FB: Empire 8

[maxpower]

Yeah.... if you hadn't seen the games, wouldn't you look at records and statistics to find evidence that U of R always plays Fisher tough?


Re: the region issue, I agree that it's nice to have a self-contained bracket; almost like our own little personal playoff before the inevitable. But in another way it's nice to have exposure to out-of-region teams, even if they are guaranteed losses like Mount (and honestly, in both SJF's and Ithaca's playoff games against MUC, the losses didn't look THAT guaranteed). The north region has, obviously, some of the best football in DIII, and is responsible for a lot of the fans and what makes DIII DIII (sorry pep), so it's nice to get a glance at that every once in a while.

I mean, without MUC's playoff game against SJF, would they ever have scheduled them to a regular season game? I don't think I said this before, but kudos to SJF for putting such a challenge right up front on their schedule.

All this is really just devil's advocate



but it's a thought I had.

Which means you all should care about it.

[maxpower]

On a semi-related note, I'd be interested to see who you guys think IC played tougher: Curry or MUC? To be fair, they weren't so injury-riddled for the MUC game....

[HScoach]

Yeah.... if you hadn't seen the games, wouldn't you look at records and statistics to find evidence that U of R always plays Fisher tough?


Re: the region issue, I agree that it's nice to have a self-contained bracket; almost like our own little personal playoff before the inevitable. But in another way it's nice to have exposure to out-of-region teams, even if they are guaranteed losses like Mount (and honestly, in both SJF's and Ithaca's playoff games against MUC, the losses didn't look THAT guaranteed). The north region has, obviously, some of the best football in DIII, and is responsible for a lot of the fans and what makes DIII DIII (sorry pep), so it's nice to get a glance at that every once in a while.

I mean, without MUC's playoff game against SJF, would they ever have scheduled them to a regular season game? I don't think I said this before, but kudos to SJF for putting such a challenge right up front on their schedule.

All this is really just devil's advocate



but it's a thought I had.

Which means you all should care about it.

The SJF/MUC series was signed BEFORE the playoff season.

[Bombers798891]

Heck, all these D-I schedules get mapped 7-8 years in advance. I know it isn't like that for D-III, but still I mean, who knows right? Teams get terrible, teams get great, sometimes unexpectedly. And sometimes, the short timeframe renders expectation moot.

798891, I don't think there is a D1 equivalent here.  D1 programs don't fluctuate that much.  Some random schools put together good years every now and again but for the most part, the daddies stay the daddies (unless they do something stupid like Notre Dame and sign with NBC and giveaway all that conference money).

You are right about D3, the inability to truly "reload," because recruiting is much more difficult when kids have to cut checks, makes it fun.

I understand what we're saying about the emphasis on regional competition as playoff criteria and then not having true regions in the playoffs. It's weird, but you have to separate the two. I've tried to stop calling them regional brackets because they don't have to be, and geography allows for a lot of crossover in the midwest, mid-Atlantic and Northeast.

I agree about Cortland last year too, FWIW.

KMack.

I think you are right about the Mount issue when you look at it from the North Region's perspective but we aren't inclined to think like that.  An unspoken part of the problem may be that there are only three teams with a realistic hope of winning the whole damn thing.  So, in the end, we are all playing for regional superiority and that gets hard to determine with the elephant in our region.

It leaves us to argue about strength of conference and key wins (which can at least occupy us during the down months) without one East Region Champion, that runs the gauntlet of East Region conferences, to go and face Mount in the Semis.

Finally, since I am on perpetual watch for crap sportscasters have tried to sell us as relevant sport analysis, I am calling this out E8.  What, exactly, does this expression mean?

But we all know that you can throw records and statistcs out for this game

Jose,

You're right that D1 programs don't fluctuate as much, especially at the top. I just meant it more as a general rule.

As a broadcaster, I never liked the "You can throw out the records" argument. I understand that some teams play other teams tough, especially in a rivalry game, but there's still often times a "better" team.

The time I realized this irked me was 2003 at Cortaca. In 2003, IC was 8-1 and had beaten an 8-3 Fisher team, a 6-4 Hobart team and wiped the floor with #9 Brockport 31-10, handing them their only loss of the regular season. Cortland's only wins to that point had been over 1-9 Kean, 1-9 William Patterson, 2-8 Buffalo State and 3-7 Utica, for a nice combined 7-33 record. So naturally the Bombers lost, blowing a chance at hosting a playoff game for the first time in nine years. And all week, there were people saying "Ah, that's Cortaca for you. Records don't matter in that game." And I just remember thinking  how convenient an excuse that was for IC. It's almost a way for them to guard against criticism for losing a game they shouldn't, like 'Hey, it's Cortaca, so even though the Red Dragons aren't very good, and we're ranked #14, don't be stunned if we lose'.

I mean, shouldn't BOTH teams get up for big games? I understand that sometimes, a rivalry means more to one school than another (I'm a Michigan State fan and I'm sure beating U of M is higher on a priority list for MSU than vice versa) but for the most part, both teams should be as emotionally invested in the rivalry game no? Maybe, never having been a player, I'm wrong, but I just don't see how the intangible effect of a rivalry game affects one side more than the other, and, if that essentially balances out, don't we come back to talent again?

[maxpower]

The SJF/MUC series was signed BEFORE the playoff season.

Cheerfully withdrawn.

[fisheralum91]

i agree with both bombers and jose--but will offer you this-
there is a reality to playing down to an opponent that you know you should beat....it is a mental thing--has happened to me not only on the field but on the golf course.

[maxpower]

FA, there may be a reality to it, but it's got to be more the exception than the rule. Otherwise, well, you'd have a lot of "better" teams losing a lot more games.

And again, none of this matters: in order to see that in Cortaca the teams sometimes play at each others' level when they shouldn't, all you have to do is look at the records and statistics of past Cortaca games.

[dlippiel]

There is always a crazy mental side to rivalries that dlip has experienced. The better team on paper and talent wise "should" win the ****in game every time, "should" win. Yet there are the factors like the one maxpower mentioned where a team plays down to another teams level. dlip can't recall how many times he has been on the "talented" team and his team struggled mightly against what should ahve been an inferior team. On the flip side when one is playing for that inferior team the rivalry or the fact that one knows they must step up their game to compete can, at times, drive an inferior team to victory. Also there is so much ****ing emotion i huge rivalry games that mental mistakes are made as a result of lack of focus. dlip guess that after going on here all in all he thinks the more talented team, the better team on paper, the team who has defeated stronger opponents shoudl win the rivalry game everytime if the "mental" pressures don't win out.

[fisheralum91]

max- i totally agree-- because if you see yourself playing down---and know that it is happening that is where you can collect yourself and right the ship.
i had a golf match last week and not only was my cpmpetitor playing a good round- i could do nothing right.
saw what was happening - took a momment to relfect then executed the way i had all summer.

[fisheralum91]

who can i thank for the + k?
thanks
whomever

[SJFF82]

Again....NCAA HAS BILLIONS....i am going to be a socialist for a minute...JT close your eyes....SPREAD THE DAMN WEALTH NCAA!   One lousy 30 sec. GoDaddy.com commercial during the SouthwestDryCleaners Bowl between 6-5 Buffalo and 6-5 Eastern Tenn St. on December 15 could easily pay for all our travels...

Can't resist this 82.... but in your scenario would you be the one GETTING the check or GIVING it?




EDIT: This reminds me of George Will--GEORGE FREAKIN' WILL--writing a column in Time Magazine about how baseball needs a luxury tax and revenue sharing.

I think you are joking and you likely see the clear difference, plus the fact that I poked fun at my own statement in any event by stating "I am going to be a socialist for a minute"....BUT, just in case....D3 would be GETTING the check, but they are part of the NCAA and should be cut in on its VAST wealth.  Comparing the NCAA to our Federal Govt when it comes to political policies is a non-starter.

[JQV]

I disagree 82, and not just for the sake of argument.  Big time college athletics generate revenue by providing a product you can't find anywhere else.  They shouldn't have to subsidize other college athletics.

The great thing about D3 is that it is different than D1.  Some funky profit sharing deal would only blunt that.

[maxpower]

Again....NCAA HAS BILLIONS....i am going to be a socialist for a minute...JT close your eyes....SPREAD THE DAMN WEALTH NCAA!   One lousy 30 sec. GoDaddy.com commercial during the SouthwestDryCleaners Bowl between 6-5 Buffalo and 6-5 Eastern Tenn St. on December 15 could easily pay for all our travels...

Can't resist this 82.... but in your scenario would you be the one GETTING the check or GIVING it?




EDIT: This reminds me of George Will--GEORGE FREAKIN' WILL--writing a column in Time Magazine about how baseball needs a luxury tax and revenue sharing.

I think you are joking and you likely see the clear difference, plus the fact that I poked fun at my own statement in any event by stating "I am going to be a socialist for a minute"....BUT, just in case....D3 would be GETTING the check, but they are part of the NCAA and should be cut in on its VAST wealth.  Comparing the NCAA to our Federal Govt when it comes to political policies is a non-starter.

I was kidding 82. Although I'm not sure what you mean by "non-starter".... do you mean most of Fisher's offense on any other team?

[SJFF82]

Again....NCAA HAS BILLIONS....i am going to be a socialist for a minute...JT close your eyes....SPREAD THE DAMN WEALTH NCAA!   One lousy 30 sec. GoDaddy.com commercial during the SouthwestDryCleaners Bowl between 6-5 Buffalo and 6-5 Eastern Tenn St. on December 15 could easily pay for all our travels...

Can't resist this 82.... but in your scenario would you be the one GETTING the check or GIVING it?




EDIT: This reminds me of George Will--GEORGE FREAKIN' WILL--writing a column in Time Magazine about how baseball needs a luxury tax and revenue sharing.

I think you are joking and you likely see the clear difference, plus the fact that I poked fun at my own statement in any event by stating "I am going to be a socialist for a minute"....BUT, just in case....D3 would be GETTING the check, but they are part of the NCAA and should be cut in on its VAST wealth.  Comparing the NCAA to our Federal Govt when it comes to political policies is a non-starter.

I was kidding 82. Although I'm not sure what you mean by "non-starter".... do you mean most of Fisher's offense on any other team?

+K...that was funny...just laughed out loud.  Non-starter:  Used in a sentence for your clarification:  The last time ITHACA beat FISHER, every current Ithaca starter, was a NON-STARTER.

[Bombers798891]

I disagree 82, and not just for the sake of argument.  Big time college athletics generate revenue by providing a product you can't find anywhere else.  They shouldn't have to subsidize other college athletics.

The great thing about D3 is that it is different than D1.  Some funky profit sharing deal would only blunt that.

Didn't the most recent NCAA figures point out that only 25% of D-I schools athletic departments turned a profit? I thought I read that on ESPN.com