It’s that time of year again, our first playoff projections.
This is where we take the 21 automatic bids, eight of which are not yet set, then figure out at-large bids, some of which will lose between now and Selection Sunday, then seed them and pair them up logically … or fiscally … or geographically … or randomly, depending on the bracket.
In doing this every year, we have to toe a fine line. We can call some conference races, leave some open, pretend we know what’s going to happen, or ignore what has yet to be played. This is an inexact science, but it’s an attempt to look at the entire field using the NCAA’s stated selection/seeding criteria. But you can’t simply try to project one bracket in isolation. How do you know if there are eight West teams getting into the field, and not seven or nine or 10?
First, the basics:
Thirty-two teams will form four eight-team brackets. And we know the champions of 21 conferences will get an automatic bid to the playoffs. Four bids (Pool B) are set aside for independents or members of non-automatic bid conferences. The remaining seven bids go to what’s called Pool C, which is everyone left over.
So how will the brackets be formed, who will play whom? That’s what we answer each week from here until Selection Sunday. For more info check out our Playoff FAQ.
These are the primary criteria (not in priority order) which will be reviewed by the NCAA:
• Win-loss percentage against regional opponents
• In-region head-to-head competition
• In-region results against common regional opponents
• In-region results vs. regionally ranked teams.
Opponents are considered ranked only if they are ranked at the time of the ranking or playoff selection process.
• Quality of wins index–only contests versus regional competition (see Quality of Wins on the left-hand rail for most recent calculation)
• Conference postseason contest(s) is included.
One thing was brought home to me over the past year: Note that some areas say “results” against regional opponents, regionally ranked teams, etc. This does not say winning percentage. It’s possible that merely playing a regionally ranked team and losing is better than going 0-0. Something to keep in mind.
Here’s our best guess at the Field of 32, updated Nov. 7. This is just a projection as if the season had ended today. Teams in bold have clinched automatic bids.
Wilkes Bracket
1. Wilkes (a)
2. Springfield (a)
3. Union (a)
4. St. John Fisher (c)
5. Hobart (c)
6. Dickinson (a)
7. Rowan (a)
8. NEFC Champ (a)
The natural seedings avoid any conference rematches and the like, so there are no pairings shuffled here. No. 8 plays 1, 7-2, 6-3 and 5-4. … Dickinson moves from the South because only seven East teams were selected. … I don’t believe Curry can pass Rowan with a win in the NEFC title game. Regardless of who wins, the No. 8 seed is likely. … If St. John Fisher loses to Alfred, Alfred (projected .800 regional winning pct., approx. 10.700 QOW) has a shot at getting in. … By beating Cortland State, Ithaca (projected .778, 9.889) would likely to ensure neither team makes the playoffs. … By beating Ithaca, Cortland State (projected .889, 10.000) would likely get in and bump Dickinson back to the South.
Wesley Bracket
1. Wesley (b)
2. Trinity (Texas) (a)
3. Mary Hardin-Baylor (a)
4. Hardin-Simmons (c)
5. Carnegie Mellon (b)
6. Wash. & Jeff. (b)
7. Christopher Newport (a)
8. Wash. & Lee (a)
Yes, we know, Trinity has certainly not wrapped up the SCAC. If Millsaps wins, it would be the No. 8 seed. … Unless you’re new to Division III, you know that travel restrictions will change the matchups in this bracket. The NCAA won’t fly three teams to Texas. This would have the following pairings: Washington and Lee at Wesley, Hardin-Simmons at Trinity (Texas), Christopher Newport at Mary Hardin-Baylor, Washington and Jefferson at Carnegie Mellon. … Note the NCAA doesn’t really try to avoid rematches of in-season non-conference games, but it does try to avoid a rematch of a conference game in the first round.
Mount Union Bracket
1. Mount Union (a)
2. Mt. St. Joseph (a)
3. Concordia (Wis.) (a)
4. Capital (c)
5. Wheaton (c)
6. North Central (a)
7. Wittenberg (a)
8. Hope (a)
Standard matchups here. … The NCAA wouldn’t be concerned about matching NCC and CUW up again. … There’s a concern CUW’s facility isn’t sufficient to host (ask Carthage how that goes) and that game could be at NCC again, like it was in September’s double-overtime thriller.
UW-Whitewater Bracket
1. UW-Whitewater (a)
2. St. John’s (a)
3. Central (a)
4. Whitworth (b)
5. UW-La Crosse (c)
6. Occidental (a)
7. St. Norbert (a)
8. Wartburg (c)
Air travel again, put Occidental at Whitworth and St. Norbert at UW-La Crosse (a 2004 rematch). (This was incorrect; a poster corrects me below) … St. John’s would be considered upset-proof — if it loses its conference title, it would still get in.
The four Pool B teams — Wesley, Whitworth, Carnegie Mellon and Washington and Jefferson — are pretty easy picks right now and only W&J is vulnerable. If the Presidents lose, it opens up the possibility that Linfield might make the field. Nobody else really has a shot in Pool B.
The final Pool C decision came down to Cortland State, Franklin and Wartburg. Wartburg had the better credentials for now, but if Cortland State wins it would probably get the nod. Franklin has fairly decent numbers as well and could be selected but the committee has traditionally looked down on runners-up in the bottom conferences (ask any one-loss team from the Midwest Conference since 1999).
We’ll do this again at the end of the night on Saturday, heading into Selection Sunday.
Interested to see no mention of Rochester if they beat Hobart…..I hope you guys are right! Would love to see Bart and the Cards face off again.
SJF fans would also love the Bart/SJF match up. They closed out their series with two great games in 02 and 03 (Both close SJF wins). Would be a great game!
Wheaton, not North Central, is leading the CCIW in terms of the conference’s tiebreaker procedures.
Point differential will end up being used if Augustana, North Central and Wheaton all win their final games this weekend. In that case, the tiebreaker for the conferene will end up being point differential in conference. Right now, Wheaton is a +152, North Central is a +103, and Augustana is a +52. Tie goes to Wheaton.
If North Central loses Saturday, with Augie and Wheaton winning, Augie & Wheaton tie for the championship, and Augie wins on head to head. An Augie loss with NC & Wheaton wins puts Wheaton in based on head-to-head. A Wheaton loss with a NC & Augie win puts NC in on head-to-head.
Pat,
How would you project the MUC region if BW beats Cap? Would Franklin be in over both of them, or would BW beat out Cap? (I realize that’s looking at the ‘midwest’ in isolation, so some other scenario?)
The predictions sound right based on the constraints of the system. And it looks like most of the deserving teams would get in.
But, although no play-off system is perfect, this would leave out:
Undefeated Williams; 1-loss Cortland State, Franklin and Trinity (Conn); plus 2-loss Bethel (assuming loss to St Johns), Coast Guard (assuming loss to Curry), Ithica, Baldwin Wallace, Alfred, Delaware Valley, Wabash, Ursinas, St Olaf, Rochester, Bridgewater State, Cal Lutheren, Middlebury, and Amhest
by taking 3-loss Whittenberg and Hope. Additionally, you suggest that three loss Linfield could be taken over Washington & Jefferson, if they become a 2-loss team.
Just like the BCS, it could be even worse for teams with better overall records, if a lot of unexpected things happen this weekend. Worst case, six 3-loss teams could be in ahead of teams with only one or two losses overall: Whittenberg, Milsaps, Hope, Averett, Augustana, and Linfield. Although unlikely, I think it would be bad to have over almost 20% of the play-off teams in with three losses with many other undefeated and one or two loss teams left out.
Pat,
You have the same pool B and C teams as me. It will be interesting if Cortland beats Ithaca…. I think that I would then replace Wartburg with Cortland…Wheaton would also be on the bubble. I would also replace Capital with Baldwin Wallace if they win. Overall, I think that most of the predictions will hold up.
Out of curiosity, why doesn’t anyone ever mention Williams. Is there conference that weak. I have noticed that an undefeated team from their conference frequently misses the playoffs.
Pat,
Also…do you feel that there is anyway that Linfield gets a Pool C bid over lets say Wheaton or Wartburg?
Nobody ever mentions Williams because their conference won’t participate in the playoffs.
The ‘West’ Bracket has me confused. I didn’t think flight travel was an issue for anyone besides Oxy and Whitworth. But the projection seems to imply that the is another travel consideration somewhere among the 6 upper midwest teams that would result in the 5 hosting the 7 rather than the 3 hosting the 5? Several of us west region posters were guessing that UW-Lax would be at Central and the 1 vs. 8 and 2 vs. 7 matchups would hold. Did some of us miss a combination of those other six teams that requires a flight or something? In the scenario posted, does SJU host Central??
I’ve never understood the NESCAC rationale on fball – playing NO teams outside the conference, and no playoffs. Afterall, in bball they do both (and with great success many years).
But it is their call, not mine, so it is what it is!
Augie87:
I believe the CCIW tiebreaker refers to only the head-to-head games among the three tied teams.
dtrain:
You’re right, my bad.
Tartan21:
That’s what automatic bids are all about. Same as in basketball.
Tartan 21:
Linfield is not a three loss team in the eyes of the comittee as one of their losses came against division II Western Oregon. Their only two losses come against #7 UMHS and #9 Whitworth. Depending upon this weeks results, they still have an outside shot at making the playoffs.
If this holds to form, in the south once again #2, #3, and #4 will have an elimination battle while Wesley has only to beat the bottom half of the bracket in the first two rounds, thanks to the NCAA’s “fly no Texas team before its time” rule.
Then again we all thought UMHB was going to destroy Wesley in TX last fall and look what happened there.
Tartan,
Even if the playoffs allowed 64 teams in, there would still be gripes. Look at the NCAA basketball tournament. You are assuming that all losses are created equal. This is never the case. No system is perfect. However, I think that the DIII system is as good as any other collegiate or professional playoff system.
Augie 87,
You are mistaken. Here is a list of the tiebreaker procedures for the CCIW:
1) Head to Head Competition
2) Best record by tied teams against the next best team or tied teams
3) Point differential between tied teams
4) Fewest defensive yards given up versus tied teams
5) Random drawing by commissioner
Concerning point 1 all teams split the regular season series.
Concerning point 2 Carthage is the next best team. Assuming that North Central beats Carthage, all teams will have defeated Carthage.
Concerning point 3: here are the scores Augustana 17 Wheaton 14, Wheaton 31 North Central 19 North Central 27 Augustana 0. Differentials are NorthCentral +15 Wheaton +9 Augustana -24. Thus if all three win out North Central gets the pool A bid. If North Central loses, Augustana gets pool A bid (by beating Wheaton). If Wheaton loses, North Central gets the bid. If Augustana loses, Wheaton gets the bid. I hope this helps.
Something really should be done regarding the seeding of the teams. Granted these are only projections right now, but if they become reality it might be a huge concern as far as fairness goes in each bracket being equal in strength of seeds. First off, the 4 top ranked teams should be the #1 seed in each bracket. This means that St. John’s Should be a top seed in a bracket of their own.
The Mount Union Bracket is nothing but a joke seeing that only one team in that bracket is ranked in the top 10 and that being the 5th ranked team Capital. There are only two other ranked teams which are the 18th ranked Wheaton team and the 20th ranked Mt. St. Joseph. There are also FOUR unranked teams in this bracket. This bracket is not evenly weighted with ranked teams compared to the other brackets and something must be done. The NCAA is obviously playing favorites with this bracket by making it pretty easy for Mount Union to make it to the finals again. But there could be an upset, there always is and hopefully it is in this bracket and that there is a ciderella story team here.
The UW-Whitewater bracket consists of FOUR teams(5 if you inclued UW-Whitewater) in the top 10 and the 11th ranked team is also in this bracket. This does not make any sense at all having 5 of the top 10 teams in the country in the same bracket!! I understand the traveling aspect of it, but teams are sometimes forced to travel all over the country as seen last year when UW-Whitewater had to travel to Oregon to play Linefield. The same thing that is projected this year happened last year in this bracket. I believe the #1, #2, #3 and #5 seeds were all in this bracket last year. The lowest ranked team in this bracket right now is ranked 19th and there is one unranked team in this bracket compared to the FOUR in Mount Union’s Bracket.
The Wesley Bracket consists of only 2 teams in the top 10 besides Wesley and has only two other teams in this bracket which are ranked 21st and 23rd in the top 25 ranked teams. There is also 3 unranked teams in this bracket.
The Wilkes Bracket is by far the worst with NO teams ranked in the Top 10. But this bracket still consists of 5 teams ranked in the teens and one team ranked 22nd. There are also 2 unranked teams in this bracket as well.
To Make things Fair the NCAA should make the Brackets Even and have the Top 4 Ranked teams be the #1 seed in each bracket. There is NO reason why there should be so many unranked teams in the Mount Union Bracket, and NO reason why there should be 5 teams in the top 10 in the UW-Whitewater Bracket. Also there is NO reason why the Wilkes Bracket should consist of NO teams in the Top 10. I understand that there are some traveling issues for some teams, but not all teams have traveling issues. Therefore, The Brackets Should be created Fairly and Evenly Weighted. I’m sure that Many Fans will Agree.
Pat,
If Cortland wins, it could come down to Wheaton and Wartburg for the last pool C bid. Who do you think has the best resume between the two?
Yes,
North Central is in the CCIW drivers seat.
That fourth tiebreaker is odd though. Defense really does win championships.
Williams is not “left out” of the playoffs, they choose not to participate. The Amherst game is their Stagg Bowl.
I am going to carry the Wartburg torch. Same with Cortland if they won and were 9-1 with an OT loss to Rowan.
No way a one-loss team whose only fault was not scoring in overtime against the conference champ should miss the playoffs. Those are the prime Pool C candidates.
I don’t think this will be an issue, as I doubt Hobart (Rochester), Capital (Baldwin-Wallace), Cortland (Ithaca)
I do think Alfred has a chance as a 2-loss team (see ATN).
Of the above bracket, I quite dislike the rematches, non-conference or not.
I also think the redundant “In-region results against common regional opponents” criteria will allow for UMHB and/or Hardin-Simmons to be seeded ahead of Trinity should they win the SCAC. ASC fifth-place team Texas Lutheran beat the Tigers 14-9; UMHB beat ’em 31-9 and HSU 35-7.
I’m sure these opinions will resurface in ATN, but thought I’d air them out here for your response and/or ridicule.
Oops,
meant to finish making the point that there are several teams with tough games this weekend, and they all won’t likely win, meaning if Wheaton and Wartburg or whoever take care of business, they should be OK.
Hobart (Rochester), Capital (Baldwin-Wallace), Cortland (Ithaca) and SJF (Alfred) all play 2-loss teams. No easy Ws there. Wartburg might have a fight vs. resurgent Dubuque too.
“Linfield is not a three loss team in the eyes of the comittee as one of their losses came against division II Western Oregon. Their only two losses come against #7 UMHS and #9 Whitworth. Depending upon this weeks results, they still have an outside shot at making the playoffs.”
dtrack22, Thanks for pointing that out. I have seen “Linfield has three losses” without clarifying only two were DIII losses repeatedly posted at times on the Daily Dose and some of the Post Pattern boards. I read a post which stated the DII school is 6-3 and was flirting with the DII top 25 earlier this season. The third loss is part of the secondary criteria, but not the primary. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that plenty of the teams on this year’s playoff bubble would have lost to that scholarship school.
I think y’all might be underestimating where Franklin fits into this picture. We’ll see where they are when the NCAA regional rankings come out later today. But last week, Franklin was 6 in the North compared to Wartburg being 10 in the West. Also, Franklin has a slightly better QOWI at the moment. Finally, both Franklin and Wartburg’s QOWI is notably better than Cortland or Linfield.
What is significant about noting that they have three losses, however, is that they have fewer wins. So even if they get in a situation vs. Wash. & Jeff. where the both have two in-region losses, Linfield (if I recall correctly) would be 5-2 against W&J’s 7-2 or 8-2, and winning percentage is primary criteria.
So that’s one point for scheduling 10 games and another for scheduling as many regional D3 opponents as possible.
It’s also another point for the AQ. Rowan’s out-of-division loss had no bearing whatsoever on its playoff chances because it was chasing the NJAC’s automatic bid.
I do understand that Franklin was higher in its region but that is not one of the criteria. In the end, the highest remaining teams in each region are compared head to head against each other. The fact that Franklin would come in at No. 6 and Wartburg at No. 10 has no particular bearing.
I hope Oxy gets a crack at Central, either in sunny Eagle Rock or in Iowa, I’m sure Widolf would like to get a playoff “W” against them to make-up for the seventysomething to nothing pasting many years back.
D3Keith,
One issue that Linfield faces in terms of “D3” wins/games is finding D3’s to play. Linfield plays nine games but only 7 vs DIII schools (NAIA-Southern Oregon, DII-Western Oregon).
The problem is finding a D3 team to replace Western Oregon (It saves both WOU and Linfield money to play but doesn’t help either in regards to playoffs). Linfield cannot get a game with the SCIAC and so that leaves another huge flight to either Tx, Minn, or Wisconsin. Why play 10 if you can’t even get more that 7 DIII games?
After we finish the HSU home/home who do we replace them with? At this rate, it could wind up where we play another NAIA: Azusa Pacific and only have 6 DIII games. However, the chances are we’ll find another name school for a DIII “marquee” matchup.
This problem is not unique to Linfield but it’s still a struggle that can come back to haunt Linfield if they lose to fellow DIII’s during the year.
In terms of this year…I think Larry Coker has a better chance on being on the Miami sidelines next season that Linfield has in making the playoffs this year. I hate saying it but I think it’s the reality.
TARTAN 21 BETA
Trinity in Connnecticut also is not allowed to participate in the playoffs by league rule. They only play the members of their own conference ……………EVERY SINGLE YEAR!
The CCIW is going to be interesting. I would prefer my Augustana Vikings make it in, but the likelyhood of North Central not winning is small.
I think Wartburg looks tough for being #2 in their conference. They are playing good ball right now. I think Wartburg and Central will do well.
Pat
Any idea how the NCAA might pair the brackets?
Pat,
If Baldwin Wallace beats Capital, how do you see Capital’s and BW’s chances of getting in and where would they be ranked? I know that BW must beat Capital in order to even have a shot at the post season.
The brackets will be paired to make them completely screwed up.
If I remember from last year, people were not happy.
pcole,
I understand that regional ranking is not criteria. And I admit I’m not entirely sure who publishes those rankings each week. Is it done by the championship committee?
I guess my point was that the NCAA has some regard for Franklin, or they wouldn’t be ranked as the #2 pool C team in the region…ahead of Baldwin Wallace. I just think y’all might be glossing over a good football team because it is from a historically weak conference.
Who knows? A BW win on Saturday might be all the committee needs to take Franklin instead of either Capital or BW.
To whom the powers may be:
There must be an ecomonical way to move atleast one team from the West to either the North or the East. Here are the reasons: First, the West has 6 of the top 11 nationally ranked teams (seems fairly obvious that it is the strongest region). Second, if you moved UW La Crosse to the north they could either travel to or host Concordia (Wis) without air travel expenses. Third thought, if you moved St Johns (MN) to the East as a #2 or #3 regional seed, (because of their National ranking at #3) they would host one and maybe two games before possibly travelling for the third game to Wilkes. The Johnnies have a fantastic facility to host and would be able to bring gate receipts to offset the travel costs for an East team to fly to Minneapolis. Besides, Northwest has a hub there and I am sure that there is someone in the NCAA office that can negotiate a preferred charter to Minneapolis from just about anywhere in the East?
I challenge the playoff selection committee to be creative and to reward the West region with a ninth playoff team. Try and I know that you will see the benefits! Then the #’s 2 & 3 nationally ranked teams won’t have to meet in the National quarterfinals AGAIN, and will probably meet in the National Semi’s, like they should.
Your thoughts? Seems to make sense to me.
Hello again!
I agree with footballfan! Why can’t the NCAA selection committee balance the brackets out from a strength standpoint? The answer is THEY CAN! All they have to do is take a small percentage of the HUGE revenues generated by the Division 1 bowl season, and use it to balance the brackets out? That seems to make a lot of sense. Afterall, every school on this list has had to shift money within their athletics departments for Title IX expenses? Why not take the same approach? Why can’t Division III have access to similar monies to travel as Division 1? 1AA? II? . . . Let’s get the brackets in balance, I think all football fans would appreciate that far more! It is crazy to have 6 of the top 11 Nationally ranked teams in one bracket and as few as NONE in some others?
Someone should be smart enough at the NCAA Offices to figure that one out? Shouldn’t they? . . .
I just realized the Wheaton is most likely pool C, and not pool A. So Franklin is the #3 pool C team in the North according to the regional rankings.
I don’t think this detracts too much from my original statement though…somebody in the NCAA thinks well enough of Franklin to place them that high.
altor
I think you are right about Franklin. They are a good team.
The tendency is to not give as much credit to good teams from historically weak conferences. Just look at St. Norbert – they are a good team (undefeated), but they come from a conference that is historically weak. Also, St. Norbert only plays one non-conference team a year, which hurts. If they don’t play a quality team, then big deal.
Food for thought: Alfred lost to Springfield 41-34 at Springfield, where they always have an advantage. SJF lost to Springfield 55-38 on their own home field. Springfield lost to Ithaca 24-7 at Ithaca, Ithaca lost to Alfred 28-17 at Alfred, and lost 34-10 to SJF at SJF.
Alfred lost to Hobart by a questionable touchdown taken away (AU defense with an interception and touchdown that was ruled a fumble on the 1 yard line that was recovered by Hobart in the end zone? And he was all alone going into the end zone?? I heard – but did not see – that the tape shows the ball clearly breaking the plane while in possesion, people viewing from the end zone said it was a touchdown?).
Alfred is certainly not going to lie down for SJF, and anyone who watched last years game knows that SJF had the ball in the red zone at the end of the game on their home field, for almost 2 minutes and did their best to score, but it just didn’t happen. This Saturdays game should be an exciting match to be sure.
PA_wesleyfan Says:
The 8th of November, 2006 at 6:20 pm
Ron
I didn’t see anyone screaming injustice the first time Welsey was in the playoffs and because their field was a mess the ncaa shipped them to Texas. And as it turned out it was a quagmire there. Wesley is getting the home advantge field it deserves. And maybe this time a Texas team will come up and win.
IIRC, it wasn’t because your old field was a quagmire as much as it didn’t have any way to secure the gate and make sure people paid to enter.
Pat
The field has been gated as long as I’ve been going to games.. And yes I understand why the old field wasn’t quite up to snuff.. But gotta defend against them Texan’s
Is there no love for the Rochester Yellowjackets? They still have to play Hobart, and with Bielecki and Vanderstyne healthy, who knows what they are capable of. But Hobart is predicted to make the playoffs. So if Rochester wins, does U of R get an at large?
A win would knock Hobart out and might get Rochester into the conversation, but it won’t get it into the field, most likelyq.
“The NCAA is obviously playing favorites with this bracket”
You do realize the NCAA hasn’t done anything yet, and won’t until Saturday night/Sunday?
This is a projection. Can the assault on the committee wait until they actually DO something?
Wildcat, I agree about NWC and other teams having trouble getting games; I did an ATN with Speckman on it a couple years ago. Some people thought it sounded like complaining, but Linfield’s plight this year shows how relevant it is.
As far as balancing the brackets, it would be nice. But this is Division III, folks. We do not generate enough revenue to support ourselves. The 4% cut from March Madness helps pay for our playoff travel. Therefore the brackets are and always will be regionally-based.
The West tends to be the strongest region, depth-wise, every year. Look at the history of the brackets, these same complaints are made every year. It’s not totally fair, but it’s no more unfair than the West Coast or Texas sub-brackets, and the answer to that always is “if you were gonna get to the Stagg Bowl, you would have to beat the best teams somewhere along the way anyway.” Look at UMHB’s run in ’04. Last year, UWW beat Central, St. John’s, Linfield, Wesley and then Mount Union. Is it any more worthwhile if they had beaten Central, then Wesley, then St. John’s, Linfield and played Mount Union?
I mean, I agree on a basic level that you want even matchups and the toughest projected battles deepest in the playoffs … but no guarantee the playoffs go according to plan, and to be the best you have to beat the best anyway.
The NCAA wouldn’t weight the bracket to get Mount Union back to the Stagg Bowl … they don’t care, they’re not making money off us, the ESPN ratings are miniscule, they have no interest that I can think of in favoring any team. They favor the matchups that make the most sense competitively, with the geographic limitations in mind.
Frankly, I don’t envy the committee because someone always thinks they got screwed regarding the 32nd bid, home games and matchups either in the first round or down the line.
Regarding balance, I think there’s some wiggle room around Wisconsin, Illinois, Ohio and Pa. … You can’t send St. John’s to the East though. Minnesota is East in no way, shape of form. The committee has flexibility in the states I’ve mentioned, but there aren’t a lot of options. You can’t put Whitewater in the Mount Union bracket. Maybe you can shift Central out of the West, even if its one of the Westernmost schools that will make it. You could make a Mount Union, a Wesley, a St. John’s and a Whitewater bracket to use the top four teams in the nation, but the trickle-down effects could be great.
The unranked teams won their AQs fair and square, they deserve their playoff spots. No doubt our system doesn’t always take the 32 best teams, but at least it’s not up to voters to determine who those are. Each team has a clearly defined path to the postseason, and if you end up being team No. 33 and beyond, you most certainly didn’t handle business at one or more points during the season and blew your shot. That’s not the committee’s fault.
Football fan, you yourself acknowledge there are travel considerations. All that stuff you say there is “NO reason” for there are perfectly well-documented reasons for. For instance, there are four regions, and the brackets tend to be based on those. So there’s a very good reason why Mount Union’s bracket is weak. It’s because many of the North teams didn’t play their way into the top 25, but they did play their way into the playoffs.
Get the poll off your minds. The AQ system was set up to ensure open access to playoffs for all conferences. You may not know how limiting the old 16-team, four-from-each-region-system was, but we should be thanking our lucky stars for what we have now. There are bids for champions of conferences that happen to be unranked (not top 25) and for runners-up, and Pool C teams have won first- and second-round games. PLU in ’99 and UMHB in ’04 would never have happened without the system we have.
It is not perfect, but it deserves much praise.
Theoretically, the No. 1 and 2 teams could meet somewhere before the Stagg Bowl, but we’ll never know. But the last team standing would have had to beat the best of the other 31 anyway … you follow me. Trust me, this is astronomically better than a fake 1 vs. 2 game after a six-week layoff.
“The answer is THEY CAN! All they have to do is take a small percentage of the HUGE revenues generated by the Division 1 bowl season, and use it to balance the brackets out?”
The Division I bowl money comes from the bowls and their organizers and the NCAA has no connection to it or access to it. I think the NCAA could run a Division I-A playoff is the BCS presidents would let them, but that’s another thread.
Basically, as I understand it, the TV money from the NCAA D-I tournament pays for every other sport. It is a gift, not a right.
I don’t mean to be so critical and condescending, I love the creativeness, but some of you are floating out ideas that aren’t possible based on how things work. Don’t you think if there were that much better a way, someone whose job this is to do this all day would have thought of it already?
Also, don’t you folks realize that no one cares about Division III but us? I mean, we’re lucky we get what we get. NAIA teams have to pay their own way, and if I’m not mistaken, sometimes they don’t accept playoffs bids because of it.
It’s one thing to say “Why doesn’t Division I hook us up with more money.” Their counter-argument could be “why do we owe you any money at all?” And if we were on our own, I don’t think we’d go to as many free and $5 games as we do, and enjoy the true atmosphere and ambience … our schools would be chasing dollars just like the big ones do, except we don’t have the fan bases to support it. So we’d be promoting athletes and trying to grow fan bases and athletic programs, and before you know it, we’re not Division III anymore, we’re them.
I just think the system has minor flaws that we can live with. I have been critical, and will probably be on Sunday and into next week, but one thing I have come to understand is that being the committee is not as easy as it looks when you take the big picture into account.
(defends the man)
Also, I don’t think the East bracket is nearly as weak as some people assume it is. It doesn’t have the dominant team at the top (although Wilkes going 10-0 in a top 10 conference in the nation is fine cred for a 1 seed), but I bet whoever ends up 4-5-6-7 would beat a lot of the other 4-5-6-7s. I think the East is the No. 2 region overall based on depth of playoff teams this season.
1. West – As usual, some unbeaten team (I know most aren’t unbeaten yet) will be on the road in the first round. (St. N, Central, Oxy, Whit, not SJU or UWW, etc.)
2. East – NY/NJ and Springfield all seem pretty even with each other.
3. South – bottom half is weak.
4. North – down year for CCIW hurts this region’s overall depth
Not a popular opinion, but then again
Unfortunately I agree that the CCIW is having a down year – still quality. Last year they were deep and quality.
I still love the WIAC – tough and deep.
“No doubt our system doesn’t always take the 32 best teams.”
I would wager to say I don’t think it’s EVER taken the the 32 best. But that doesn’t bother me too much. AQs are a necessary part of the package.
I can see both sides of this . . . and regional perspectives certainly seem to emerge during the debate. While I don’t think there needs to be extraordinary means used, the NCAA can (and has) the means to moderate the power glut in regions with a high number of highly ranked teams, i.e. moving John Carroll or UW-LX to different regions. Moving a high-seed isn’t the answer, but putting a mid to lower-seed, such as UW-LX (if it qualifies), in the North might be a nice way to mitigate things this time around.
Meanwhile, the Texas-West Coast early round issues seem to a consistent rough spot. Sometimes it seems like the only solution might be a d3 growth spurt. Despite the NAIA’s woes, it doesn’t seem to be happening anytime soon.
Keith,
What you said!
Win 5 games and you win the championship.
Keith,
Very well said….As I have discussed earlier, I feel that the DIII system is a very good playoff system. Completely fair? No? But what in life is.
Keith,
You think the north region is the weakest? I’m a North homer, but really?
If Capital beats BW, and your projections are on, then the North will have the #1 and #5 team in the country, and the number 5 in the country will probably be the fourth seed in the bracket, behind two undefeated teams (weak conferences, but undefeated nonetheless).
Sure the NCAC and CCIW are a mess, with the potential of putting a two or three loss champ in the playoffs, but you’ll have conference champs in the lower half of the bracket, not pool C teams.
Again, I’m a North homer, but I think that I would rank the regions West, North, East, South.
While not entirely conclusive, these records will certainly help Keith’s assertion.
East vs. South 15- 9
South vs. West 7- 2
South vs. North 23- 8
West vs. North 21-13
It would certainly help if there was more interconnectedness between the East and the West and North, but it is quite apparent that the East beat up on the South, and the South did likewise to the West and North.
However, for those that are into statistics, I do believe the North has a greater standard error. Meaning, there is greater diversity between the top and bottom of that region. This is why Mount Union and Capital are rightly at the top.
I guess I misinterpreted the third tiebreaker in the CCIW. I was looking at the total points scored by the teams in conference play, not just the games played between the three teams involved.
I’ve never been a bigger Carthage fan than I am this weekend!
I’d love to see Occidental take on Central. My cousin was on the Oxy team that played at Central in the late 80’s. Never understood why that game was played in the Midwest instead of sunny California!