Last year at this time I was having a beer, shouting in a loud room at a former D-III quarterback and future D3football.com color analyst, breathing in the smoke and looking at the shambles of my previous bracket projection while trying to assemble the next one.
This year at this time … well, it’s done.
Wednesday night’s projected hold up pretty well. All of the at-large teams remain the same, though selected in a different order. And the wrinkle of Maine Maritime, which is so far away from the rest of the field that there’s only one team in our projection it can drive to, actually got a fairly simple solution, if surprising to some.
But enough with the chit-chat and on with the brackets. Pool B and Pool C teams are noted. The rest got automatic bids.
Bracket 1
1. Mount Union
2. Delaware Valley
3. Alfred
4. Mary Hardin-Baylor (Pool C)
5. Montclair State
6. Maine Maritime
7. Johns Hopkins
8. Susquehanna
The games: Susquehanna at Mount Union; winner faces the winner of Maine Maritime and Mary Hardin-Baylor. Johns Hopkins at Delaware Valley; winner faces the winner of Montclair State at Alfred.
Why? Maine Maritime could only drive to one place: Montclair State. Mary Hardin-Baylor doesn’t have an opponent it can drive to. (Or, more accurately, it could drive to Mississippi College, but that would leave Huntingdon without an opponent. Basically, two flights are required in the first round no matter how we arrange the 32 teams, so why not match UMHB this way?)
Bracket 2
1. UW-Whitewater
2. Wittenberg
3. Case Western Reserve (Pool B)
4. Illinois Wesleyan
5. Coe (Pool C)
6. Wabash (Pool C)
7. Trine
8. Mount St. Joseph
The games: Mount St. Joseph at UW-Whitewater; winner faces winner of Coe at Illinois Wesleyan. Wabash at Case Western Reserve (again, yes); winner faces winner of Trine at Wittenberg.
Why? Coe wasn’t going to be in this bracket, but there’s a bind in the West that would either force Coe and Central to play each other or put Coe at St. John’s in the first round. Coe can get to Illinois Wesleyan easily within 500 miles, as well at UW-Whitewater.
Bracket 3
1. Wesley (Pool B)
2. Thomas More
3. Hampden-Sydney
4. Huntingdon (Pool B)
5. Albright (Pool C)
6. Mississippi College
7. Ohio Northern (Pool C)
8. North Carolina Wesleyan
The games: North Carolina Wesleyan at Wesley; winner faces winner of Mississippi College at Huntingdon. Ohio Northern at Thomas More; winner faces winner of Albright at Hampden-Sydney.
Why? Well, Ohio Northern is here because it’s closer to the rest of the teams than DePauw is, even though DePauw is in the NCAA’s South Region. I put Albright here instead of swapping them with Johns Hopkins because Albright would likely have had been seeded to play Delaware Valley if both were in the same bracket.
Bracket 4
1. St. John’s
2. Central
3. Linfield
4. Monmouth
5. St. Thomas
6. Cal Lutheran
7. DePauw
8. Lakeland
The games: Lakeland at St. John’s; winner faces winner of St. Thomas and Monmouth. Cal Lutheran at Linfield; winner faces winner of DePauw and Central.
Why? Cal Lutheran was going to play Linfield no matter what. Central nudged ahead of Linfield in my mind with a .537 SOS compared to Linfield’s .508. Each was 1-0 against teams in our mock regional ranking: UW-Stevens Point did not make the ranking.
When Ohio Northern was selected as our last Pool C team, Springfield, Washington and Jefferson and St. Norbert were left on the board. Ohio Northern has a win against a regionally ranked team, which those teams lacked.
The final board, with regional record, strength of schedule and results against regionally ranked opponents:
Springfield 7-2 .568 lost to ALF
Ohio Northern 8-2 .537 beat NCC, lost to MTU
Wash. & Jeff. 9-1 .433 lost to TMRE
St. Norbert 9-1 .491 lost to MONM
This is a fairly unusual-looking bracket for those who may still be stuck in the pre-Pools era and expect to see only East, South, North and West teams in their respective brackets. But when you have a South team from Indiana and another from suburban Cincinnati … when you have three East teams from Pennsylvania and a South team even further East, in Delaware, you simply cannot build a bracket that makes sense to the old guard.
This bracket makes the best use of the limited first-round flight resources, and does so in a responsible manner. It makes sense.
We’ll see if it makes the big screen tomorrow.
The high temperature in Belton TX next Saturday should be around 72 degrees. Those guys from Maine are going to swelter.
Is there a barbecue place in Belton that serves barbecued lobster? 🙂
Very interesting and well thought out brackets. Some of the better first round matchups IMHO:
Wabash at Case Western Reserve III
Ohio Northern at Thomas More
St. Thomas at Monmouth
A very interesting projection, Pat. I’m sure you’ll probably hear squawks about some of your placements (UMHB to the “East”, DePauw to the “West”, Miss. Coll & ONU lower than Huntingdon & Albright) but it looks like a set of brackets that would give us plenty of good games and a competitive tournament. Whoever made it to Salem would definitely have to earn their way there. Now let’s hope the powers-that-be see it in a similar way.
I like the bracket, but there are so many variables. It has to be the toughest year as far as figuring out who is going where in the brackets, if not who will be in.
Wow, UMHB to the East. Second round match up with at Mount Union in Alliance. Maybe a reach.
I’ll be interested to see who that last team Pool C team is, leaving out one-loss Saint Norbert and one-loss W&J for two loss for two-loss Ohio Northern. Not saying I disagree just wondering if the committee has the stones to do it.
The boys in Greencastle are praying you are right. They’d much rather face Central (a very good Central) than either UW-W or MUC.
I have to say I was shocked, but like the look of the brackets. UMHB “East” would certainly make for an interesting tourney.
Despite Cal-Lutheran defeating my university today, I feel they deserve enormous respect for going undefeated through one of the strongest SCIAC fields in many years.
Cal-Lu has a well balanced attack with a strong RB in Brian Stuart and a solid All-Conference QB in Jericho Toilolo combined with a very potent Dee squad. While I can’t comment on the quality of the 5 teams seeded in Bracket 4 above the Kingsmen, their Seniors are real hungry after just missing out on the playoffs the past 3 years. So, won’t be surprised if they win a round or two and wish them all the best of luck.
How would the bracket seeding go? Are the bracket numbers the seeds?
If so, semi’s would be 4 at 1 and 3 at 2, right? IMO, UWW should be the #1 overall seed, followed by MUC #2, SJU #3, and Wesley #4. But, this would have the same semi-final contests.
——————-
Conrad, St. Norbert may be 1 loss, but they are in the MWC, which weighs heavily against them.
Even though I agree with the bracket, I feel that there is going to be a surprise from the committee. Of all of the pool C projected teams and think that Coe and Ohio Northern have the most to worry about. The committee seems to generally give the second place team in Mt Union’s conference the benefit of the doubt. However, this year there seems to be a lot more emphasis on wins or losses. It will be interesting but I feel that Coe or Ohio Northern may get passed.
Pat,
I have seen UMHB play and feel that they are a top 10 team. However, if you never saw them play and looked at the stats they would appear very average and in danger of missing the field. SOS is 178 with a below average O win % and O-O win %. Does the committee look at these factors or do they get by on their mystique?
It just appears that these numbers are overlooked when evaluating some teams and then conversely used almost exclusively when evaluating others.
Mystique? I think they get by on their 9-1 record. In the regional rankings so far, that seems to have been the top priority. In the 3rd ranking, only a couple of 1-loss teams were ranked below any 2-loss teams, and UMHB was ranked only below a bunch of Pool A teams and a Pool B lock. Most likely they’re first on the board in the south, and I doubt they lose out 6 times.
I thought if ONU was in, somebody in the “west” would be moved-you have Coe moving-interesting.
All I can say is “wow”. What a crazy looking bracket. I completely agree with the teams selected, but their placement is interesting to say the least.
In the east region, the 2 best teams are from out of region and would meet in the 2nd round. Wow.
HScoach,
You and I both know that UMHB will be in the field and may be one of the first team taken. With rare exceptions the pool C candidates usually do not play and may not even play common opponents (NC and ONU are exception). Therefore strength of schedule and opponents win percentage are very useful. Here are the stats for all pool C candidates
Team SOS O win% O-O win %
ONU (57) (0.54) (0.54)
NC (30) (0.58) (0.57)
UMHB (178) (0.45) (0.49)
W&J (214) (0.40) (0.50)
Wabash (72) (0.53) (0.52)
StNorbert (117) (0.50) (0.47)
StThomas (77) (0.53) (0.53)
Coe (108) (0.50) (0.53)
Albright (104) (0.51) (0.56)
If you look at this criteria, UMHB compares poorly to all candidates except W&J. St Norbert, who most of us agree has very little chance of getting in, compares quite favorably to UMHB. If you factor in regional ranking UMHB does better. But you can ask, is an 8th or 9th seeded team in a strong region inferior to a 6th or 7th seeded team in an average region.
Mystique may be a bad word. It just seems that in some cases teams may not be evaluated by the same objective standards. Subjective feelings elevate or lower some teams.
UMHB may be a pool C choice but they were co-conference champs with Mississippi College – only a fieldgoal separating them. Placing them in the East also makes that region more exciting – UMHB did upset Mount Union in Alliance and in the snow several years back. By the way, tomorrow’s temperature in Belton will in the 50s!
Why ONU and not Otterbein? Otterbein beat ONU. Both teams suffered losses to Mt. Union and both teams have two losses in the OAC.
As a MWC supporter and Monmouth Alum, there is nothing I would like more than to see the Norbs make the field. However, their best win was in OT, at home, against a 6-4 Wartburg team, and they were beaten badly by Monmouth (52-24) in their only loss. They have some impressive wins with regards to score, but I think their chances are faint at best. Had the game at Monmouth been close I think they would be in the conversation.
Mille,
I think you are right in that teams aren’t simply evaluated by “objective standards”. I don’t believe they should be. Otherwise, we would just feed a computer a bunch of numbers and let it spit out a bracket. Rather than mystique, i think the word judgment should be used. Hopefully, that within certain parameters, the Committee will try to choose and rank the best football teams. UMHB would beat St. Norbert by at least 4 TD in my opinion. Therefore, using “objective standards” would produce a vastly inferior bracket.
mille125,
I responded to one of your comments above on page 21 or 22 of the Pool C thread.
UWWRocks, you might be interested too. We’re having basically the same discussion.
Of course, it’s almost bracket time, so I’m going to suspend my contribution to this discussion
They’re saying they’ll start revealing on ESPNews in 10 mins.
Halfway through, we’re allowed to post and I will have a new Dose post and a new Post Patterns thread … so hold your reactions
Nice job guys. 31 out of 32 is pretty darn good. Interesting re W&J. Not exactly the SOS you’d like to see over teams like ONU and other Pool C contenders.