MIAA PO hopes

[Ian Carlson]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

[Divisiontwo]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

[Ian Carlson]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

[Erbert]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

Next round of rankings?

1. Ferris
2. OB
3. GVSU
4. Indy
5. FHSU
6. NW
7. Southern Ark
8. Harding

Just took a stab based on last weeks.

[S&TMinerfan]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

Missouri S&T deserves to be at least in the discussion! 8-1 record. Their only loss is to #4 Indy by 7 points after being up on them by 11 points at half.
I honestly think if they had the name recognition they would already be in the top 7.

Next round of rankings?

1. Ferris
2. OB
3. GVSU
4. Indy
5. FHSU
6. NW
7. Southern Ark
8. Harding

Just took a stab based on last weeks.

[Techster88]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

Missouri S&T deserves to be at least in the discussion! 8-1 record. Their only loss is to #4 Indy by 7 points after being up on them by 11 points at half.
I honestly think if they had the name recognition they would already be in the top 7.

What quality wins does S&T have?

[Tony Nicolette]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

Missouri S&T deserves to be at least in the discussion! 8-1 record. Their only loss is to #4 Indy by 7 points after being up on them by 11 points at half.
I honestly think if they had the name recognition they would already be in the top 7.

Name recognition has nothing to do with the selection process.

First, S&T played one less D2 game than most of the rest of the teams that are currently above them. D2 win % is a primary criteria, so S&T's 8-1 loses out to GV's 9-1 (.888 vs. .900) immediately. Coincidentally, that same thing hurts UIndy a bit.

Second, S&T's Cumulative Opponents' win % (which makes up 2/3 of its SOS rating) is .426. No one ranked above them in the Regional Seedings presently has a cumulative opponents' win % below .500. S&T's resume is getting clobbered by this.

If S&T's resume were identical to UIndy's (which SOS dictates that it is not), the Greyhounds would possess an advantage via head-to-head.

I could dig into the secondary criteria from here, but I think the point is made. S&T's weak SOS is the big driver. To further illustrate, one of S&T's wins over a team with a D2 record of .500 or better is at Tuskegee. Pretty good on its face, until we look at Tuskegee's SOS...their COW% is worse than S&T's at .425.

Again, when reading the selection criteria, Name Recognition is listed no where. Has ZERO to do with it. The #'s the committee can look at simply don't tell a very compelling story for S&T, and SOS is easily the biggest part of that.

[TSU_Mike59]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

Name recognition has nothing to do with the selection process.

First, S&T played one less D2 game than most of the rest of the teams that are currently above them. D2 win % is a primary criteria, so S&T's 8-1 loses out to GV's 9-1 (.888 vs. .900) immediately. Coincidentally, that same thing hurts UIndy a bit.

Second, S&T's Cumulative Opponents' win % (which makes up 2/3 of its SOS rating) is .426. No one ranked above them in the Regional Seedings presently has a cumulative opponents' win % below .500. S&T's resume is getting clobbered by this.

If S&T's resume were identical to UIndy's (which SOS dictates that it is not), the Greyhounds would possess an advantage via head-to-head.

I could dig into the secondary criteria from here, but I think the point is made. S&T's weak SOS is the big driver. To further illustrate, one of S&T's wins over a team with a D2 record of .500 or better is at Tuskegee. Pretty good on its face, until we look at Tuskegee's SOS...their COW% is worse than S&T's at .425.

Again, when reading the selection criteria, Name Recognition is listed no where. Has ZERO to do with it. The #'s the committee can look at simply don't tell a very compelling story for S&T, and SOS is easily the biggest part of that.

+1. It all comes down to this: with the dregs of the GLVC being so bad, GLVC teams have to schedule well in the non-conference portion of their season. S&T did not this year (Tuskegee is 5-5 is the best team they played in nonconference).

S&T is no doubt in the discussion, and they may back their way in as a result of other teams around them losing, but a grand total of zero wins against a team that's above .500 (two teams right at .500) is killing them.

[Bmawalk]

[Kiss My Ass]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

The MIAA posters tout the MIAA Conference as the best (top to bottom) in D2, so logic would dictate that a 2 loss MIAA team should be good enough to win the national championship on a frequent basis.

[Brandon]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

The MIAA posters tout the MIAA Conference as the best (top to bottom) in D2, so logic would dictate that a 2 loss MIAA team should be good enough to win the national championship on a frequent basis.

MIAA posters, supporters, admin, teams, and coaches need to quit believing this. It's simply not true anymore.

[HookemHerd]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

MIAA posters, supporters, admin, teams, and coaches need to quit believing this. It's simply not true anymore.

[Brandon]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

Right. Just because you have the best team (15/16) doesn't mean you have the best conference. ESU was not bad in those years either.

But compare it to the mid-2000's.

In 2004, Pitt State or Northwest could have won it all. In 2005, Pitt, Northwest, and Washburn had that ability. In the same year, UCM dominated Pitt after Pitt had just dominated Northwest.

[the Northeasterner]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

My general point is that the way the miaa us doing it's business now is not working and we need to rethink how we run our season. kicking nsu or Lincoln isn't answer. It's non conf games. If we are best conf let's get out and play others and show it. Since the GAC is on silo they loose the advantage of weak conf and we can gain in region sos games

The way region 3 is set up and with rise if GAC top 4 we need to start finding ways to get teams into po and into top 4 seeds

[Brandon]

Re: MIAA PO hopes

My general point is that the way the miaa us doing it's business now is not working and we need to rethink how we run our season. kicking nsu or Lincoln isn't answer. It's non conf games. If we are best conf let's get out and play others and show it. Since the GAC is on silo they loose the advantage of weak conf and we can gain in region sos games

The way region 3 is set up and with rise if GAC top 4 we need to start finding ways to get teams into po and into top 4 seeds

Historically, the SR playoffs should be (pay no attention to order)....

1. GLIAC
2. GLIAC
3. GLIAC OR MIAA
4. MIAA
5. MIAA
6. GAC
7. GLVC

Won't get that setup when the MIAA does not play non-conference games.