September 19th, 2000 12:00am
Just about every time you turn around there is another Division II poll. The coaches have one. We have one at D2football.com, and there is the USA Network poll. But thankfully the one and only one that counts finally has been released – the NCAA regional poll – which is the basis for determining playoff seedings.
The first edition of the poll for the 2000 season was released late Monday. For the most part it contained no major surprises. But if history is any guide, at some point it will.
Although Pitt State left Maryville, Missouri a 35-28 loser to the Northwest Missouri Bearcats, the pollsters correctly did not alter dramatically Pitt State’s position in the region from what some of the beauty contest polls indicated for the prior few weeks.
A loss is a loss by any other name, but there are quality losses and not so good losses. Pitt State’s loss to NWMS was a quality loss.
I suppose the argument could be made that the loss was tainted by the fact Pitt State had a lead it could not protect during the last few minutes of the game, but this ignores the fact that time and time again Northwest has been able to mount a late-game rally and win.
The only negative from the game is that it might have made Pitt State’s road to the playoffs more difficult. We hope not and actually think not. The NCC will chew itself up suggesting that a single loss should not be enough to eliminate Pitt State from the tournament. It would be a shame, however, if the NWMS loss kept the Gorillas out of the playoffs. The Midwest Region Committee, however, correctly recognized the context of the loss to Northwest and put the Gorillas in the fourth slot in the region.
From a Northwest standpoint, the Pitt State game had to be little disconcerting. NWMS has won seven-straight come from behind games. Streaks have a habit of ending. Even some of the NWMS players indicated they were getting a bit tired of having to pull games out late in the contests. Someday NWMS will dig itself a hole deep enough that no miracle will be sufficient to extract it from the depths. If you are a Northwest fan and need something to worry about, worry about the comeback heroics finally ending – and maybe at the most inopportune time.
On the other hand, consider UC Davis’ tactics. It digs the hole for its opponent, puts it in the hole, covers it with dirt and then stomps on the pile – all just to make sure there is no chance for last minute miracles. That’s what Davis did again last week when it soundly thrashed Wet Chester 45-0.
But before anyone measures the Aggies on this lopsided win, consider that the West Chester team it played is not the team of the last few seasons. Critical offensive losses clearly dealt West Chester a severe blow. It has only scored six total points in three games. We will find out a lot more of what this season’s Aggies are made of in coming weeks.
Speaking of the regional poll there is one oddity in the Northeast Region. How did Shepherd make it above Slippery Rock?
Sure the Rock has one loss and Shepherd has none. But the Rock lost to Youngstown in a game in which the Rock hung in reasonably well. It then moved on to crush two West Virginia Conference opponents. Although beating Fairmont 40-3 was bad enough it could have been worse had the Rock’s starters not been yanked early.
If the I-AA loss to Youngstown was enough of a transgression to put Slippery Rock only in the third spot in the region, where does this leave New Haven?
After losing a brutal 14-9 contest to IUP, New Haven stands 2-1 and is fifth in the region. This slot would seem to give it a reasonable chance to advance if anyone above it slips.
But New Haven has a nasty slate of I-AA games ahead including this weekend against U. Mass. Is the Northeast Regional Committee saying that losses to U. Mass and other strong I-AA teams will be considered no better than the Rock’s loss to Youngstown? If it is, New Haven’s playoff hopes are gone. But this can’t be what the Committee is saying -- or is it?
And to set the record straight on one more point from the Northeast Region if anyone thinks IUP is 4-6 slots above Slippery Rock as the national beauty contest polls suggest, think again. At worst it should be even with IUP on a regional basis (instead of two slots lower). If IUP is correctly slotted at number five nationally, then the difference between numbers 6-11 must be minute.
The Rock unjustifiably in our view is suffering a post-Youngstown penalty. In two weeks, however this may be resolved when it travels to IUP for a game that could decide the PSAC West title. This improper positioning of Slippery Rock does make us wonder, however, what happens if it loses to IUP. The loss should not be a playoff killer, but we wonder nonetheless.
This weekend does not have the blockbuster-type game Northwest and Pitt State offered last weekend, but there are some interesting contests nonetheless.
North Dakota State hosts South Dakota for what should be the Bison’s third win. South Dakota State will test its NCC worthiness against visiting Northern Colorado. We think SDSU will pass the test but not without some major effort.
Pittsburg State tries to regroup when it faces a stiff challenge from visiting Central Missouri State. Pitt State can ill-afford an emotional letdown after the NWMS loss if it wants to continue to have a claim on a playoff berth and the MIAA title. The Gorillas should be up to the task, however.
Slippery Rock and IUP both have what should be tune up games before they collide a week later. Slippery Rock hosts a rebuilding Edinboro while IUP travels to Lock Haven hoping to notch its 19th-straight win against the Lock Haven Eagles.
Carson-Newman is now into part of the season that should allow the Eagles to glide through their schedule until October 28 when the Eagles go to Catawba for what will be its decisive regular season game.
Next week at this time we suspect the regional rankings will not be much different than this week’s version. This weekend, however, may be the last one the regional pollsters can relax. Starting on September 30 the D-II slate has at least one major game each weekend that significantly could alter the playoff landscape.
There is one other topic this week that can be overlooked -- the NCAA sanctions against Texas A&M-Kingsville.
The NCAA on Wednesday released its findings and penalties for a long list of offenses at TAMUK that seemed to go well beyond what had been originally alleged. Included in the list was the use of one athlete who had already used his entire 10-semester eligibility.
Originally the impression the initial NCAA investigation gave was that TAMUK and the NCAA were at odds over whether certain TAMUK athletes had maintained the proper number of credit hours to participate in athletics. The NCAA findings suggest a lot more than a simple difference in interpretation of the rules was at work at TAMUK. The findings suggest willful defiance of the rules had been practiced for a long time.
You can find the full NCAA ruling on this matter starting on the front page of D2football.com. Read it. It is enlightening.
Some may find the NCAA's sanctions harsh, particularly the reduction in permitted scholarships for football over the next three years. In our view the sanctions may not have been harsh enough.
Admittedly when the TAMUK story first broke last season and after talking to both the University's administration and the NCAA our understanding of the initial allegations suggested there was a reasonable amount of doubt about whether TAMUK was in violation of the rules and that even if it was the violations were not by design. This week's NCAA ruling strongly suggests otherwise.
Although this story is still not as simple as the NCAA ruling makes it out to be, the infractions that were not part of the originally understood allegations are the most troubling.
The real shame is that some good people were caught up in this and paid a price for it. Not the least of these were the non-offending student athletes.
But, if this ruling kills TAMUK's ability to recruit maybe it creates the proper outcome. This type of behavior benefits no one and has no place in collegiate athletics.
The NCAA ruling seems to make it obvious that TAMUK will have little or no place in college athletics for a long time.
But even in this ruling and its apparent justice, there are losers beyond the athletes remaining at TAMUK. The ruling hurts those prospective athletes from the TAMUK area that looked to further their educational and athletic experience at a school whose purpose is to assist in the development of students in its immediate area.
TAMUK has offended the NCAA and all its members, but worse it has offended its own local constituents. How harsh a penalty does this deserve? More, we suspect, than a few years of scholarship reductions.