FB: Empire 8

[SJFF82]

Much as I'm not a Fisher fan, it sucks that Fisher's overly ambitious schedule is biting them in the ass while Hartwick could win the conference having played one less game than everyone else.

yeh, but what is really biting them in the ass is that team from Oneanta, not anything else.  Assuming that the MUC game is not substantially used against them for at an large bid, they are really in the same position they were in last year at this point...3-1 with a loss to 'Wick.  If they win the rest, are they 8-1 in the Committee's mind as opposed to 8-2? 

[Pat Coleman]

Traditionally, yes, with the Mount Union game being not only out of region but against Mount Union. But they probably wouldn't be the best 1-loss Pool C candidate.

[SJFF82]

Traditionally, yes, with the Mount Union game being not only out of region but against Mount Union. But they probably wouldn't be the best 1-loss Pool C candidate.

makes sense

[dlippiel]

Much as I'm not a Fisher fan, it sucks that Fisher's overly ambitious schedule is biting them in the ass while Hartwick could win the conference having played one less game than everyone else.

Their ambitious schedule wouldn't bite them if they just beat the teams they "should beat" like Wick.

[wickfan]

I went to the game, sorry for posting so late after the game but work has been hell.

Anyway, I was very nervous going in. Ithaca spanked us 69-42 and SJF trounced Ithaca. I then looked at the stats of the Fisher Ithaca game. It appears that it was a very close game until half and then it was my understanding Juvan went out injured. He was limping at the end of the Hartwick game so I can only assume that is where the injury came from.

I noticed a few things about the lineup between the Fisher and Ithaca games. First, I saw two changes defensively, #9 moved from TE to DE replacing #42 (all 200 lbs of him). I also saw #25 replace #45 at inside LB. On offense I saw #41 who had a huge game receiving, replace #9 at TE. 

I would assume the coaches figured that they need some size on the D-line. They brought in #42 on passing situations and he got some decent rush a few times.

The line size was incredible and I think that really gets to the issue at Hartwick. They don't seem to have very big lineman on either side of the ball. Since this is my first year watching them, I am not sure if this is a historic problem or not. The Fisher lineman dwarfed Hartwick. I didn't check the program but they must have given up easily 50 lbs per man.

I think the reason Hartwick was even in the game was the ability to run the ball. I think the zone read with Boltus worked well. I think they lose the game if they don't  establish the running game.

When you have a small defense, time of possession is key. It was about even for the game.

I saw the first fumble and the interception right in front of me. The interception was good coverage.

Somebody commented on if Fisher didn't turn the ball over they win, could very well have been.  I think if #5 knocks the ball down on the hail mary and didn't whiff on the first TD pass, things could have turned out different also. I also think Hartwick botched a huge play when they dropped an interception in the first half. It was potentially a 14 point swing.

I think the players of the game were the Oline from Hartwick. How they got any running room at all for Demulder is beyond me.

All in all, a great D3 football game.  I am looking forward seeing Alfred this weekend, it will be a first for me.

[Bombers798891]

Traditionally, yes, with the Mount Union game being not only out of region but against Mount Union. But they probably wouldn't be the best 1-loss Pool C candidate.

Curious,  how do the selection voters look at any loss a team suffers to MUC out of conference? I mean, I applaud SJF for going out there and having the guts to play MUC in the regular season, but is it kind of a win-win for SJF?

If they win, it's a pretty impressive feather, but of they lose, well, you can't really be all that critical because it's MUC right? Maybe I'm just overly cinical, but what can ya do? For example, if IC winds up say, 8-2 with a loss to Cortland, wouldn't they make as much sense as a 7-3 Fisher? Cortland could very well be in the Top 10 by season's end.

I think Fisher tends to get tripped up in conference play, although really, how many of those games were huge "Upsets"? Hartwick beat them last season, but hey, they went 8-2 in the regular season and fluky or not, that's a good record. Springfield beat them in 2006, but they went 9-1 that regular season. The '05 team lost to an Ithaca squad that went 8-2 in the regular seaosn with two OT losses.  Even the 04 loss was to a Norwich school that was 7-3. That's a 32-8 record by those four teams. It's not like the Utica/RPI game here. They lost to very good teams those seasons.

[Bombers798891]

When I wrote 7-3, I meant to write:

Wouldn't an 8-2 IC squad with losses to Fisher and say Cortland be almost as impressive as a "7-3" SJF team?

I don't know. I understand that you can't say SJF should beat Mt. Union, but if we're just going to say that it doesn't really count against them if they lose, then what's the point of keeping score? I mean, it's not that ambition with an OOC slate shouldn't be applauded, but to me, it shouldn't be used as a way to say "Well, let's ignore this loss, and pretend they're a one-loss team." No-one forced them to play MUC. They're not a "one-loss" team if they run the table from here on out. They're a two loss team with one of those losses coming against a phenominal team. MUC may be ALMOST unbeatable, but they can be beaten. There shouldn;t be some unofficial "Mount Union exception" because then where does it stop? Whitewater has been to the last three title games, no? Do the teams who lose to them get those same benefits? What's the line? If Cortland State is 9-0 when Ithaca comes to town, and they're in the top 8 or so, and they beat IC, can we consider IC to be a "one-loss team" because Cortland just ran the table?

I remember when people were talking about the D-I NC last season and they kept saying, "Yeah, LSU has two losses, but they were both in overtime, so really, they're two plays away from being undefeated." You play the games to win, and if you have the ambition to schedule a team MUC, that's awesome. But you should be held to a standard just the same. I can understand it if two teams have identical records, but if one team goes 9-1 and the other goes 8-2 with a loss to MUC, they're not the same thing.

This isn't so much a rant against Fisher--they just happen to be the team playing Mt. Union this season. It's just, for a guy rooting for a Big-10 school (Go Spartans) who has to hear ad naseum that every SEC school is better simply because most of the SEC losses "Don't count" it gets tiresome to hear. We all say the phrase "On any given Saturday, anyone can be upset." And to me, part of that means you don't get any "Get out of one loss free" cards. If Vandy can beat Auburn, and if Stanford can beat USC, then SJF can beat MUC

[superman57]

bombers, your rant while interesting is off base... instead of comparing SJFC-MUC to USC-Stanford, it is better to judge it to USC-Ohio State, where a lose is not really a lose... But a win cements you as the top of the country... if Fisher goes in with 3 loses... They do not deserve to make the playoffs... and If they lose to Salisbury on saterday... it is a sad sad day in Fisher history

[Bombers798891]

bombers, your rant while interesting is off base... instead of comparing SJFC-MUC to USC-Stanford, it is better to judge it to USC-Ohio State, where a lose is not really a lose...

Actually, the point I was trying to make was not about comparing SJF to Stanford in terms of talent.

It seems like the line coming from people is that SJF shouldn't be considered a two-loss team right now. The logic of that argument seems to be based in the concept of Mount Union being unbeatable. And as USC-Stanford illustrates, no team is unbeatable, ergo, no losses "shouldn't count" because every loss is avoidable, because every game can be won. As I said, if Stanford can beat USC, SJF can beat Mt. Union.

And of course Ohio State's loss to USC is a loss. You get off the bus, you walk on the field, you are responsible for the score. If you don't want to have it be a loss you either don't schedule it or you win it.

And as I said, I'm not saying all losses are created equal. But there's a difference between weighing a loss and pretending one didn't happen

[pg04]

bombers, your rant while interesting is off base... instead of comparing SJFC-MUC to USC-Stanford, it is better to judge it to USC-Ohio State, where a lose is not really a lose...

Actually, the point I was trying to make was not about comparing SJF to Stanford in terms of talent.

It seems like the line coming from people is that SJF shouldn't be considered a two-loss team right now. The logic of that argument seems to be based in the concept of Mount Union being unbeatable. And as USC-Stanford illustrates, no team is unbeatable, ergo, no losses "shouldn't count" because every loss is avoidable, because every game can be won. As I said, if Stanford can beat USC, SJF can beat Mt. Union.

And of course Ohio State's loss to USC is a loss. You get off the bus, you walk on the field, you are responsible for the score. If you don't want to have it be a loss you either don't schedule it or you win it.

And as I said, I'm not saying all losses are created equal. But there's a difference between weighing a loss and pretending one didn't happen

I would say that Mount Union is on a much higher level in comparison to Division 3 than USC is in comparison to Division I

[superman57]

a lose too MUC should be looked at with a grain of salt... and does a 8-2 fisher squad deserve a playoff spot before an 9-1 Ithaca... yes absolutley

[pg04]

a lose too MUC should be looked at with a grain of salt... and does a 8-2 fisher squad deserve a playoff spot before an 9-1 Ithaca... yes absolutley

In that case Fisher would get the bid since they have the head to head...

[maxpower]

a lose too MUC should be looked at with a grain of salt... and does a 8-2 fisher squad deserve a playoff spot before an 9-1 Ithaca... yes absolutley

In that case Fisher would get the bid since they have the head to head...

But does a 9-1 IC get the bid over a 7-3 Fisher?!?!?!?!?!?!JK

[pg04]

a lose too MUC should be looked at with a grain of salt... and does a 8-2 fisher squad deserve a playoff spot before an 9-1 Ithaca... yes absolutley

In that case Fisher would get the bid since they have the head to head...

But does a 9-1 IC get the bid over a 7-3 Fisher?!?!?!?!?!?!JK

Lol... Depends, is the 3rd loss to Salisbury.  If so, then no since Fisher still has the tiebreaker 

[gobombers15]

a lose too MUC should be looked at with a grain of salt... and does a 8-2 fisher squad deserve a playoff spot before an 9-1 Ithaca... yes absolutley

In that case Fisher would get the bid since they have the head to head...

Unless Hartwick also runs the table. Then it gets ugly.

Bombers, not sure what your issue with LSU last year was. They were clearly the best two-loss team in the nation. Mizzou and WVU had a shot to make the BCS Championship Game but choked on that bone. And if you even say Georgia I am going to man-slap you the next time I see you at a game. They didn't even win their division in the SEC. Also, you may get tired of hearing about the SEC, but they really are that much better than every other conference (Big 12 is close this year). There are literally no freebies in that conference. Ole Miss was 0-8 in the conference last year but led or trailed by 3 or less in the 4th quarter in six of those games.  I used to share the same opinion as you, then I moved to Louisiana. The level of play, the intensity of the games and the rivalries are unparalleled.

Re: Fisher. If they finish 8-2, regardless of whether they win the conference, they deserve to be in the playoffs. If they're 7-3, they probably should be left at home if they don't win the auto bid.