FB: Empire 8

[Yanks 99]

this is a little off topic,
but with the addition of Buff St. Frostburg and Salisbury, at what point does Springfield bolt?
How long will the Salis. Frostburg experiment last?
thoughts?

And oh yeah---Fisher football in my  home town Sat!!

I think that Springfield is gone after this year...then Buff State, Frostburg, and Salisbury join the league next season as an affiliate.  Not sure how long the Buff State affiliate is for...but I heard that Frostburg and Salisbury signed on for only two years.  Not sure how accurate that last part is.

Sucks that I can't make it to Utica on Saturday.  I would love to watch that game and over indulge myself at Cavallo's...

[fisheralum91]

thanks guys!
yanks- ill think of ya whilst consuming wings and utica club !

[Doid23]

I don't think Pat is anti-east.

Seriously? Where have you been? It's a nice thing to say, but Pat is most definitely anti-East.

I'm pro-facts. Facts don't say much nice about the East. It's just reality, Doid.

No attitude, huh Pat? OK, I posted something earlier regarding MUC playoff results vs. the East and North. Facts. You keep saying how the East get's blown out by MUC in the playoffs. Please opine.

Here's my problem with the whole importing Mt. Union thing. The numbers don't support that the East is so  lacking vs. the North. The real beneficiary of this model are the "elite" North (Midwest) teams, but I'm not sure why they deserve the pass.  This is going to seem strange, sometimes comparing blowout losses, but basically, the results over the last 5 years vs. the North and East are very similar for Mt. U's opponents:

2005  d. MSJ 49-6, Augustana 44-7, Capital 34-31, Rowan 19-7
2006  d. Hope 49-6, Wheaton 44-7, Capital 17-14, Fisher 26-14
2007  d. Ithaca 42-18,New Jersey 59-7, Fisher 52-10, Bethel 62-14
2008  d. RMacon 56-0, Hobart 42-7, Cortland 41-14, d. Wheaton 45-24
2009  d. W&J55-0, Montclair 62-14, Albright 55-3, Wesley 24-7

They blow out everyone in the first rounds, no matter where they're from. But, the scores show that over the years, the best North Rep excluding Mt. U (Capital, Capital, Bethel, Wheaton) had similar results vs Mt. U and the East (Rowan, Fisher, Fisher, Cortland. So, ex Mt. U, why exactly is the North considered superior to the East? Take away Mt. Union (the fact that they carry a 200 man roster would suggest to me that they're really not a true DIII team, but that's a discussion for another day), and I'd stack the East vs. the North any day.

Mr Facts, any opinion on these facts? Still hearing crickets...

[Pat Coleman]

I don't equate 34-31 with 19-7. I don't equate 17-14 with 26-14 ... let alone 52-10 in the same round a year later. I don't equate 24-7 with any other game that happened last season. I understand why you want to believe those things but they are not the same.

I would equate 19-7 or 26-14 with 24-7, sure, but those are too far apart to be apples to apples, aren't they? Those aren't years where Mount Union was in the east bracket, either, and isn't the argument that the East comes by its bad rep unfairly because it's had to play Mount Union the last three years?

[Bombers798891]

I don't equate 34-31 with 19-7. I don't equate 17-14 with 26-14 ... let alone 52-10 in the same round a year later. I don't equate 24-7 with any other game that happened last season. I understand why you want to believe those things but they are not the same.

I would equate 19-7 or 26-14 with 24-7, sure, but those are too far apart to be apples to apples, aren't they? Those aren't years where Mount Union was in the east bracket, either, and isn't the argument that the East comes by its bad rep unfairly because it's had to play Mount Union the last three years?

I can't speak to others, but me, it's more that, ok the East is down, and they deserve to be down, and for MUC to come East.

However, it seems like after MUC kills the East, the argument becomes "Well, if you want to get respect, don't get killed by MUC." Which seems kind of like an unfair burden, since we all lose to MUC (Except UW-W) we're really talking about degrees of losing and that gets into shades of gray that are tougher to compare.

(Correct me if I am wrong here, but in the 24-7 MUC win over Wesley, wasn't their starting QB knocked out of the game and didn't Shorts have to play at QB? It seems reasonable to assume that might keep the score down a bit doesn't it?)

I have no problem with MUC moving East based on the overall quality of play. I have an issue with the argument that the East is weak because they don't play MUC well. How many people do?

[fisheralum91]

I think when Fisher made it to the Final 4 and went to Alliance, there was a legit feeling that Fisher had a fighting chance.
After that the feeling became....put up a good fight and dont get killed by that much......Now, in all honesty if the season plays out the way I want it to, Fisher may have a return trip with a different outcome.
Delusions-maybe
Optimism- def.
Probability-more than you would think

But im a Fisher homer what can i say.

[Bombers798891]

I think I'd just like some sample sizes taken into account. It's meaningful (to me) to say that through hundreds/thousands of regular season games in the past four years, the East has failed to distinguish itself. That's why I agree with Pat's premise that the East is down and disagree with the idea that he's biased. I don't always agree with Pat, but read his posts (even ones not related to the E8) and I've never thought he showed bias.

But a dozen or so games against MUC seems to be a bad piece of supporting evidence for that premise. I think MUC and UWW are too good to really use as barometers for anything nation-wide. And even though I've done it myself, comparing scores is tricky. If the 2007 Bombers game MUC their closest game of the year to that point, does that mean they're better than the rest of the OAC? Doubtful, but how can we know either way?

[Yanks 99]

I think I'd just like some sample sizes taken into account. It's meaningful (to me) to say that through hundreds/thousands of regular season games in the past four years, the East has failed to distinguish itself. That's why I agree with Pat's premise that the East is down and disagree with the idea that he's biased. I don't always agree with Pat, but read his posts (even ones not related to the E8) and I've never thought he showed bias.

But a dozen or so games against MUC seems to be a bad piece of supporting evidence for that premise. I think MUC and UWW are too good to really use as barometers for anything nation-wide. And even though I've done it myself, comparing scores is tricky. If the 2007 Bombers game MUC their closest game of the year to that point, does that mean they're better than the rest of the OAC? Doubtful, but how can we know either way?

I agree...using MUC as the barometer is not a great example...but it is the only one we really have, and the one that Pat brings up often.  Again...as I have stated a few times today already...I think it is the North Region that gets the biggest pass in all of this.  Yes...the East Region teams have not been successful against MUC.  Their record against them in the past 11 years is 1-12.  But the North Region teams have a record of 1-122 during this same timeframe.  That is a pretty big freaking sample of lack of success.

[fisheralum91]

I have been chatting with a friend and I must say there is quite a buzz about the Fisher UC game this sat eve.
It will be great to have many of the doctors on hand in attendance to catch a great game.
This one has been circled on UC calendar since camp and they have a lot to proove.
Fisher needs to avoid the trap game and roll on home to face IC next week!
Should be a great weekend!

[Bombers798891]

I think I'd just like some sample sizes taken into account. It's meaningful (to me) to say that through hundreds/thousands of regular season games in the past four years, the East has failed to distinguish itself. That's why I agree with Pat's premise that the East is down and disagree with the idea that he's biased. I don't always agree with Pat, but read his posts (even ones not related to the E8) and I've never thought he showed bias.

But a dozen or so games against MUC seems to be a bad piece of supporting evidence for that premise. I think MUC and UWW are too good to really use as barometers for anything nation-wide. And even though I've done it myself, comparing scores is tricky. If the 2007 Bombers game MUC their closest game of the year to that point, does that mean they're better than the rest of the OAC? Doubtful, but how can we know either way?

I agree...using MUC as the barometer is not a great example...but it is the only one we really have, and the one that Pat brings up often.  Again...as I have stated a few times today already...I think it is the North Region that gets the biggest pass in all of this.  Yes...the East Region teams have not been successful against MUC.  Their record against them in the past 11 years is 1-12.  But the North Region teams have a record of 1-122 during this same timeframe.  That is a pretty big freaking sample of lack of success.

That's because you're not putting that stat into context. You keep trotting it out, but it's not a valid comparison, which is why people ignore it. That 122 losses includes dozens of losses against mediocre and bad OAC teams and not playoff teams which is all they get from the East.

You need to compare similar teams. I doubt that the North Region playoff record against MUC is that much worse than the East. Which again, pretty much proves what? That no-one can expect to have sustained success against MUC but Whitewater

If MUC was in the NJAC, the East would be 1-122 against them too (depending on how Rowan did). Would anyone from the E8 have taken them? Maybe 2006 Fisher if they were at home, but after that? Not likely. Who in the Liberty League would have beaten them? No-one.

[Yanks 99]

I think I'd just like some sample sizes taken into account. It's meaningful (to me) to say that through hundreds/thousands of regular season games in the past four years, the East has failed to distinguish itself. That's why I agree with Pat's premise that the East is down and disagree with the idea that he's biased. I don't always agree with Pat, but read his posts (even ones not related to the E8) and I've never thought he showed bias.

But a dozen or so games against MUC seems to be a bad piece of supporting evidence for that premise. I think MUC and UWW are too good to really use as barometers for anything nation-wide. And even though I've done it myself, comparing scores is tricky. If the 2007 Bombers game MUC their closest game of the year to that point, does that mean they're better than the rest of the OAC? Doubtful, but how can we know either way?

I agree...using MUC as the barometer is not a great example...but it is the only one we really have, and the one that Pat brings up often.  Again...as I have stated a few times today already...I think it is the North Region that gets the biggest pass in all of this.  Yes...the East Region teams have not been successful against MUC.  Their record against them in the past 11 years is 1-12.  But the North Region teams have a record of 1-122 during this same timeframe.  That is a pretty big freaking sample of lack of success.

That's because you're not putting that stat into context. You keep trotting it out, but it's not a valid comparison, which is why people ignore it. That 122 losses includes dozens of losses against mediocre and bad OAC teams and not playoff teams which is all they get from the East.

You need to compare similar teams. I doubt that the North Region playoff record against MUC is that much worse than the East. Which again, pretty much proves what? That no-one can expect to have sustained success against MUC but Whitewater

If MUC was in the NJAC, the East would be 1-122 against them too (depending on how Rowan did). Would anyone from the E8 have taken them? Maybe 2006 Fisher if they were at home, but after that? Not likely. Who in the Liberty League would have beaten them? No-one.

I understand...and I could pull the numbers against "playoff teams".  I am almost certain that it would be something like 1-30 then.  I''l take a look.  It still doesn't explain their overall lack of success against a team they see every single year.

[fisheralum91]

I guess the question begs:
If there is an East team that is 10-0 does University of Mount Union still get shipped east?
We know for sure 9-1 means having to travel to Alliance.

[rams1102]

I agree that the East is not that strong. OK, Rowan was a beast for a while, but recently they have been pretty average. Before the NJAC went to (10) teams it was hard for Rowan and Montclair to find people to play then. Many times there were (8) game schedules. Now we have (10) teams and the level of competition may not be that good. Maybe Buff St, B-Port and Morrisville (no knock on these teams) move to an Up-State conference. That would leave (3) open games. The NJAC can then look to Schedule Fisher, Ithaca, Alfred, Del Val, Wesley and other quality teams and improve the level of football. You can only get better by playing better teams. Some of the NJAC teams are talented but find it hard to do it game in and game out. We will see what the metal of Montclair is when we play Kean this Friday.

[fisheralum91]

Rams,
I think that in an ideal world there would be an upstate superconference.
We have had that discussion many times.
Just dont see it happening.
Not in my lifetime anyway.

[PBR...]

I agree that the East is not that strong. OK, Rowan was a beast for a while, but recently they have been pretty average. Before the NJAC went to (10) teams it was hard for Rowan and Montclair to find people to play then. Many times there were (8) game schedules. Now we have (10) teams and the level of competition may not be that good. Maybe Buff St, B-Port and Morrisville (no knock on these teams) move to an Up-State conference. That would leave (3) open games. The NJAC can then look to Schedule Fisher, Ithaca, Alfred, Del Val, Wesley and other quality teams and improve the level of football. You can only get better by playing better teams. Some of the NJAC teams are talented but find it hard to do it game in and game out. We will see what the metal of Montclair is when we play Kean this Friday.

kean played dvc the last couple of years so they deserve some credit....