Bracketology Projection

[DuffMan]

...leaving four at-large bids.

Ugh.  (yeah, yeah, win your AQ)

[Cowboy2]

...leaving four at-large bids.

Ugh.  (yeah, yeah, win your AQ)

So interesting..yea win your conference and you get the AQ. However, McMurry is now joining the SCAC. In time if others possibly form conferences, or break away, the AQs will make the Pool Cs start to disappear. Could we see only 2-3 spots in the coming years? If that happens would more teams continue to play steeper competition earlier in the season to get their program ready? We've seen this year a lot of abnormal games scheduled to help SOS efforts, but if the Pool C becomes a thing of the past, would it increase the fun OOC games we experienced, or would teams go back to budget games?

[smedindy]

Well in 2024 and 2025, I think the ASC still has a bid, so that's...THREE Pool Cs.

The ASC and SCAC will have a lot of non-conference games to fill

[BSCpanthers]

Well in 2024 and 2025, I think the ASC still has a bid, so that's...THREE Pool Cs.

The ASC and SCAC will have a lot of non-conference games to fill

They can fill those OOC games playing each other. 

At some point another round of playoffs, or some sort of play in games added to the playoffs.  There needs to be room for the at large, non-conference winners to get in. 

[bluestreak66]

Well in 2024 and 2025, I think the ASC still has a bid, so that's...THREE Pool Cs.

The ASC and SCAC will have a lot of non-conference games to fill

They can fill those OOC games playing each other. 

At some point another round of playoffs, or some sort of play in games added to the playoffs.  There needs to be room for the at large, non-conference winners to get in.

I feel like they have to do some kind of expansion/trimming down on Pool As. Not sure what that looks like though.

Not even trying to sound self serving as a fan of a team who is almost always relegated to Pool C or bust. If there were 7 Pool C bids this year, maybe 8-2 John Carroll would have a shot. Certainly more of a chance than with only 5. That being said, they didn't do themselves any favors by losing their first game, and I don't necessarily think 5 is too few.

What alarms me is that in a year with only 4 Pool C bids (or 3), 2019 national champion North Central would have almost assuredly been left out. The point where legitimate national champions are being left out is the point where something needs to change.

An easy potential fix is removing the bye week and adding another round, if not a full 64 teams, maybe 48 with 16 play in games, giving 29 AQs and 19 at large.

Assuming that's too drastic, maybe resurrect Pool B in some capacity. If there was a way the NCAA could take some criteria (conference OOC win%, recent playoff record, ect.), maybe take the lowest 8 performing conferences and put them as Pool B, where half will get AQs, and the rest will go to the Pool C group, thus giving 21 Pool A, 4 Pool B, 7 Pool C

Not sure either of those options are realistic or if the NCAA even feels a need to address the issue, but either one could really help make sure the best teams are getting a shot in the playoffs, while still allowing access to every team in the division.

[smedindy]

How do you define lowest performing? Because if you you past playoff results you could miss out on a generationally good team from a less-than-successful conference.

Using Wally's bottom 8 conferences, the teams on that bubble would be Ripon, Aurora, Springfield or Catholic, Huntingdon, Mass-Dartmouth, Mt. St. Joseph, Gaulladet (or Castleton), and Northwestern (MN). Some good teams there. The NCAC, CCC, and SCIAC would be on the bubble of that list.

Yeah, eliminating teams like NW (MN), or Gaulladet would be easy from a paperwork standpoint, but I think it'd lessen the diversity and color of the tournament.

Expanding the tournament means extending it past Christmas. Maybe a New Year's Day D-3 championship game would be OK. But would the NCAA pay for another week of travel, hotels, etc. for a whole other round?

If I'd expand it, I'd make it 36, and the #1 seed (cough cough) would get the bye. That'd make seven pool C teams.

[Cowboy2]

Until they have a year or two where multiple Pool Cs are in the semis or finals, I doubt it will be addressed by the NCAA. I Didn't do research but in recent memory a number of annual programs in discussion or that are awarded, have been in R6 R5 R3 usually. Correct me if I'm wrong if I left a region out. But a team is always salty when they don't get in Pool C because they didn't do enough to obtain the AQ. Which is a double edged sword when looking SOSs and common opponents of those that get in. Whatever it is what is.

I'd propose this...for player safety.

Season starts week 1. Everyone plays 5 games. Nationwide bye week on week 6. Teams play out remaining 5 games and end week 11 how they do now anyways.

Week 12. Wild card round of 32! Top 16 teams get a bye based on SOS, national rankings, regional ranking or whatever by quadrant. 16 pool c teams make it in. If a team doesn't make it in, well then they didn't do enough to justify it. Right now there's arguments when a 9-1 deserving team, who would be fun to see, is left out. So call it a bye week. Put  Those 16 teams are on the road. None of the 500-600 rule. If they want to play they go that first round. If not the team forfeits and the host has a bye.

Week 13: round one of 32 teams
Week 14: round two of 16 teams
Week 15: round three quarter finals
Week 16: round four - semis
Week 17: Stagg Bowl Finals

Technically you extend the season one week. Have a Christmas bowl in the name of player saftey. NCAA isnt out any extra money either...outside of say officiating. Allows a team that slipped up on week to a top 10-15 program to still make it in. Heck they do it in D1 each year with that bogus selection instead of a true playoff. Probably have 3/4 of the teams from the SEC this year. What they make off that game would sponsor plenty of D3 playoffs games for years to come!

Most likely this  schedule for the champions is still 15 games. Maybe a 16 game wild card team runs the table. But it would break it up and allow teams a chance to have an extra bye week prior to a big playoff run.

Just my thoughts.. crown it

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

An easy potential fix is removing the bye week and adding another round, if not a full 64 teams, maybe 48 with 16 play in games, giving 29 AQs and 19 at large.

Removing the bye week works if the conference has an even number like the HCAC. Most teams take the bye week in week 4 and then play conference 5-11 so it's an easy change. But in conferences that have an odd number like the MIAA (at least until Calvin starts playing) one team at a time has a bye in the middle of conference play. Could be tricky to find a team anywhere nearby that is also needing to fill a game in week 7 or 8.

As far as field size... I think 64 is too large, even 48 is probably a bit much. If you had 40 you'd have over 10 at large bids which is plenty. 16 teams play opening round and 24 get a week off. That would mean 1-6 "seed" in each bracket gets a week off while 7-10 "seeds" play. Would be great for those lower seeded schools because they have a much better shot at being able to win a playoff game.

I don't see the problem with extending the season by one week because it only affects 2 teams and I guarantee if you ask players who make the Stagg if they mind playing a week later they'd have no problem. Besides, lots of basketball teams go all over the country for tournaments around Dec 29-31. They don't seem to have any issues playing.

[SW1]

What about a playoff system similar to high schools that use division 1 or 2? They determine it based on enrollment size but it could be modified to use any criteria. Maybe 32 in big division and 16 in the other or maybe proximity to each other for cost savings. Maybe the smaller division could play for the Mahogany and Brass instead of the Walnut and Bronze. There has to be a way to separate the teams that want to play the tougher playoffs and those who would like to go the easier route.

[Cowboy2]

I still like having week 12 a bye week prior to playoffs. It could also be utilized as a wildcard round for pool C. A lot of major sports have increased wild card teams or a winner takes all game to get into the playoff. It could be a super regional. North south east and west each have 2 teams play a game. The final spot game goes to the last to teams the national committee wants in the pot.. Could have the 27 AQs, who took care of their own, have an off week. Have 5 pool C games that week at the schools expense so NCAA can't blame it on cost. The 5 winners are then to fill the first round of playoffs. It would then proceed as normal from there

You increase the season schedule by 1 week! But honestly it's good for the body to rest and it would be much needed for a playoff run. Would be an easy sale in my opinion.

[HOPEful]

I like the idea of a wildcard round, much like the play-in games for the NCAA D1 basketball tournament. You could pair 8 of your weakest AQs and 8 Pool C teams and gain 8 spots for Pool C teams.

The AQs would get a chance to play a postseason game they could win rather than getting a first-round matchup against an elite team that beats them by 60 with their second stringers. You'd get Pool C matchups like John Carroll v. Wheaton that would be fun to watch and give more teams a chance to play their way in despite taking second in the conference to one of those said elite teams.

[jknezek]

I think we just do something easier and cheaper (most likely the NCAA favorite idea) and say football conferences have to be  9 teams to have an AQ. Sure it screws all these conferences that are forming up on 6 now, but that was a stupid policy decision anyway. I'm a firm believer in the AQ system. Win your conference, I don't care how crappy your conference is or how bad you've been in the playoffs in the past, and you get a dream shot. That's how it should be. The problem is the conference qualifying limit is too low.

But a 9 team conference is really ideal. It's not that hard to find and schedule 2 non-conference games. Sure we will likely have less cross-conference data to compare teams, but since you still have all the champions getting in, I'm always less concerned about who is the "Best Last Team to get a C". And if these 6 team conferences don't want to consolidate or can't for some reason, well... Pool B will be re-energized on a 9 team divisor. If it was up to me, the Pool B criteria would then be amended to add Conference Champion as one of the primary criteria, and it would be added to Pool C as secondary criteria.

That way those 6 team conference champions get something of a leg up. A big one in Pool B, a smaller one if they drop to Pool C.

Regardless, with roughly 235 D3 football teams in a few years (since we are expecting to add a few less the NESCACs), that gives you max 26 or 27 Pool A, and 5 or 6 Pool B and C. I suspect you'd end up with a lot of football only affiliates, but that's ok.

This type of policy stays within the NCAA DIII guidelines of access for all, we've just moved the access point to a more reasonable size. Six team football conferences? Idiotic to have to schedule 5 OOC games. I think they must have been drunk when they decided on this. Especially since it already means a max of about 39 AQs if everyone shifted to 6 team conferences...

Finally, if you really want to incentivize this kind of action, any conference 12 or over can already hold a conference title game. Add Pool C primary criteria to favor teams that play in a conference title game. That takes away some of the sting of a loss, will still allowing for conference consolidation. As an example, if the SCAC starts football, and the ASC and SCAC both end up with 6-8 members each, neither conference qualifies for Pool A. But if they combine and hold a conference championship, one AQ is awarded and one runner-up has a leg up in criteria for Pool C.

[Cowboy2]

I still like having week 12 a bye week prior to playoffs. It could also be utilized as a wildcard round for pool C. A lot of major sports have increased wild card teams or a winner takes all game to get into the playoff. It could be a super regional. North south east and west each have 2 teams play a game. The final spot game goes to the last to teams the national committee wants in the pot.. Could have the 27 AQs, who took care of their own, have an off week. Have 5 pool C games that week at the schools expense so NCAA can't blame it on cost. The 5 winners are then to fill the first round of playoffs. It would then proceed as normal from there

You increase the season schedule by 1 week! But honestly it's good for the body to rest and it would be much needed for a playoff run. Would be an easy sale in my opinion.

I doubt the NCAA would foot the bill but if the universities could make it work I know every program would love to showcase their team for it.

You could get something like this for example based on results so far..."just an EXAMPLE"

Super regional/wild card/bye week whatever you want to call it.

North Wheaton vs WIAC#3
South HSU vs BSC
East John's Hopkins vs Utica
West: MIAC #2 vs WIAC #2

National committee selects At large from a field of something possibly like: Wash U, Bridgewater, Belhaven, DePauw, JC etc.

Heck rest of the field could still have the fun bowl games that week as well where they play for the "whatever jug" or local conferences could play each other's #2 or #3 that was left home.

[Cowboy2]

Well said jknezek!!!

[Etchglow]

I think we just do something easier and cheaper (most likely the NCAA favorite idea) and say football conferences have to be  9 teams to have an AQ. Sure it screws all these conferences that are forming up on 6 now, but that was a stupid policy decision anyway. I'm a firm believer in the AQ system. Win your conference, I don't care how crappy your conference is or how bad you've been in the playoffs in the past, and you get a dream shot. That's how it should be. The problem is the conference qualifying limit is too low.

But a 9 team conference is really ideal. It's not that hard to find and schedule 2 non-conference games. Sure we will likely have less cross-conference data to compare teams, but since you still have all the champions getting in, I'm always less concerned about who is the "Best Last Team to get a C". And if these 6 team conferences don't want to consolidate or can't for some reason, well... Pool B will be re-energized on a 9 team divisor. If it was up to me, the Pool B criteria would then be amended to add Conference Champion as one of the primary criteria, and it would be added to Pool C as secondary criteria.

That way those 6 team conference champions get something of a leg up. A big one in Pool B, a smaller one if they drop to Pool C.

Regardless, with roughly 235 D3 football teams in a few years (since we are expecting to add a few less the NESCACs), that gives you max 26 or 27 Pool A, and 5 or 6 Pool B and C. I suspect you'd end up with a lot of football only affiliates, but that's ok.

This type of policy stays within the NCAA DIII guidelines of access for all, we've just moved the access point to a more reasonable size. Six team football conferences? Idiotic to have to schedule 5 OOC games. I think they must have been drunk when they decided on this. Especially since it already means a max of about 39 AQs if everyone shifted to 6 team conferences...

Finally, if you really want to incentivize this kind of action, any conference 12 or over can already hold a conference title game. Add Pool C primary criteria to favor teams that play in a conference title game. That takes away some of the sting of a loss, will still allowing for conference consolidation. As an example, if the SCAC starts football, and the ASC and SCAC both end up with 6-8 members each, neither conference qualifies for Pool A. But if they combine and hold a conference championship, one AQ is awarded and one runner-up has a leg up in criteria for Pool C.

I don't know that I'd go up to 9, but I agree that 6 is too low.  I understand the 6 was mainly for other sports but I'd love to see it go before the committee next year to go back to 7 for just football (not that I think it'll happen).