RR's

[Horror Child]

In my opinion after yesterday

1. Kutztown
2. Slippery Rock
3. Notre Dame
4. IUP
5. Shepherd
6. West Chester
7. Tiffin
8. Ohio Dominican
9. WV State
10. California

[IUPNation]

So how SHOULD the NCAA determine playoff teams?

That's a good question.

Relying on numbers on a spreadsheet based on criteria that doesn't tell the whole story sure isn't it.

Problem #1 in our region is that the PSAC does not play a round robin of all teams during the season like the GMAC, MEC and NE10. So those teams will have all about the same SOS whereas Pee Sack teams will have various degrees of SOS based on who they got stuck with in crossovers.

So how can you punish a PSAC team with a low SOS but plenty of wins based on a schedule they were handed and have no control over?

In years past, PSAC East teams benefitted from getting higher SOS because the West was stronger but a West team would get punished for having weaker East teams on the schedule. How is that fair? Many season, we IUP fans would see that our teams had no margin of error based on playing bottom feeder East teams and then having to run the gauntlet in the West. Whereas West Chester could skate through the East...get middle ground West teams, be able to lose a game or two and not have it hurt them.

The first fix is for The Home Office In Lock Haven to come up with a yearly formula to schedule crossover from year to year based on the previous years standings (just like the NFL does. I mean if SOS is a big factor, the Pee Sack needs to level it out for every league member.

I proposed this for every year:

For the first two weeks...

Teams that finished 1st and 8th in each division face off the following season.
2-7
3-6
4-5

Then the last week of the season, these will b scheduled but the only change would be that each team finishing first during the current season would face off for the State Game and whoever they were scheduled to play then faces off (just like it is set up now.

1 gets scheduled against 5 from the previous season standings
2-6
3-7
4-8

Since the Pee Sack tends to trend the same in terms of program success...this formula would probably give everyone about the same SOS...and would not punish higher teams for getting stuck with the bottom feeders as all of their crossovers.

Then I think conference OOC should be a factor as well. If the Pee Sack cleans up in OOC games...that should factor in on the SOS between leagues. If the Pee Sack dominated the NE10 in week 1....a PSAC teams with a lower SOS from league play should still come out ahead of a NE10 team that got a bogus bump in SOS playing it's weakling conference games..

I could go on and on....and there is never going to be a perfect way. However, The Home Office in Lock Haven could do a lot more to mitigate any damage by fixing the crossover scheduling.

[IUPNation]

About what?

That IUP was screwed over in 2006 despite your stupid spreadsheet.

[Horror Child]

I will take you silly insult of calling me a whiny fool as that your admission I was right because you know I am.

You probably are right that some region 1 teams get nods over better teams in other regions. That generally would never apply to IUP. Probably West Chester though. HA!

BTW the nuns at Kenrick would have told you that 8-2 is better than 7-3

Would they say that 9-1 is better than 8-2?

[IUPNation]

Would they say that 9-1 is better than 8-2?

Yes...but IUP got bumped for two weaker 7-3 teams with bad losses on their resume.

You aren't going to admit IUP got screwed over and I'm not going to stop being pissed off about it.

So we can keep going at this but neither of us going to change our tune.

[Horror Child]

That's a good question.

Relying on numbers on a spreadsheet based on criteria that doesn't tell the whole story sure isn't it.

Problem #1 in our region is that the PSAC does not play a round robin of all teams during the season like the GMAC, MEC and NE10. So those teams will have all about the same SOS whereas Pee Sack teams will have various degrees of SOS based on who they got stuck with in crossovers.

So how can you punish a PSAC team with a low SOS but plenty of wins based on a schedule they were handed and have no control over?

In years past, PSAC East teams benefitted from getting higher SOS because the West was stronger but a West team would get punished for having weaker East teams on the schedule. How is that fair? Many season, we IUP fans would see that our teams had no margin of error based on playing bottom feeder East teams and then having to run the gauntlet in the West. Whereas West Chester could skate through the East...get middle ground West teams, be able to lose a game or two and not have it hurt them.

The first fix is for The Home Office In Lock Haven to come up with a yearly formula to schedule crossover from year to year based on the previous years standings (just like the NFL does. I mean if SOS is a big factor, the Pee Sack needs to level it out for every league member.

I proposed this for every year:

For the first two weeks...

Teams that finished 1st and 8th in each division face off the following season.
2-7
3-6
4-5

Then the last week of the season, these will b scheduled but the only change would be that each team finishing first during the current season would face off for the State Game and whoever they were scheduled to play then faces off (just like it is set up now.

1 gets scheduled against 5 from the previous season standings
2-6
3-7
4-8

Since the Pee Sack tends to trend the same in terms of program success...this formula would probably give everyone about the same SOS...and would not punish higher teams for getting stuck with the bottom feeders as all of their crossovers.

Then I think conference OOC should be a factor as well. If the Pee Sack cleans up in OOC games...that should factor in on the SOS between leagues. If the Pee Sack dominated the NE10 in week 1....a PSAC teams with a lower SOS from league play should still come out ahead of a NE10 team that got a bogus bump in SOS playing it's weakling conference games..

I could go on and on....and there is never going to be a perfect way. However, The Home Office in Lock Haven could do a lot more to mitigate any damage by fixing the crossover scheduling.

WarriorVoice how the NCAA should determine playoffs. Mostly what you talked about was the PSAC should do. Your only comment was the NCAA shouldn't rely on numbers on a spreadsheet based on criteria that doesn't tell the whole story, and they don't do that. Boatcapt has been going on and and on about the NCAA somehow "claims" that they do even though he hasn't been able to show that claim. The criteria is published. It lists what is considered.

[IUPNation]

In my opinion after yesterday

1. Kutztown
2. Slippery Rock
3. Notre Dame
4. IUP
5. Shepherd
6. West Chester
7. Tiffin
8. Ohio Dominican
9. WV State
10. California

Notre Dame should drop. If IUP lost, we sure would have dropped.

Amazing how other schools in other leagues don't get penalized.

[Horror Child]

Yes...but IUP got bumped for two weaker 7-3 teams with bad losses on their resume.

You aren't going to admit IUP got screwed over and I'm not going to stop being pissed off about it.

So we can keep going at this but neither of us going to change our tune.

Ah, but in 2015, IUP was a #5 seed with an 8-2 record while Bowie St was a #6 seed with a 9-1 record. I don't recall you stomping your internet feet that season. Now who's inconsistent?

[IUPNation]

WarriorVoice how the NCAA should determine playoffs. Mostly what you talked about was the PSAC should do. Your only comment was the NCAA shouldn't rely on numbers on a spreadsheet based on criteria that doesn't tell the whole story, and they don't do that. Boatcapt has been going on and and on about the NCAA somehow "claims" that they do even though he hasn't been able to show that claim. The criteria is published. It lists what is considered.

But you told me in 2006 that IUP had bad SOS and needed to have played an 11th game so that's why they got screwed over.

When did all of that stop being a criteria?

That's my whole point, This **** changes from year to year.

Yet the same schools get ****ed over time and time again and other schools get a wide open avenue to make the playoffs without really having to do anything.

So since the NCAA can't figure it out, the PSAC can at least minimize the damage they inflict by their insane way of scheduling crossovers.

IUP should not be going from playing the worst two teams in the East to playing the top two next year. A little moderation please.

[IUPNation]

Ah, but in 2015, IUP was a #5 seed with an 8-2 record while Bowie St was a #6 seed with a 9-1 record. I don't recall you stomping your internet feet that season. Now who's inconsistent?

They still got a playoff bid right? They weren't ****ed over and left out.

I win again.

PLus the CIAA really sucks, A 9-1 record in that league is a 6-4 record in the PSAC.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

But you told me in 2006 that IUP had bad SOS and needed to have played an 11th game so that's why they got screwed over.

When did all of that stop being a criteria?

That's my whole point, This **** changes from year to year.

Yet the same schools get ****ed over time and time again and other schools get a wide open avenue to make the playoffs without really having to do anything.

So since the NCAA can't figure it out, the PSAC can at least minimize the damage they inflict by their insane way of scheduling crossovers.

IUP should not be going from playing the worst two teams in the East to playing the top two next year. A little moderation please.

Hard to say Kutztown will carry this in to next year. They and SRU lose superstar QBs.

[WarriorVoice]

That's a good question.

Relying on numbers on a spreadsheet based on criteria that doesn't tell the whole story sure isn't it.

Problem #1 in our region is that the PSAC does not play a round robin of all teams during the season like the GMAC, MEC and NE10. So those teams will have all about the same SOS whereas Pee Sack teams will have various degrees of SOS based on who they got stuck with in crossovers.

So how can you punish a PSAC team with a low SOS but plenty of wins based on a schedule they were handed and have no control over?

In years past, PSAC East teams benefitted from getting higher SOS because the West was stronger but a West team would get punished for having weaker East teams on the schedule. How is that fair? Many season, we IUP fans would see that our teams had no margin of error based on playing bottom feeder East teams and then having to run the gauntlet in the West. Whereas West Chester could skate through the East...get middle ground West teams, be able to lose a game or two and not have it hurt them.

The first fix is for The Home Office In Lock Haven to come up with a yearly formula to schedule crossover from year to year based on the previous years standings (just like the NFL does. I mean if SOS is a big factor, the Pee Sack needs to level it out for every league member.

I proposed this for every year:

For the first two weeks...

Teams that finished 1st and 8th in each division face off the following season.
2-7
3-6
4-5

Then the last week of the season, these will b scheduled but the only change would be that each team finishing first during the current season would face off for the State Game and whoever they were scheduled to play then faces off (just like it is set up now.

1 gets scheduled against 5 from the previous season standings
2-6
3-7
4-8

Since the Pee Sack tends to trend the same in terms of program success...this formula would probably give everyone about the same SOS...and would not punish higher teams for getting stuck with the bottom feeders as all of their crossovers.

Then I think conference OOC should be a factor as well. If the Pee Sack cleans up in OOC games...that should factor in on the SOS between leagues. If the Pee Sack dominated the NE10 in week 1....a PSAC teams with a lower SOS from league play should still come out ahead of a NE10 team that got a bogus bump in SOS playing it's weakling conference games..

I could go on and on....and there is never going to be a perfect way. However, The Home Office in Lock Haven could do a lot more to mitigate any damage by fixing the crossover scheduling.

So you said it yourself, there's no perfect way...Glad we agree on something...

[Horror Child]

But you told me in 2006 that IUP had bad SOS and needed to have played an 11th game so that's why they got screwed over.

When did all of that stop being a criteria?

That's my whole point, This **** changes from year to year.

Yet the same schools get ****ed over time and time again and other schools get a wide open avenue to make the playoffs without really having to do anything.

So since the NCAA can't figure it out, the PSAC can at least minimize the damage they inflict by their insane way of scheduling crossovers.

IUP should not be going from playing the worst two teams in the East to playing the top two next year. A little moderation please.

I didn't just tell you IUP had a bad SOS, I showed you and everybody in post #144.

The criteria doesn't change every year, but yes, it does change. You've reiterated that your point is some teams have no room for error, yet the criteria is the same for all.

[Horror Child]

They still got a playoff bid right? They weren't ****ed over and left out.

I win again.

PLus the CIAA really sucks, A 9-1 record in that league is a 6-4 record in the PSAC.

But the CIAA sent a team to the national championship game more recently than the PSAC.

[shipfbfan12]

Hard to say Kutztown will carry this in to next year. They and SRU lose superstar QBs.

Kutztown loses DiGalbo but returns Nickel who did pretty well in 2018 when DiGalbo was injured and even when DiGalbo returned they split QB duties for a few games.