2nd and the Final Regional Rankings count towards a team's RRO record. If so, then Union and Hobart were counted. IMO...The problem for Ithaca and one way the committee justified moving Johns Hopkins ahead of Ithaca was that Susquehanna showed up as RR on the final list. That gave Hopkins a RRO win. As I conjectured before they may have been looking for a way to even things up to the CC after dissing them in 2019.