FB: Empire 8

[pg04]

Just as in Division I there are teams in the tournament who couldn't possibly win the national title, so there are in Division III. It's one of the few similarities, to be honest.

That is actually a great point...even though I hate the ECFC and the NEFC...

But let's be real honest...there are really 30 teams that make the playoffs every year that couldn't possibly win the National Championship...judging that we are staring down the barrel of Mount Union vs. University of Wisconsin-Whitewater VII...

There are a couple teams in the West/North that have at least challenged UWW (Didn't North Central Almost beat them last year?), so I think that there are about 28 teams with no shot, but yeah. 

[dlippiel]

I know I get shot down whenever I bring this up, but just out of curiosity: if Mount Union or UWW were moved up to D-II today, where in the pack would they stand? Would they be by far the worst? Somewhere in the middle? Somewhere (this is what I suspect) toward the bottom?

Honestly dlip thinks they would be quite competitive to an extent. dlip is not going to go through a ton of D2 rosters but he would guess that many D2 teams have more size and depth on avg than UWW or MUC. Yet dip thinks both teams would fare well against lower D2 competition. dlip once asked Pat how he thought MUC and/or UWW would do in the IVY. If dlip remembers correctly (he is 34 with the memory of a 100 yr old man!) his thoughts were that they would do quite well and finish maybe middle of the pack or a tad higher (don't want to speak for you Pat so feel free to shoot this down and/or share your thoughts). Honestly dlip would love to see MUC and UWW play some D2/IVY teams on occasion. Max dlip loves this topic and thinks it is very interesting and thought provoking to discuss. Although we will most likely never see UWW or MUC play those teams.

[Old IC Voice]

I for one would love to see a game between MU and Akron. Akron football is in the doldrums of D1, just got shredded by a depleted OSU team, and they're 35 miles from each other! How has this game not happened yet?!

[Bombers798891]

Isn't Norwich the perfect example of how there really is no perfect system? I think we have this idea that playoffs, generally speaking, give you a "true" national champion. And yet, the Cadets prove that every system has its flaws. Not that the Cadets would be title contenders, but they can take up one of 32 playoff spots, despite the fact that in my belief, as things currently stand, they'd get beaten soundly by any team in the E8.

This is true, but I don't think the ECFC champ, or UMAC champ, is keeping someone out of the field that would truly compete for the national championship. This system still gives you a true national champion.

I agree but let me ask this though: Would this be the case if we didn't have Mount and Whitewater? Removing them and their unique dynasties from the equation, isn't it possible some team, left out as say, a 9-1 Pool C--I'm thinking like, the 2006 Cortland State team that finished the year #14--could get hot and make a run? (There are probably stronger teams that have been left out of the NCAA's, so people can chime in with their own)

I think the presence of those two teams just changes the complexion of any postseason tournament. But even with those two, here's kind of what I mean: No system really gives you a *true* champion

When we talk in the regular season, we always say you can't use the transitive property. Just because Alfred beat Fisher and Fisher then beat Ithaca doesn't mean Alfred will beat Ithaca. We all accept this as pretty straightforward. But in a playoff, we have to make this assumption all the time.

Last season, Whitewater beat Linfield in the semis, and Mount beat Wesley. Based on the way the playoffs went, we say that Whitewater's the national champion. But we don't know that Wesley couldn't have beat Whitewater. For all we know, Wesley was two touchdowns better than Whitewater. It was just chance (or geography) that the two didn't meet in the semis.

We assume Whitewater's better than Wesley because Mount was better than them and Whitewater better than Mount. It's the same transitive property, isn't it?

Obviously, this system at least gives 32 teams a shot on the field, and really, aside from some elaborate round robin that isn't really possible in football. But although what we have is a *better* system, I don't know that it, or any system is without flaws.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Just as in Division I there are teams in the tournament who couldn't possibly win the national title, so there are in Division III. It's one of the few similarities, to be honest.

That is actually a great point...even though I hate the ECFC and the NEFC...

But let's be real honest...there are really 30 teams that make the playoffs every year that couldn't possibly win the National Championship...judging that we are staring down the barrel of Mount Union vs. University of Wisconsin-Whitewater VII...

There are a couple teams in the West/North that have at least challenged UWW (Didn't North Central Almost beat them last year?), so I think that there are about 28 teams with no shot, but yeah.

Yeah, NCC lead UWW into the fourth quarter.  Trine also gave them quite a game. 

Odds are it will be UMU vs. UWW yet again, but I think there are probably 5-8 other teams in any given year that with some really good breaks could win it all (or at least make the Stagg).

[maxpower]

Isn't Norwich the perfect example of how there really is no perfect system? I think we have this idea that playoffs, generally speaking, give you a "true" national champion. And yet, the Cadets prove that every system has its flaws. Not that the Cadets would be title contenders, but they can take up one of 32 playoff spots, despite the fact that in my belief, as things currently stand, they'd get beaten soundly by any team in the E8.

This is true, but I don't think the ECFC champ, or UMAC champ, is keeping someone out of the field that would truly compete for the national championship. This system still gives you a true national champion.

I agree but let me ask this though: Would this be the case if we didn't have Mount and Whitewater? Removing them and their unique dynasties from the equation, isn't it possible some team, left out as say, a 9-1 Pool C--I'm thinking like, the 2006 Cortland State team that finished the year #14--could get hot and make a run? (There are probably stronger teams that have been left out of the NCAA's, so people can chime in with their own)

I think the presence of those two teams just changes the complexion of any postseason tournament. But even with those two, here's kind of what I mean: No system really gives you a *true* champion

When we talk in the regular season, we always say you can't use the transitive property. Just because Alfred beat Fisher and Fisher then beat Ithaca doesn't mean Alfred will beat Ithaca. We all accept this as pretty straightforward. But in a playoff, we have to make this assumption all the time.

Last season, Whitewater beat Linfield in the semis, and Mount beat Wesley. Based on the way the playoffs went, we say that Whitewater's the national champion. But we don't know that Wesley couldn't have beat Whitewater. For all we know, Wesley was two touchdowns better than Whitewater. It was just chance (or geography) that the two didn't meet in the semis.

We assume Whitewater's better than Wesley because Mount was better than them and Whitewater better than Mount. It's the same transitive property, isn't it?

Obviously, this system at least gives 32 teams a shot on the field, and really, aside from some elaborate round robin that isn't really possible in football. But although what we have is a *better* system, I don't know that it, or any system is without flaws.

That is a *great* way to make an 1800th post. +k.

[Pat Coleman]

I know I get shot down whenever I bring this up, but just out of curiosity: if Mount Union or UWW were moved up to D-II today, where in the pack would they stand? Would they be by far the worst? Somewhere in the middle? Somewhere (this is what I suspect) toward the bottom?

I think if they went over today, they would be top 50-75 immediately, with the same roster. UWW goes comparable with the middle of the pack in the Northern Sun Intercollegiate Conference (lost a game a few years ago to St. Cloud State, which was UWW's first with a new quarterback), which seems to be a two-bid league on a regular basis. And it wouldn't take long for them to be competitive, I'd suspect, with the same coaching.

[Pat Coleman]

Offhand, I'd say talent, coaching, tradition (leads to recruiting better talent), playoff games and playoff practices.

Right, we agree there.  The argument then continues that the practices, etc. would benefit the next at-large team that missed the playoffs than a lower-tiered conference winner. 

It's only five more practices unless they can manage to win a game.

[dewcrew88]

Good start for the E8 in terms of OOC play. Utica beating St. Lawrence so easily surprised me, although the result didn't. The Wick put forth a pretty discouraging effort against a Morrisville State team that's gone 8-41 the past five seasons and allowed at least 34 points a game in each year, but at least they got the win. Salisbury rolled Newport News, but that was to be expected. Perhaps the most surprising was Frostburg beating Geneva.

Next week will be a big week for the conference. Alfred and Utica look to continue the conference's success against LL teams, while Fisher faces a steadily improving Buffalo State team. Fisher probably wins, but I don't think it will be easy. 27-10 Fisher, 28-20 Alfred

IC gets thrown to the wolves, going on the road to play the conference favorites, and doing so without--as far as I know--a true #1 quarterback. Hopefully, the defense keeps them in it, but...let's just say, 31-13 Salisbury feels right to me.

I'm very interested in the Utica/Union game. My downview on the Dutchman nonwithstanding, Union is quite a few steps up from the Castleton State/Becker's of the world. The Pioneers winning probably means they'll be 3-0 heading into the Salisbury game and brimming with confidence.

A Union win, on the other hand, could get things turned around for them. At 1-1, and facing a very beatable Ithaca team at home (that will be licking its wounds most likely) followed by the two teams they beat last season, could get them on a roll, and would really go a long way towards helping the LL improve its OOC rep following last season. Right now though, I am leaning towards Utica based on, in my view, an edge at QB. 34-17 Pioneers.

Utica beating Union would be one of the biggest wins in program history, without question.

I think Utica has 5 more games left on their schedule this year where if they win it will be the biggest win in the program's history (Union, Salisbury, Ithaca, SJFC, and Alfred).

True story. Although I also think, based on early and incomplete returns, Union's the most likely culprit, although Ithaca's ripe for the taking, as that game is in Utica.

Hypothetical question using Utica/Union as the backdrop: Does a team's struggles dilute the significance of them becoming another program's big victory? Right now, Union is coming off a 2-7 season. If they went say, 3-6 this season, how does that affect the way we view the win? We could ask this question about a lot of teams. I'm a Michigan State fan, and they recently beat Michigan three straight times for the first time in like, 40 years. Of course, that coincided with three of the worst Michigan teams of the last 40 years.

Personally, as much as I like beating Michigan, I have to admit, watching them go 4-8 took the luster off. It's why I hope SJF stays good, because when we beat you in 20 years, I want it to matter.

I think it does in the context of where Utica started, and where it is trying to go.  Going into last year, Utica had only beaten 2 teams...ever...that had a winning record at the end of the year (in 2006 against a 5-4 Mount Ida team and in 2004 against a 5-4 RPI team).  Last year, they made pretty good strides in non-league games and beat 3 more teams with winning records at the end of the year, even though they finished winless in the league.  Castleton State (unbelievably in the terrible ECFC) was 5-4, Wilkes finished 6-5, and RPI ended up 6-4 after a rough start.

Even if Union finishes sub .500, or Ithaca finishes the year at 6-4, a win over either of these two programs is a huge signature win for them...especially in the context of only beating 5 above .500 teams in ten years.  Union maybe wouldn't be the biggest win ever...but they are a legitimate program...and even if they finished with a terrible record (though I suspect they will finish above .500 at least), this will probably be Utica's second biggest program win ever.   Currently, I think that the 2004 win against RPI is the program's biggest win.  A win for the first time over Alfred, Ithaca, or SJFC...no matter what their records are...immediately becomes Utica's biggest program win.

yes, the RPI win in my opinion, is the biggest win in UC history. Blaise has them going places though.

[dewcrew88]

I think it does in the context of where Utica started, and where it is trying to go.  Going into last year, Utica had only beaten 2 teams...ever...that had a winning record at the end of the year (in 2006 against a 5-4 Mount Ida team and in 2004 against a 5-4 RPI team).  Last year, they made pretty good strides in non-league games and beat 3 more teams with winning records at the end of the year, even though they finished winless in the league.  Castleton State (unbelievably in the terrible ECFC) was 5-4, Wilkes finished 6-5, and RPI ended up 6-4 after a rough start.

Even if Union finishes sub .500, or Ithaca finishes the year at 6-4, a win over either of these two programs is a huge signature win for them...especially in the context of only beating 5 above .500 teams in ten years.  Union maybe wouldn't be the biggest win ever...but they are a legitimate program...and even if they finished with a terrible record (though I suspect they will finish above .500 at least), this will probably be Utica's second biggest program win ever.   Currently, I think that the 2004 win against RPI is the program's biggest win.  A win for the first time over Alfred, Ithaca, or SJFC...no matter what their records are...immediately becomes Utica's biggest program win.

See, what's interesting to me is that you didn't mention the Springfield win in 2008, even though that's the only time Utica's ever beaten a non-Norwich E8 team and the Pride arguably are a better football team than Alfred or Fisher, historically speaking. The Pride went 4-6 that year, although they're 17-4 since.

I'm not saying you're wrong, just that that's sort of what I was getting at. It seems like we color wins in certain ways based on how good the team is. Since this is shaping up to be a not so hot IC team--and maybe not a great Union squad--it's just the stuff that rolls around in my head

It's going to happen though. It might take another decade of "This is the year!" talk, (only kidding) but everyone gets their shot--okay, except Norwich

Oooh, I forgot the 34-33 win against Hey, Pride.

[Jonny Utah]

Either that or they can pull a Norwich and leave a conference where you are a perennial doormat with a 4-26 record over a five year period, and join a conference where you immediately put yourself in position to get a Pool A bid every single year and immediately go 11-2 in the league in the first two years...

You know, I got to thinking about this when people were talking (whining) about the BCS. Isn't Norwich the perfect example of how there really is no perfect system? I think we have this idea that playoffs, generally speaking, give you a "true" national champion. And yet, the Cadets prove that every system has its flaws. Not that the Cadets would be title contenders, but they can take up one of 32 playoff spots, despite the fact that in my belief, as things currently stand, they'd get beaten soundly by any team in the E8.

Good riddance, I say. Unless things change for that program their talent level relative to the rest of the playoff field will still remain poor, and they don't drag down the conference anymore while being an awful road trip. (I guess, for now, Frostburg takes that spot?)

Personally, I did not like to see Norwich go.  A very nice road trip for those who live in the Boston area in the fall.  Now the Springfield trip is in jeapordy.  Any word if Ithaca will still play Springfield?  I mean, they had played since the 1970s.

[Bombers798891]

Either that or they can pull a Norwich and leave a conference where you are a perennial doormat with a 4-26 record over a five year period, and join a conference where you immediately put yourself in position to get a Pool A bid every single year and immediately go 11-2 in the league in the first two years...

You know, I got to thinking about this when people were talking (whining) about the BCS. Isn't Norwich the perfect example of how there really is no perfect system? I think we have this idea that playoffs, generally speaking, give you a "true" national champion. And yet, the Cadets prove that every system has its flaws. Not that the Cadets would be title contenders, but they can take up one of 32 playoff spots, despite the fact that in my belief, as things currently stand, they'd get beaten soundly by any team in the E8.

Good riddance, I say. Unless things change for that program their talent level relative to the rest of the playoff field will still remain poor, and they don't drag down the conference anymore while being an awful road trip. (I guess, for now, Frostburg takes that spot?)

Personally, I did not like to see Norwich go.  A very nice road trip for those who live in the Boston area in the fall.  Now the Springfield trip is in jeapordy.  Any word if Ithaca will still play Springfield?  I mean, they had played since the 1970s.

Heck, they've played them through the other 87 conference switches they've made over the years. What's one more? Part of me wonders though, if too many locked in games is good. Obviously, there are plenty of teams who only have one (or none I guess) but between seven conference games, Cortland and then possibly Springfield, it doesn't let you branch out.

From a personal perspective, I like seeing IC play different teams. Even if they weren't necessarily competitive all the time, Lycoming, King's, B-Port, Union, Huntington were all cool to see. And since we're not exactly making deep playoff runs, this is the one chance to get some variety in the schedule.

[Jonny Utah]

I know I get shot down whenever I bring this up, but just out of curiosity: if Mount Union or UWW were moved up to D-II today, where in the pack would they stand? Would they be by far the worst? Somewhere in the middle? Somewhere (this is what I suspect) toward the bottom?

I think if they went over today, they would be top 50-75 immediately, with the same roster. UWW goes comparable with the middle of the pack in the Northern Sun Intercollegiate Conference (lost a game a few years ago to St. Cloud State, which was UWW's first with a new quarterback), which seems to be a two-bid league on a regular basis. And it wouldn't take long for them to be competitive, I'd suspect, with the same coaching.

Oh I think they would be top 10 in D2 easily.  Even Bentley and the NE-10 teams make that D2 top ten and those teams would not beat MUC or UWW.  Once they start playing the powerhouses like North Alabama or Lake Superior State, they might start having some problems.

Just my opinion.

[Pat Coleman]

I don't know about Top 10 -- that's a pretty big jump. But they would be very good and wouldn't be in the bottom half of any conference, I don't think.

There may be NE-10 teams that make the top 10 but I'm not sure they're among the 10 best teams in D-II. NE-10, PSAC, are not national contenders.

[sjfcards]

I know I get shot down whenever I bring this up, but just out of curiosity: if Mount Union or UWW were moved up to D-II today, where in the pack would they stand? Would they be by far the worst? Somewhere in the middle? Somewhere (this is what I suspect) toward the bottom?

I think if they went over today, they would be top 50-75 immediately, with the same roster. UWW goes comparable with the middle of the pack in the Northern Sun Intercollegiate Conference (lost a game a few years ago to St. Cloud State, which was UWW's first with a new quarterback), which seems to be a two-bid league on a regular basis. And it wouldn't take long for them to be competitive, I'd suspect, with the same coaching.

Oh I think they would be top 10 in D2 easily.  Even Bentley and the NE-10 teams make that D2 top ten and those teams would not beat MUC or UWW.  Once they start playing the powerhouses like North Alabama or Lake Superior State, they might start having some problems.

Just my opinion.

I don't know if I would put those programs as high as top 10, but I think they are in the top levls of DII right away. I have not seen a ton of DII games in the past, but I have watched teams from the Ivy league play several times in the past, and I don't think that they are that much better than a UMU or a UWW.

Obviously it is a step up from DIII and with scholarships (not the Ivy leagues, but DII teams) those teams can always attract a level of talent not seen at DIII. So, I guess this is a two part answer. I think if you put UMU or a UWW in DII with their current rosters, I think they are very competitive (2-4 losses is my guess), but if you give them a couple seasons with scholarships, I think they are firmly inside the top 10.

Another interesting thought along these lines is how far down the DIII ladder can you go before teams would get rolled in every game?