FB: Empire 8

[sjfcards]

One other note regarding MUC into the East region. I think a much more appropriate way to do that may be to have the last team in from the South or North region be sent to the East, since they are one of the last teams into the playoffs. Rather than send every East team to MUC year after year.

If the last team in from other regions blows up some of the top teams in the East, and makes it deep ino the playoffs or even back to play MUC in the semis then you know the East is a much weaker region. Not just pointing to the fact that all east teams lose to MUC like everyone else does every year.

[Pat Coleman]

Pat -

The question on the football homepage regarding Ithaca's rushing game is misleading.  Those numbers take into account a snap over the punter's head and QB sacks, which accounted for -62 yards rushing.  In my opinion those yards shouldn't count so the real number is 48 yards rushing.  It is misleading!

I believe in D3, those yards do count. I think that those negative yards count in the rushing totals at all college levels, but maybe PC knows for sure.

there is different rules for d3?

No, as I mentioned yesterday.

[Yanks 99]

dlip doesn't know if he fully agrees. There are a multitude of reasons as to why the East is where it is today. dlip is referring to eastern programs that have fallen off from being so-called "national" and even "regional" powers (ex. IC, Union). There are clearly two sides to the coin but dlip is at the point where he feels if the East wants any national respect we must do something about it. The stats game and comparisons have been being made for awhile. We simply need to get better if we hope to have the opportuntiy to compete for a national championship and some national respectablility. What worries dlip is the way things seem to be looking recently he doesn't know if the East will be back. Just some thoughts.

agreed the only way to get it back is to do it on the field....Period. Until somone from the east gets at least to the final 4 and in most eyes to the final game if not winning it, there won't be any thought given to any team being a true power. Yes there are local/regional powers  for example this year dvc/sjf but until someone kicks down the door and makes a run deep into the playoffs no love will be shown to the east

Tough to do when they keep sending MUC over to the East Bracket every year.  As I have stated in previous posts, whether or not we have a "true" East team represent us in the Final 4 is not a reasonable measure of how strong the region is.  Is the North Region stronger because they get a rep to the Final Four every year because MUC is in the East?  I will say it again...the East Region as a whole has exactly as many win against MUC in the past 11 years as the North Region and the South Region does...one each.

I would love to get the chance to prove the East is on a level playing field with other regions (outside of the perennial powers of MUC and UWW)...but because we always end up with MUC in our bracket, it is pretty tough to find out.

I don't know if I totally agree Yanks. In 2006, Fisher went to MUC in the final four and kept the game close down to the wire, however, the following year, MUC was brought into the East despite Fisher being a quality 1 loss team, and several other teams in the east being quality teams, including a 2 loss Ithaca team that made the playoffs and stuck with MUC for a half.

I think the problem is that everyone points to the East and says they are weak because MUC rolls to the finals every year through the east. However, if MUC did not play in the east, then we would send a team to the final four consistently. If MUC was put in the south every year, would we all say the south is weak because every team gets rolled by MUC?
I don't think the East is as strong overall as other conferences, but I don't think the dropoff is as great as some would have us believe. I think other regions may be elevated in several cases by the top teams in their region (MUC, UWW, and Wesley). But look at what those teams do to other teams in their own regions. The destroy them. I think the East is punished for not having that one really great team. I keep waiting for Fisher to turn into that team, but they don't seem to want to turn that corner.  I thought they were ready back in 2006, but they have come back to the pack since then.

I hear you Cards...but to answer your question...yes...if MUC was put in the South every single year I believe collectively we would all be saying the South Region was the weakest region.  After all...what else would we have to go on???  None of the East teams would ever face another team from the South as they would be beaten (probably severely) by MUC every year.

I do agree with you though...what hurts us is that we don't have the "every year" power (the closest we have currently is Fisher).  However...I wouldn't put Wesley in the same category as MUC and UWW.  Yes...they have made deep runs in the playoffs the last few years...but they (and the whole South region included) have always avoided the MUC's and UWW's until the semis.  If you look at the last 4 years, when Wesley's playoff run has ended...it has ended in rather spectacular fashion (their losses being 43-9 in 2009, 46-14 in 2008, 27-10 in 2007, and 44-7 in 2006) and they have never advanced further then the semis.  This record could easily be any of our stronger teams from the East over the past couple of years...with the exception that we always seem to get MUC in our bracket and never get the chance to get to the semis.

[Pat Coleman]

Last team to beat Mount Union before the Stagg Bowl was a South Region team that did it on Mount's home turf. And unlike Rowan 1999, they didn't lay an egg in the Stagg Bowl the next week.

[Yanks 99]

Last team to beat Mount Union before the Stagg Bowl was a South Region team that did it on Mount's home turf. And unlike Rowan 1999, they didn't lay an egg in the Stagg Bowl the next week.

Correct...like the East region, that is the one win that the South Region has over MUC in the past decade plus.  Both the South, North, and East Regions have exactly one win each over MUC over the past 11 years. 

[Yanks 99]

I cannot imagine that you are arguing that the South Region is better as a whole simply because of their one win (Mary Hardin-Baylor) over MUC by 3 in 2004???  Because they kind of did lay an egg when they lost to Linfield in the championship the following week...

[Pat Coleman]

But the East gets blitzed while the South has not embarrassed itself.

I don't think many current fans are basing their opinion on a game in 1999. Probably not many are on a game in 2004, but then again, that was the last time Mount was kept out of the Stagg Bowl.

I do not agree with your premise that the South would have performed the same as the East has against Mount Union. It's not just the wines, but the scores. Regional finals of 55-3, 41-14 and 52-10 the past three years? I don't think those happen against Mary Hardin-Baylor or Wesley. (We know for a fact it wouldn't against Wesley.)

[Pat Coleman]

I cannot imagine that you are arguing that the South Region is better as a whole simply because of their one win (Mary Hardin-Baylor) over MUC by 3 in 2004???  Because they kind of did lay an egg when they lost to Linfield in the championship the following week...

Uhm, check your history. They lost by one score and they were driving as time expired. Compare that to the Rowan beatdown by Pacific Lutheran in 1999.

[Yanks 99]

I cannot imagine that you are arguing that the South Region is better as a whole simply because of their one win (Mary Hardin-Baylor) over MUC by 3 in 2004???  Because they kind of did lay an egg when they lost to Linfield in the championship the following week...

Uhm, check your history. They lost by one score and they were driving as time expired. Compare that to the Rowan beatdown by Pacific Lutheran in 1999.

I know the score was close...but the fact is they lost in the championship game the week after slaying Goliath.  It would have been like the 1980 Hockey Team losing to Finland the next game.  It was nice to beat the Russians...but would we even care today if we didn't eventually win the gold???

I can agree to disagree...just not sure there is that much of a difference between the regional scores you just listed above for the East Region (which of course includes MUC) and the 43-9, 46-14, and 44-7 playoff losses that Wesley has suffered in 3 of the past 4 years, or MHB's 53-21 and 39-13 playoff losses over the past two years.  I mean...they all smell like beat downs...

I am actually not sure how the North Region escapes the most criticism.  They play more games against MUC each year (obviously...they are in the same Region)...and have exactly as many wins as the East and South Regions do (one each).  More chances to beat MUC...and the same amount of wins???

[Pat Coleman]

Well, guess you won't be convinced, then. But I am positive Mary Hardin-Baylor never goes to Alliance and gets beaten down 55-3.

Wesley didn't lose 43-9. They won 43-9.

[Yanks 99]

Well, guess you won't be convinced, then. But I am positive Mary Hardin-Baylor never goes to Alliance and gets beaten down 55-3.

Wesley didn't lose 43-9. They won 43-9.

Good catch...read it wrong...disclaimer...they lost 24-7 in all games that I listed 43-9.  Not quite the spectacular beatdown...but pretty much shut down for sure...by MUC.

And you are correct, and I agree with you...Mary Hardin-Baylor doesn't go to Alliance and lose 55-3...they usually lose to UWW or Wesley in the quarters of semis before they would have to play MUC.  Also, I don't believe they have even played MUC since that 2004 game we spoke of above.

[Bombers798891]

But the East gets blitzed while the South has not embarrassed itself.

I don't think many current fans are basing their opinion on a game in 1999. Probably not many are on a game in 2004, but then again, that was the last time Mount was kept out of the Stagg Bowl.

I do not agree with your premise that the South would have performed the same as the East has against Mount Union. It's not just the wines, but the scores. Regional finals of 55-3, 41-14 and 52-10 the past three years? I don't think those happen against Mary Hardin-Baylor or Wesley. (We know for a fact it wouldn't against Wesley.)

There's more to the playoffs than regional finals.

1) In 2007, Ithaca gave MUC a better game than anyone they played in their first ten games. Ithaca actually had a lead, and scored on the first team defense. They were only down nine at the half. What an embarrassment.

2) The Purple Raiders didn't exactly roll through Fisher in 2006 either considering it was 19-14 in the 4th quarter. Another embarrassment

3) Cortland's margin of defeat in 2008 (27) was closer than anyone's in the OAC's that year and like Ithaca the year before, they were the first team to have a lead against them and trailed by six at the half. And that year in the opening week, Fisher held them to the fewest points they'd score all season before the Stagg Bowl. Two more humiliating experiences

Yeah, the OAC as a whole has been down. But it's not like East teams been going in there and trailing 45-0 after two quarters. Three years in a row, East teams went into MUC and gave them solid games, in most cases their best games of the season to that point. Have they beaten them  No. But there's more to  determining a region's strength than how they do in one game shots against arguably the greatest dynasty in college football.

[AUKaz00]

One other note regarding MUC into the East region. I think a much more appropriate way to do that may be to have the last team in from the South or North region be sent to the East, since they are one of the last teams into the playoffs. Rather than send every East team to MUC year after year.

If the last team in from other regions blows up some of the top teams in the East, and makes it deep ino the playoffs or even back to play MUC in the semis then you know the East is a much weaker region. Not just pointing to the fact that all east teams lose to MUC like everyone else does every year.

Isn't that what John Carroll did?

[BoSox0322]

Pat -

The question on the football homepage regarding Ithaca's rushing game is misleading.  Those numbers take into account a snap over the punter's head and QB sacks, which accounted for -62 yards rushing.  In my opinion those yards shouldn't count so the real number is 48 yards rushing.  It is misleading!

I believe in D3, those yards do count. I think that those negative yards count in the rushing totals at all college levels, but maybe PC knows for sure.

there is different rules for d3?

No, as I mentioned yesterday.

Just wanted to clarify... I think that came from a D3 Journalist...

[SJFF82]

Upstate -

I stated I could care less if it makes Ithaca look bad or not it is just misleading.  Did Ithaca really have -14 rushing in the typical sense of the word? No, they didn't, so why should the stats count that way? Quit choosing half the story to make yourself sound clever.

Yes, I agree they are misleading and yes obviously you do care how it makes Ithaca look to observers, otherwise you wouldn't have brought it up to begin with...

If you can't handle some slight ribbing you probably shouldn't be around...

Remember when Ithaca was relevant on the field and didnt have to debate age-old statistical categories to remain so....cmon IC posters, you and your program are better than this.

Remember when a posters kharma was used as a measuring stick to determine how much of an asshole you are?........Oh wait, it still is.

awwww....did I piss an IC fan off once again....

Careful Jonny, if you piss this guy off too much he throws a fit, quits PP, and has to come back under an assumed name before he can bring himself to post again...

who would do such a thing?