Forum Search:
RSD No Spam
rec.sport.disc without the spam


Home » RSD » RSD Posts » D-III teams opting for the D-I path
D-III teams opting for the D-I path [message #128685] Mon, 15 April 2013 11:22 Go to next message
donovd
Messages: 241
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
I think the current system for this is bad and I want to talk about a case in Great Lakes as an example.

Wheaton (Illinois) decided to pick the D-I path before conferences. Because at least one team in the D-III conference expressed a desire to go to D-I regionals, the conference kept their automatic bid.

Wheaton finished 4th out of 5 D-III teams. So technically the D-I bid regionals was offered to Knox for winning the conference. But since teams had to choose their path beforehand, Knox turns it down automatically to go D-III.

Since the bid is the conference's automatic bid, it stays in conference. It is offered to the next team and the next team till it hits a team that signed up for D-I. Now Wheaton has a bid to D-I regionals.

Now I have no stake in this and Wheaton actually has the regular season results that say they are a top 16 team in the region so I don't mean to claim they don't deserve to go to regionals. But I wanted to point out that this system would allow the worst D-III team in the country a bid to D-I regionals by just saying they wanted to go.


So my solution - if a D-III team opts for the D-I path, actually make them a D-I team and put them in D-I conferences. Then they earn a D-I regionals bid by beating D-I teams. I think it would make the whole thing simpler to just have independent series basically as opposed to this crossover system.

In the case of Wheaton, they would have been in the Illinois D-I conference which would have earned the conference another bid to regionals (8 out of 10 teams making it). They had already beaten the Loyola-Chicago earlier this year who finished 4th at conferences so I think Wheaton had a good chance to make top 8.

Re: D-III teams opting for the D-I path [message #128689 is a reply to message #128685] Mon, 15 April 2013 12:03 Go to previous message
anakin gerics
Messages: 1362
Registered: November 2009
Senior Member
On Apr 15, 2:25 pm, DanD <dand.rp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the current system for this is bad and I want to
> talk about a case in Great Lakes as an example.
>
> Wheaton (Illinois) decided to pick the D-I path before
> conferences.  Because at least one team in the D-III
> conference expressed a desire to go to D-I regionals, the
> conference kept their automatic bid.
>
> Wheaton finished 4th out of 5 D-III teams.  So technically
> the D-I bid regionals was offered to Knox for winning the
> conference.  But since teams had to choose their path
> beforehand, Knox turns it down automatically to go D-III.
>
> Since the bid is the conference's automatic bid, it stays in
> conference.  It is offered to the next team and the next
> team till it hits a team that signed up for D-I. Now Wheaton
> has a bid to D-I regionals.
>
> Now I have no stake in this and Wheaton actually has the
> regular season results that say they are a top 16 team in
> the region so I don't mean to claim they don't deserve to go
> to regionals.  But I wanted to point out that this system
> would allow the worst D-III team in the country a bid to D-I
> regionals by just saying they wanted to go.
>
> So my solution - if a D-III team opts for the D-I path,
> actually make them a D-I team and put them in D-I
> conferences.  Then they earn a D-I regionals bid by beating
> D-I teams.  I think it would make the whole thing simpler to
> just have independent series basically as opposed to this
> crossover system.
>
> In the case of Wheaton, they would have been in the Illinois
> D-I conference which would have earned the conference
> another bid to regionals (8 out of 10 teams making it).
> They had already beaten the Loyola-Chicago earlier this year
> who finished 4th at conferences so I think Wheaton had a
> good chance to make top 8.
>
> --
> Posted fromhttp://www.rsdnospam.com

~~~~~~~~~~


---man....it's painful to have to read something like that.......

conference...
choose....
decide....
now such and such....
had...
kept...
regionals...
conference.....to region....(is a conference smaller than a
region?...and i mean...isn't there a term already for something that's
smaller than a region that a lot of sports already use?
what in the world was the big goofy idea about all those changes that
upsa had to come up with?
too bad that all these kids just starting off....think that 'THIS" is
the way it should be.
Previous Topic:Condors Combine 2013 April 27-28
Next Topic:Muff'n Men (Pittsburgh Mixed) Tryouts
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Oct 15 23:46:35 PDT 2019
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.0RC2.
Copyright ©2001-2009 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software