FB: Empire 8

[sjfcards]

And I think you are drawing too heavily off of that game.  The good news is if Fisher wins this week they will be assured a playoff spot, and then we'll both get to see.

This is the biggest issue that Fisher faces when being considered for elite status. As a fan, I believe Fisher is an elite program, and has more than enough talent to be in the conversation with the Linfields, NCC's, etc. But I totally get when an outsider looks at the program and sees these losses and questions that status.

My definition of an elite team is one of those programs that you know you have to get through to get to a regional final, or for regional supremacy, or for a chance to lose to one of the purples. These struggles with the triple option has forced really good Fisher teams to go on the road when they have made the playoffs (last year is an example, but even the 2006 team had to go to Springfield in the playoffs), and they have kept really good Fisher teams out of the playoffs all together (2010).

As a fan I can look at the loss to SU and say, well...it is that stupid offense, and write it off as nothing more. To someone on the outside I get it when you see a program that is a tough out in the playoffs but a program that also has no undefeated seasons, has made the NCAA's inconsistently, and has had to go on the road when they get there. If Fisher keeps giving people a reason to question their elite status, then people will question it.

I guess the question I have is which is a better situation? A program that does struggle at times with programs they should beat, but you can pretty much count on to win some games when they do make the playoffs? Or, a program that can roll through the regular season and make the NCAA's every year, but you don't know that they are good enough to make a deep run?

I guess what I am asking is who has had the better run in the last 4 or 5 years, Hobart or SJFC? These are just the  two teams I am picking, but there may be better comparisons. Hobart gets in every year, and HAS made a deep run (but not every year). Or Fisher, they don't always get in, but they win at least two games when they do get there.

If I can put it another way...which is the better team...One that is consistent is always going to play well, or the team that when they play well there are very few teams (like 3) that can beat them? 

[rams1102]

And I think you are drawing too heavily off of that game.  The good news is if Fisher wins this week they will be assured a playoff spot, and then we'll both get to see.

This is the biggest issue that Fisher faces when being considered for elite status. As a fan, I believe Fisher is an elite program, and has more than enough talent to be in the conversation with the Linfields, NCC's, etc. But I totally get when an outsider looks at the program and sees these losses and questions that status.

My definition of an elite team is one of those programs that you know you have to get through to get to a regional final, or for regional supremacy, or for a chance to lose to one of the purples. These struggles with the triple option has forced really good Fisher teams to go on the road when they have made the playoffs (last year is an example, but even the 2006 team had to go to Springfield in the playoffs), and they have kept really good Fisher teams out of the playoffs all together (2010).

As a fan I can look at the loss to SU and say, well...it is that stupid offense, and write it off as nothing more. To someone on the outside I get it when you see a program that is a tough out in the playoffs but a program that also has no undefeated seasons, has made the NCAA's inconsistently, and has had to go on the road when they get there. If Fisher keeps giving people a reason to question their elite status, then people will question it.

I guess the question I have is which is a better situation? A program that does struggle at times with programs they should beat, but you can pretty much count on to win some games when they do make the playoffs? Or, a program that can roll through the regular season and make the NCAA's every year, but you don't know that they are good enough to make a deep run?

I guess what I am asking is who has had the better run in the last 4 or 5 years, Hobart or SJFC? These are just the  two teams I am picking, but there may be better comparisons. Hobart gets in every year, and HAS made a deep run (but not every year). Or Fisher, they don't always get in, but they win at least two games when they do get there.

If I can put it another way...which is the better team...One that is consistent is always going to play well, or the team that when they play well there are very few teams (like 3) that can beat them?

I firmly believe that Fisher is a real good team. I do not think they are elite. Will they be? At the pace they are going, very likley, but not as of yet. IMHO the elite are UWW, UMHB, MTU and Wesley. You may throw Linfield in as a maybe but not a definite. Look at the past (15) years. MTU (7), UWW (5), Linfield (1), St. John's (1) and Pac Luth (1) as champions. It took a while for Wesley and UMHB to get there. If Fisher keeps up their same pratices they will also be there soon.

[Bombers798891]

I've somewhat recently come to the conclusion, that, as much as we debate stuff, the "best" team designation is largely irrelevant.

Booby says the 2010 Cardinals were better than a pair of teams that went to the Elite 8.

I think Ithaca's 2004 ECAC team is Mike Welch's best, over a team that was literally one play away from the National Championship game.

But at the end of the day, what does that really mean? Would we rather sit here, strongly asserting the fact that no, this team was better, or would we rather watch our team in the NCAAs? IC's 2004 team would beat the 1994 team by three touchdowns, but the 1994 team played twp of the program's most iconic NCAA games ever. So who really cares that they were probably as close to 4-6 as they were to the Stagg Bowl?

Fisher's 2010 was awesome, but all they have to show for it was an ECAC win. Is being "better" than an Elite 8 team comforting when you're playing out the string and the other team was trading punches with Mary Hardin-Baylor?

[sjfcards]

And I think you are drawing too heavily off of that game.  The good news is if Fisher wins this week they will be assured a playoff spot, and then we'll both get to see.

This is the biggest issue that Fisher faces when being considered for elite status. As a fan, I believe Fisher is an elite program, and has more than enough talent to be in the conversation with the Linfields, NCC's, etc. But I totally get when an outsider looks at the program and sees these losses and questions that status.

My definition of an elite team is one of those programs that you know you have to get through to get to a regional final, or for regional supremacy, or for a chance to lose to one of the purples. These struggles with the triple option has forced really good Fisher teams to go on the road when they have made the playoffs (last year is an example, but even the 2006 team had to go to Springfield in the playoffs), and they have kept really good Fisher teams out of the playoffs all together (2010).

As a fan I can look at the loss to SU and say, well...it is that stupid offense, and write it off as nothing more. To someone on the outside I get it when you see a program that is a tough out in the playoffs but a program that also has no undefeated seasons, has made the NCAA's inconsistently, and has had to go on the road when they get there. If Fisher keeps giving people a reason to question their elite status, then people will question it.

I guess the question I have is which is a better situation? A program that does struggle at times with programs they should beat, but you can pretty much count on to win some games when they do make the playoffs? Or, a program that can roll through the regular season and make the NCAA's every year, but you don't know that they are good enough to make a deep run?

I guess what I am asking is who has had the better run in the last 4 or 5 years, Hobart or SJFC? These are just the  two teams I am picking, but there may be better comparisons. Hobart gets in every year, and HAS made a deep run (but not every year). Or Fisher, they don't always get in, but they win at least two games when they do get there.

If I can put it another way...which is the better team...One that is consistent is always going to play well, or the team that when they play well there are very few teams (like 3) that can beat them?

I firmly believe that Fisher is a real good team. I do not think they are elite. Will they be? At the pace they are going, very likley, but not as of yet. IMHO the elite are UWW, UMHB, MTU and Wesley. You may throw Linfield in as a maybe but not a definite. Look at the past (15) years. MTU (7), UWW (5), Linfield (1), St. John's (1) and Pac Luth (1) as champions. It took a while for Wesley and UMHB to get there. If Fisher keeps up their same pratices they will also be there soon.

Maybe I should have been more clear on my definition of elite. Whenever I have a discussion about the elite in D3 I take UMU, UWW, and UMHB right out of the discussion. Not because they are not the elite teams (the clearly are), but because they are so far ahead of everyone else. When I discuss elite I am referring to the teams that have a chance to compete with those teams (keep it close when you play and lose to them). Let's be honest, one of those three teams is going to win this year.

After UMU, UWW, and UMHB there is a level that I think Fisher belongs in. The Wesley, Linfiend, North Central sphere of football at this level. That is what I was discussing in my previous post.

[rams1102]

And I think you are drawing too heavily off of that game.  The good news is if Fisher wins this week they will be assured a playoff spot, and then we'll both get to see.

This is the biggest issue that Fisher faces when being considered for elite status. As a fan, I believe Fisher is an elite program, and has more than enough talent to be in the conversation with the Linfields, NCC's, etc. But I totally get when an outsider looks at the program and sees these losses and questions that status.

My definition of an elite team is one of those programs that you know you have to get through to get to a regional final, or for regional supremacy, or for a chance to lose to one of the purples. These struggles with the triple option has forced really good Fisher teams to go on the road when they have made the playoffs (last year is an example, but even the 2006 team had to go to Springfield in the playoffs), and they have kept really good Fisher teams out of the playoffs all together (2010).

As a fan I can look at the loss to SU and say, well...it is that stupid offense, and write it off as nothing more. To someone on the outside I get it when you see a program that is a tough out in the playoffs but a program that also has no undefeated seasons, has made the NCAA's inconsistently, and has had to go on the road when they get there. If Fisher keeps giving people a reason to question their elite status, then people will question it.

I guess the question I have is which is a better situation? A program that does struggle at times with programs they should beat, but you can pretty much count on to win some games when they do make the playoffs? Or, a program that can roll through the regular season and make the NCAA's every year, but you don't know that they are good enough to make a deep run?

I guess what I am asking is who has had the better run in the last 4 or 5 years, Hobart or SJFC? These are just the  two teams I am picking, but there may be better comparisons. Hobart gets in every year, and HAS made a deep run (but not every year). Or Fisher, they don't always get in, but they win at least two games when they do get there.

If I can put it another way...which is the better team...One that is consistent is always going to play well, or the team that when they play well there are very few teams (like 3) that can beat them?

I firmly believe that Fisher is a real good team. I do not think they are elite. Will they be? At the pace they are going, very likley, but not as of yet. IMHO the elite are UWW, UMHB, MTU and Wesley. You may throw Linfield in as a maybe but not a definite. Look at the past (15) years. MTU (7), UWW (5), Linfield (1), St. John's (1) and Pac Luth (1) as champions. It took a while for Wesley and UMHB to get there. If Fisher keeps up their same pratices they will also be there soon.

Maybe I should have been more clear on my definition of elite. Whenever I have a discussion about the elite in D3 I take UMU, UWW, and UMHB right out of the discussion. Not because they are not the elite teams (the clearly are), but because they are so far ahead of everyone else. When I discuss elite I am referring to the teams that have a chance to compete with those teams (keep it close when you play and lose to them). Let's be honest, one of those three teams is going to win this year.

After UMU, UWW, and UMHB there is a level that I think Fisher belongs in. The Wesley, Linfiend, North Central sphere of football at this level. That is what I was discussing in my previous post.

I now understand and agree with you, but with one exception, I consider Wesley in that elite group. Good discussion & thanks.

[AUPepBand]

Alabama Coach Frank Thomas once said the ingredients of a successful football coach is:
60% material
10% coach's knowledge
10% ability of the coach to impart said knowledge to players
10% of coach's organization of practices
10% of coach's personality

Assuming this is also the recipe for an "elite" football program (ie UWW, UMU, UMHB, Wesley), where does Fisher fall short?

Pep might amend the recipe to include an ingredient of "facilities" but is sticking with the Thomas recipe as Pep believes the facilities acts as a magnet to attract the "material."

Please discuss.

[fisheralum91]

60% Material.....is that players?

[AUPepBand]

60% Material.....is that players?

Indeed! Haha! The "fabric" that comprises the team.

[ITH radio]

Jimmy and Joes, not the X's and O's eh pep?

[Bombers798891]

Alabama Coach Frank Thomas once said the ingredients of a successful football coach is:
60% material
10% coach's knowledge
10% ability of the coach to impart said knowledge to players
10% of coach's organization of practices
10% of coach's personality

Assuming this is also the recipe for an "elite" football program (ie UWW, UMU, UMHB, Wesley), where does Fisher fall short?

Please discuss.

1. Why would we assume this is the recipe for an elite football program? Because you want it to be?

2. To answer your question somewhat dismissively: You shouldn't need "Why Fisher falls short of Mount and Whitewater" explained to you.

3. But to answer your question in detail: There's a difference in "being elite" and "being as good as someone else who also happens to be elite".

Let's use Union and Ithaca as an example. They went 86-19 under Bagnoli from 1982-1991. They made the playoffs six times and went to the Stagg Bowl twice and the national semifinals a third time. Ithaca went 92-21 during that time, made the playoffs five times, went to the Stagg Bowl three times, and won two. The two schools met three times in the playoffs, and Ithaca won all three, two on the road. There are two things I know about these programs from this era:

1. It would be pretty insane to claim that Union was not an elite program during his time there.

2. It would also be pretty ridiculous to claim they were as good as Ithaca.

I view Fisher and Wesley/UMHB in a similar vein to Ithaca and Union, just with a slightly lowered ceiling across the board

[AUPepBand]

Jimmy and Joes, not the X's and O's eh pep?

Yessir.

[Dr. Acula]

After UMU, UWW, and UMHB there is a level that I think Fisher belongs in. The Wesley, Linfiend, North Central sphere of football at this level. That is what I was discussing in my previous post.

I would agree with rams...if you're putting UMHB in the elite group you almost have to put Wesley up there too.  Their resumes are pretty similar and they've played each other pretty evenly over the past decade (UMHB holding a 5-4 edge H2H by my count). 

[Upstate]

I think it goes:

Elite (Teams that play for the Walnut & Bronze):
-UWW
-UMU

Great (Teams that you'll often see make the Final 4):
-UMHB
-Wesley
-Linfield
-North Central

Very Good (Teams that can make a run to the elite 8):
-John Carrol
-Johns Hopkins
-St. John Fisher
-Bethel
-Wabash
-Wartburg
-Hobart
-Wheaton
-St. Thomas
-St. Johns

After that there are about 15 pretty good teams that are interchangeable and can bump up a level if they're having a really good year.

[boobyhasgameyo]

I think it goes:

Elite (Teams that play for the Walnut & Bronze):
-UWW
-UMU

Great (Teams that you'll often see make the Final 4):
-UMHB
-Wesley
-Linfield
-North Central

Very Good (Teams that can make a run to the elite 8):
-John Carrol
-Johns Hopkins
-St. John Fisher
-Bethel
-Wabash
-Wartburg
-Hobart
-Wheaton
-St. Thomas
-St. Johns

After that there are about 15 pretty good teams that are interchangeable and can bump up a level if they're having a really good year.

Hasn't North Central made it to the final four once in the d3football.com era, same as Fisher?  With that appearance being last year.  Or am I forgetting a year?  To me I see North Central and Fisher as very comparable.  North Central is what Fisher would be if Fisher didn't lose the one stupid game a year. 

[Dr. Acula]

I would bump NCC down to that next level too.  At least for now.  Last year they had a great team centered around a great QB.  I'd take a wait and see approach to make sure that's the start of something at that "consistent regional finals" level and not the exception.  Plus their coach is retiring so I'm definitely in wait and see mode with them.

The only one in the last group I'm iffy on is Hopkins.  That's based purely on seeing them play Mount in the playoffs so not really a perfect measurement of their prowess I'll admit.  But I have not been impressed by them on the same level as the other teams in that group that I've seen.  Maybe they're very similar though and Mount just played really well against them.