Perfect Playoff Bracket

[Ram040506]

Saginaw Valley lost to the national champion by 5 points this year. Shepherd lost to the national runner-up by 31, who then lost to the national champion by 27. Shepherd also lost to last year's national champion by 48 when SVSU lost to that same national champion by 2. SVSU didn't make the playoffs in either year. So at best guesstimate, Shepherd would be a 4th-place team in the GLIAC the last two years.

Transitive property huh? What about Michigan Tech only losing by 8 to Ferris? That 4-7 juggernaut surely would whoop everyone in Region 1 too right?

Come on dude, that stuff means nothing.

[Ram040506]

I was thinking about that quote. When you say this, it contradicts the practice of using the metrics.

I looked it up, and Shepherd is 1-4 against non-SR1 teams going back to 2015. The average score was 38-16.

They haven't earned the benefit of the doubt.

In the context of at that moment in time Shepherd had played Delta State in 2010 and lost a closer than it looks 29-17 game. They beat GV their next time in the semi's. That was the data they had at that point going into the UNA decision.

Shepherd joined the PSAC then and apparently we got the bad mojo of that conference and now we also get smoked. Perhaps its the stink of the PSAC. I completely agree that based on the last couple year's results, in no way shape or form should the Rams get any benefit of the doubt when resumes are comparable. Give it to the stronger conference rep from the other region. There wasn't much of a peep for 1 loss Shepherd going to 2 loss Mines this year, and there shouldn't have been either.

[KleShreen]

Uhh... no. There is doubt in mine on those teams so I guess we'll just agree to disagree.

Saginaw Valley lost to the national champion by 5 points this year. Shepherd lost to the national runner-up by 31, who then lost to the national champion by 27. Shepherd also lost to last year's national champion by 48 when SVSU lost to that same national champion by 2. SVSU didn't make the playoffs in either year. So at best guesstimate, Shepherd would be a 4th-place team in the GLIAC the last two years.

[Ram040506]

Newberry, Saginaw Valley, Sioux Falls, Minnesota-Duluth, Emporia State, West Georgia all would have been more competitive against Colorado Mines in the semifinals than Shepherd was. 100% not a single shred of doubt in my mind.

Uhh... no. There is doubt in mine on those teams so I guess we'll just agree to disagree.

[KleShreen]

Now you're trolling. Nation got to you lol.

Newberry, Saginaw Valley, Sioux Falls, Minnesota-Duluth, Emporia State, West Georgia all would have been more competitive against Colorado Mines in the semifinals than Shepherd was. 100% not a single shred of doubt in my mind.

[IUPNation]

I think 11 weeks of MIAA games is torture.

Kle is just jacking with you. Like I said previously, in a 28 team playoff seeded nationally, many SR1 teams would still make it.

Unless you use your Grand Poo Bah powers to convince the NCAA to drop regions and use more D1 blood money to fund those playoffs more power to you!

[IUPNation]

UNA got home field in several national championships, so it was fine.

Yep and they should have lost the first one ..a ****ing high school option offense getting off that lucky pass. Unbelievable IUP lost the game…but they did.

[Brandon]

I don't think it hurt them in that discussion that the previous year they showed well too by beating GV.

I was thinking about that quote. When you say this, it contradicts the practice of using the metrics.

I looked it up, and Shepherd is 1-4 against non-SR1 teams going back to 2015. The average score was 38-16.

They haven't earned the benefit of the doubt.

[Predatory Primates]

Agree to disagree. Shepherd had more D2 wins and played more games, UNA had 9 D2 games. I don't think it hurt them in that discussion that the previous year they showed well too by beating GV.

UNA got home field in several national championships, so it was fine.

[Brandon]

Agree to disagree. Shepherd had more D2 wins and played more games, UNA had 9 D2 games. I don't think it hurt them in that discussion that the previous year they showed well too by beating GV.

I've run out of patience for using flawed metrics to attempt to justify poor decisions. These metrics have proven to be a failure.

On Inside D2Football, we talk about criteria versus common sense all the time. Looking through that lens.

North Alabama was the one seed in SR2.
North Alabama was undefeated in Division II.
North Alabama was undefeated in Gulf South Conference play.

Shepherd was the 3 in SR1.
Shepherd was undefeated in Division II.
Shepherd was undefeated in Mountain East Conference play.

Every one of those facts indicates UNA should have been the host. They were a higher seed in a tougher region and played a tougher schedule.

The only way to justify anything else is to pretend that all regions and conferences are equal, and no one that pays attention to D2 would make that case.

[Ram040506]

I absolutely disagree.

In 2016, UNA was the top seed in SR2 and was undefeated against D2 teams. Shepherd was also undefeated, but was the 3 Seed in SR1. Without a doubt, UNA should have been the host.

Agree to disagree. Shepherd had more D2 wins and played more games, UNA had 9 D2 games. I don't think it hurt them in that discussion that the previous year they showed well too by beating GV.

[Brandon]

I think they should do it as they have been, some formula or committee deciding. Shepherd hosting GV that year was the right call. The following year there was some back and forth about whether Shepherd should host UNA, and I think the correct decision was made then too allowing SR1 to host.

If Shepherd had won the PSAC against IUP, and was undefeated I think West Florida or Mines should have had to come to WV as well.

I absolutely disagree.

In 2016, UNA was the top seed in SR2 and was undefeated against D2 teams. Shepherd was also undefeated, but was the 3 Seed in SR1. Without a doubt, UNA should have been the host.

[Ram040506]

Sorry, when you said "many SR1 teams" I assumed you were talking about a comparable amount to what each region already gets. They'd probably be worthy of having 2 or 3 each year. But certainly not the 7 they currently get. Although, one could argue that given the historical semifinals results, even 2 might be pushing it. Sure feels like the 9th-12th teams in the other regions would be more competitive for national titles than the 1st/2nd teams from SR1 most years.

Now you're trolling. Nation got to you lol.

[Brandon]

Sorry, when you said "many SR1 teams" I assumed you were talking about a comparable amount to what each region already gets. They'd probably be worthy of having 2 or 3 each year. But certainly not the 7 they currently get. Although, one could argue that given the historical semifinals results, even 2 might be pushing it. Sure feels like the 9th-12th teams in the other regions would be more competitive for national titles than the 1st/2nd teams from SR1 most years.

There would be four at a minimum. NE10 Champion / MEC Champion / PSAC Champion / GMAC Champion

[Ram040506]

What if there is a one game difference?

The first two rounds would be pretty boring, but it might help in the later rounds.

I think they should do it as they have been, some formula or committee deciding. Shepherd hosting GV that year was the right call. The following year there was some back and forth about whether Shepherd should host UNA, and I think the correct decision was made then too allowing SR1 to host.

If Shepherd had won the PSAC against IUP, and was undefeated I think West Florida or Mines should have had to come to WV as well.