It’s official, the regions expand
Aug
2006
We’ve gotten official word that the addition to the definition of regional games first talked about in February went through all the hurdles of the NCAA process and is in place for this fall.
As a reminder, this is in addition to every other existing definition of a regional game (200 miles shortest possible driving distance, teams within the same Division III football region, teams in the same conference but different regions).
These are the NCAA’s administrative regions. They now also count for regional games as well:
The NCAA’s four regions, from the bylaws:
Region 1 - Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont
Region 2 - New York, Pennsylvania
Region 3 - Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, Ohio, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia
Region 4 - Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming.
We will apply this definition to schedules as quickly as possible. But it’s worth noting that the Linfield/Hardin-Simmons game is now in-region, as is the Mary Hardin-Baylor/UW-Whitewater game.
This can only make the selection process better reflect the strength of actual teams. It’s not perfect, but it’s a step forward.
August 21st, 2006 at 5:48 pm
Thirteen of the states in the “Region 4″ have no D3 schools, so the region is “kinda empty”. If “in-region” is an encouragement to schedule D3 opponents, then this may help with the problems that the NWC, the ASC and WIAC members have in filling out their football schedules.
The benefit for basketball is that it opens up inter-regional competition between the CCIW vs. MIAC/WIAC and ODAC vs. NCAC. (Now if we can find a loophole to expand CCIW vs. MIAA games.)
Coaches can pick up snowbird games as “in-region” or “non-region” depending on their wishes, too.
August 21st, 2006 at 6:57 pm
So the Raiders can go to Puerto Rico for an in region game…..Sweet!
How many D3 teams in Puerto Rico?
But for gosh sakes don’t schedule W & J. It won’t count as in region?
August 21st, 2006 at 7:22 pm
W&J and Mount Union are well within the 200-mile radius, so it would definitely still be in-region.
“As a reminder, this is in addition to every other existing definition of a regional game (200 miles shortest possible driving distance, teams within the same Division III football region, teams in the same conference but different regions).”
August 21st, 2006 at 8:56 pm
I believe we have updated all of the football games affected. Here’s a sampling of the new regional games, though certainly not a comprehensive list:
Principia/Macalester
Simpson/Concordia (Wis.)
Grove City/Merchant Marine
Mount Union/Averett
Emory and Henry/Marietta
Redlands/Trinity (Texas)
August 22nd, 2006 at 7:22 am
I was thinking the Mount Union/Averett game would now qualify so MTU’s full 10 game schedule is now all In Region.
August 22nd, 2006 at 12:08 pm
This is better, but if TX-WA is “in-region” , and NE-HI and IL-AK would be if there were teams in all those states, doesn’t the “regional” term as a geographic measure become pretty ludicrous?
I’ll continue to say it: get rid of the “in-region” distinction once and for all and let the teams play whomever they damn well want.
August 22nd, 2006 at 12:31 pm
With so many different ways to be “in-region” now (and these new definitions cover enormous swaths of territory), it seems that we’d be just as well to drop the umpteen different ways to be in-region and just count al D-III games the same way. There can’t be very many D-III vs. D-III out of region games left, can there?
August 22nd, 2006 at 2:13 pm
Looks like this will open up some competition in football between the CCIW, MIAC, WIAC, and IIAC. In the past only some teams in the CCIW and the WIAC and IIAC could play and have it still count in region. This opens up some interesting scheduling opportunities.
August 22nd, 2006 at 4:48 pm
I applaud the AA for a step in the right direction. While I agree w/ Ron and Wally Wabash, I do think that this provides a realistic means for schools in certain areas to get NAIA and DII schools off their schedules.
August 22nd, 2006 at 4:51 pm
Also, isn’t the distinction for all games “in-conference” being considered regional games new?
Just a quick review of Wesley’s schedule last year indicates three conference games were “out of region” contests.
The new rule fixes that, though.
August 22nd, 2006 at 5:39 pm
Putting Wesley in region 1 will cost them the Waynesburg game I believe. It’s a little over the 200 mi. and with only 5 in region games to start that will pretty much kill their chances of a bid don’t you think Pat? Also most of Wesleys non conference opponents come out of the South, PA and NJ. So that will take away those western PA games.
August 22nd, 2006 at 5:57 pm
If it includes all conference games, then Newport News and Brockport State should count as in-region.
August 22nd, 2006 at 6:00 pm
Besides, Wesley is in Pool B play anyway. If they win like they did last year, they should get another bid. If they don’t, well, Pool C is a tough place to be. Lots of deserving teams get left out of that group, even with the expansion to 32.
August 22nd, 2006 at 7:10 pm
PA_Wesleyfan: you STILL get to count South Region games so Waynesburg counts.
Josh: Good point, I should have mentioned that the conference-game-as-regional-game only applies to conferences recognized by the NCAA. The ACFC is not one. And Newport News, being a non-D3 school, would never be a regional game for anyone.
August 23rd, 2006 at 10:23 am
It may not be perfect - but it is an improvement.
At this point I don’t care what the regions are, I just want the season to start! GO AUGUSTANA!
August 23rd, 2006 at 5:37 pm
So would this give Carnegie Mellon 4 or 7 “in-region” games??? Their UAA opponents are Washington, Chicago and Case Western. 4 of their non-conference games are PA teams. So it would be 7 if the UAA is recognized by the NCAA am I correct??
August 24th, 2006 at 7:21 pm
Isn’t the emphasis on regional games in Division III for the expressed purpose of limiting travel costs for schools who can’t afford to fund many flights and overnight stays?
The West in D3, however, was extremely limited in certain places and needed to be able, for football anyway, to schedule from the Pacific to the Midwest just to have some options.
August 25th, 2006 at 8:38 am
It’s almost a clone of the playoff system high school football uses. At least similar. But there is no perfect system. Even the BCS has had its fair share of problems.
August 25th, 2006 at 1:58 pm
No, BDTartan–CMU actually plays nine “in-region” games. Your contests against Bethany and Hiram count as in-region due to the fact that they’re within a 200 mile radius of Pittsburgh, geographically speaking, which was one of the “old” criteria.
Thiel, Westminster, Grove City and F&M now count because of the “new” in-state criteria. Your conference games against Chicago, CWRU and Wash U count because of the same conference/same region provision.
Hope that helps a little.
August 25th, 2006 at 11:28 pm
So Colorado College would be the only “non” region game. I get it. Thanks.
August 26th, 2006 at 12:28 am
Wow!
My wife and I were already planning to attend the Linfield/H-SU and UW-W/MH-B games. This realignment makes them even more meaningful. We’re also looking with great interest at the Depauw/Trinity game. And it appears the closest to Texas my alma mater might be scheduled in the regular season is in Memphjs against Rhodes. Here’s hoping…
August 26th, 2006 at 11:55 am
I always felt the distinction had no clear purpose. I agree with Ron Boerger.
BD Tartan…check out North Region UAA Board in Post Patterns. Would be great to hear something from CMU over there.
August 29th, 2006 at 5:13 pm
I will if I can find it. I don’t know everything, but my brother plays for CMU so I can fill people in if need be.