FB: Empire 8

[BoSox0322]

I don't think that was the logic being used at all, I think he was just saying you guys got beat by a horrible team. 

I was messin around while commenting on the who beat who out of conference stuff... boob

[fisheralum91]

oh boy- well at least the night crew held up their end of the bargain last night.
one week closer to the E8 Championship boys--see you on the tenth!

[theicdubbz]

Just caught up from last night.   My biggest response to the 8 pages is:

GOOD GOLLY ALFRED HAS A KICKER TOO?!!!!

Some Beach.

Alfred Kicker Transfer to Bomberland!

[JQV]

Apparently, the Hartwick posters mastered the use of the quote button over night.   I really hate nested quotes.

To respond to what seemed to be the one topic of conversation:

Frankly we could go round and round concerning polls. A couple of examples if polls are based on results for a particular year:

1. There shouldn't be a preseason poll since no games have been played yet. What is it based on?

2. In the first week of the season any team in the top 25 beaten by a team out of the rankings should be replaced by that team, right? If the poll is based on this years results.

Like I said we could go round and round and it gives us topics for discussion, but the great thing about DIII is it is actually decided on the field.

1. I think it is pretty clear what a preseason poll is based on.  It is a prediction of how each voter thinks a team will be during the season.  Why is that such a foreign concept?  Sports media coverage is built primarily on two things: Predicting outcomes and evaluating outcomes.  Predictions do no harm to the game at all.

2.  How does this work?  Let's say IC is a top ten preseason team.  Then, in week 1, they lose to a perennial doormat like, say, Hartwick.  Using this as evidence that Hartwick is a top ten team is simply brazen ego.  I think most voters just use this as evidence that IC was vastly overrated thus promoting teams 11-25 who the pollster previously assumed were less talented than IC.  

In the end, the people that complain about polls are the people that really don't deserve to be in the poll but don't realize it.

[chris7sarge]

Hey Upstate, I'll bet if you check, Keeley's numbers from the Fisher game 2 years ago were pretty good (was he really the 4th string QB the year before at SJF??!!)!?  I believe he quarterbacked AU to a win on Fisher's field.  Of course, Brenton Brady and the defense played a big part in that win too.  I'm hoping for an instant replay again this year.

msarge7  -  I think you make a good point.  But as I recall (Pep can verify) that was the game we lost Julio - could have used him the next year and one of my main men Blake Fuller (LB) who took a year off.

That was not the game we lost Julio.  He was lost the following year.  I do believe that we lost a HUGE part of our offense without Julio though.  He absolutely controlled Fisher the entire 4th quarter 2 years ago.  He got 1st downs and controlled the clock to keep it outta Fisher's hands.

Yes, Brenton Brady crushing Qb's always helps too.  By the way I heard a rumor he had a tryout with the Bills 2 weeks ago.  Any word on that Pep?

[sjfcclimbing]

 

In the end, the people that complain about polls are the people that really don't deserve to be in the poll but don't realize it.

Not always, I argued all last year about SJFC poll placement and in the end, they proved me right. Sometimes it is hard for people to except change. Wick is a decent team but they need to understand that polls tend to reward great defenses over great offenses. In the playoffs, defenses tend to win games.

[Jonny Utah]

Apparently, the Hartwick posters mastered the use of the quote button over night.   I really hate nested quotes.

To respond to what seemed to be the one topic of conversation:

Frankly we could go round and round concerning polls. A couple of examples if polls are based on results for a particular year:

1. There shouldn't be a preseason poll since no games have been played yet. What is it based on?

2. In the first week of the season any team in the top 25 beaten by a team out of the rankings should be replaced by that team, right? If the poll is based on this years results.

Like I said we could go round and round and it gives us topics for discussion, but the great thing about DIII is it is actually decided on the field.

1. I think it is pretty clear what a preseason poll is based on.  It is a prediction of how each voter thinks a team will be during the season.  Why is that such a foreign concept?  Sports media coverage is built primarily on two things: Predicting outcomes and evaluating outcomes.  Predictions do no harm to the game at all.

2.  How does this work?  Let's say IC is a top ten preseason team.  Then, in week 1, they lose to a perennial doormat like, say, Hartwick.  Using this as evidence that Hartwick is a top ten team is simply brazen ego.  I think most voters just use this as evidence that IC was vastly overrated thus promoting teams 11-25 who the pollster previously assumed were less talented than IC.  

In the end, the people that complain about polls are the people that really don't deserve to be in the poll but don't realize it.

1) And, sometimes good teams loose great players from the year before and are predicted lower than they should (Union in 2007)

2) And just use the Michigan/App St example.  Some think the poll is where teams deserve to be, and others think the poll is where the best teams are.  Some think Michigan should have been ranked ahead of App. St after the week one loss because they were the better team and would have beaten them 9/10 times.  other people think App St. deserves to be ranked higher because they actually beat them!

It also actually matters I think as different polls mean different things.  In d3, the poll matters a lot less than the d1 poll.  The d1 poll actually dictates what bowls the top teams go to while the d3 poll has less of an impact on playoff selection.

[maninyellowhat]

admrial...you might want to shut your mout as your first game this year Wick got routed by WNEC...who is now in the basement of the NEFC...yes the NEFC

Dude, we get it.  Fisher lost to Hartwick, but that victory was a fluke because 'Wick lost to a team in the NEFC.  Let it go already, or is this all you have to talk about since the Yankees are out of the playoffs?

[Yanks 99]

admrial...you might want to shut your mout as your first game this year Wick got routed by WNEC...who is now in the basement of the NEFC...yes the NEFC

Dude, we get it.  Fisher lost to Hartwick, but that victory was a fluke because 'Wick lost to a team in the NEFC.  Let it go already, or is this all you have to talk about since the Yankees are out of the playoffs?

Not for nothing...but could it be that WNEC beating Hartwick was the fluke?  I am not saying 'Wick has completely arrived.  But they beat Ithaca and Fisher (first time anyone has done that in the same year) and played a great game against Alfred.  If 'Wick had beat Ithaca, got trounced by Fisher, and played the same game against Alfred...I could understand people saying Ithaca was a fluke.  That didn't happen this year. 

[theicdubbz]

Bomber boys,
I watched the replay of the Norwich game last night.  What was interesting was a comment the announcer made.  He said that the Fisher loss was the first loss the Bombers have had at home to a team not named Cortland!  is that really true???

Side Note:  I was quite impressed by the show.  Lady Dubbz said it was better than the normal Time Warner Sports programs.   BUT, ICTV guys please get a bettter shot of the crowd than the camera behind the FDC.  I kept getting disgusted with the backs of Yellow shirts.  Try getting the front next game.

[AUKaz00]

Exactly right.  Hartwicks non-conference opponents do have a .390 winning percentage.  While Fishers opponents only have a .300 winning percentage to this point.  But, If I'm not mistaken, SOS is not only based on your opponents records, but the records of your opponents opponents.  Does that make any sense?  Haha.

Like someone said:  Husson, Becker, WNEC, and Mt. Ida just might finish with a higher winning percentage than that of Kings, Rochester, Buffalo State, and Brockport.  BUT, these teams play in much tougher conferences against mucher tougher competition.  Thus, the SOS for these teams will be higher than Hartwicks weaker opponents. 

Am I mistaken or is this true?

It should also be noted that the SoS will only come into play in a 3 or more way tie after the other tie-breaker scenarios are exhausted.  Debating Fisher and Wick could be useless if another team's OOC strength is even greater.  If only Fisher and Wick finish tied for the E8 we know what will happen, Wick gets the AQ.

[JQV]

Bomber boys,
I watched the replay of the Norwich game last night.  What was interesting was a comment the announcer made.  He said that the Fisher loss was the first loss the Bombers have had at home to a team not named Cortland!  is that really true???

Side Note:  I was quite impressed by the show.  Lady Dubbz said it was better than the normal Time Warner Sports programs.   BUT, ICTV guys please get a bettter shot of the crowd than the camera behind the FDC.  I kept getting disgusted with the backs of Yellow shirts.  Try getting the front next game.

It depends on the time limit he put on it.  IC's last non-jug lost at home was to the Brockport Darnley's on 10/6/2001.

[Yanks 99]

Exactly right.  Hartwicks non-conference opponents do have a .390 winning percentage.  While Fishers opponents only have a .300 winning percentage to this point.  But, If I'm not mistaken, SOS is not only based on your opponents records, but the records of your opponents opponents.  Does that make any sense?  Haha.

Like someone said:  Husson, Becker, WNEC, and Mt. Ida just might finish with a higher winning percentage than that of Kings, Rochester, Buffalo State, and Brockport.  BUT, these teams play in much tougher conferences against mucher tougher competition.  Thus, the SOS for these teams will be higher than Hartwicks weaker opponents. 

Am I mistaken or is this true?

Just throwing this around for arguements sake and because I am bored...

SOS and teams that play in "tougher" conferences is pretty much relative.  Because of the AQ, most of the teams out there play in conferences.  Because, in general, these leagues will have a top to bottom outcome, usually records are similar between league champions and bottom feeders.  Example...clearly by everyone's standard the NJAC and Empire 8 have a stronger conference overall then NEFC.  But if you match the record of the first place team's from the E8, NJAC, and NEFC at the end of the year, you will see their records are very similar...with 0-2 losses at the most.  Same thing for the guys in the basement from all 3 leagues...with anywhere from 1-3 wins.

Obviously, I am not saying that the NEFC has a stronger conference then the E8 or NJAC.  If I ever do, I will order mandatory drug testing for myself.  But because this is D3...you can only take a look at overall records, and NOT use the standard "well we know this team is better then this team" because they played 2 more teams ranked in the "notional" top 25, or because they are in a "stronger" conference.

[superman57]

My comment was not meant to say that Hartwick is a fluke or anything like that...my comment was to get admrial off of his insane concept that in the first week if a team beats a ranked team then we should swap them in the polls...I believe that hartwick is for real and that their loss to WNEC is in fact a fluke

sorry to get everyone riled up...just trying to prove the admrials claims were flawed...as I have stated before I don't think teams should be ranked untill weeks 3 or 4...but if thats not gonna happen...then for the most part I think that the pollsters get it right...last year Fisher did not start ranked...they had to earn it and they did...

[superman57]

ok Mt. Ida...Husson and becker are all Independents..you know what never mind...I give up... Hartwick is the greatest team ever and we should all just roll over and see if they can throw for 600 yards at MUC