FB: Liberty League

[PBR...]

Off topic new break...Gen. Mills recalling pizza's due to e. coli if any of u bachelors out there have these in the freezer trade 'em or chuck 'em out...GENERAL MILLS' TOTINO'S AND JENO'S PIZZA'S RECALLED

[Jonny Utah]

-Frank, (Im not going to post the whole thing again, but wouldnt a two loss IC get in over a 2 loss Montclair?

Currently, absolutely not.

Damn it Utah.....how clear does my man Frank need to make this for you!!!

Yea, currently Ithaca has not played Alfred or Cortland.  But if both IC and Montclair finish the season with 2 loses, IC would beat them for the pool C (common opponent Cortland)

Montclair's SoS (OWP & OOWP) and quality win vs. Wesley would put them over the top, by my estimation.  When I said "currently," I was assuming both win out and was focusing more on SoS issues.  Ithaca could finish fourth in its conference.

Still in reading the FAQ for playoff determination I see this....

The following primary criteria (not in priority order) will be reviewed
followed by....
• Win-loss percentage against regional opponents.
• Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP).
- Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP).
• In-region head-to-head competition.
• In-region results versus common regional opponents.
• In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.

This is telling me that SOS might not be the big issue we are all making it out to be?

[Frank Rossi]

-Frank, (Im not going to post the whole thing again, but wouldnt a two loss IC get in over a 2 loss Montclair?

Currently, absolutely not.

Damn it Utah.....how clear does my man Frank need to make this for you!!!

Yea, currently Ithaca has not played Alfred or Cortland.  But if both IC and Montclair finish the season with 2 loses, IC would beat them for the pool C (common opponent Cortland)

Montclair's SoS (OWP & OOWP) and quality win vs. Wesley would put them over the top, by my estimation.  When I said "currently," I was assuming both win out and was focusing more on SoS issues.  Ithaca could finish fourth in its conference.

Still in reading the FAQ for playoff determination I see this....

The following primary criteria (not in priority order) will be reviewed
followed by....
• Win-loss percentage against regional opponents.
• Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP).
- Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP).
• In-region head-to-head competition.
• In-region results versus common regional opponents.
• In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.

This is telling me that SOS might not be the big issue we are all making it out to be?

Count up the wins here:

- Regional W/L - TIE
- SoS - Advantage MONTCLAIR (and should remain that way)
- Head-to-Head - TIE
- Common Opponents - Advantage ITHACA (under this scenario)
- Against Ranked - Advantage MONTCLAIR (win vs. Wesley)

Monclair clearly leads Ithaca.

[Knightstalker]

The thong of the Day.

[Frank Rossi]

Oops.  Guess they had a couple first-quarter mistakes in this game...

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/highschool/news/story?id=3088759&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab5pos1

[Senor RedTackle]

Attention Pumpkinhead Fans...

The LL schedule is shifting around next year.

The 2008 RPI-Hobart game will be the LAST regular season game played on the hallowed grounds of '86 Field on November 8th.  RPI will move into their new complex (soon to be named EngiNegro Field after gro wins the lottery) in '09.

Load up your Amish buggies and make the 14 hour trip to Troy for the final miracle on '86 Field.

the cat turd is once again frozen.........

[JQV]

-Frank, (Im not going to post the whole thing again, but wouldnt a two loss IC get in over a 2 loss Montclair?

Currently, absolutely not.

Damn it Utah.....how clear does my man Frank need to make this for you!!!

Yea, currently Ithaca has not played Alfred or Cortland.  But if both IC and Montclair finish the season with 2 loses, IC would beat them for the pool C (common opponent Cortland)

Montclair's SoS (OWP & OOWP) and quality win vs. Wesley would put them over the top, by my estimation.  When I said "currently," I was assuming both win out and was focusing more on SoS issues.  Ithaca could finish fourth in its conference.

Still in reading the FAQ for playoff determination I see this....

The following primary criteria (not in priority order) will be reviewed
followed by....
• Win-loss percentage against regional opponents.
• Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP).
- Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP).
• In-region head-to-head competition.
• In-region results versus common regional opponents.
• In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.

This is telling me that SOS might not be the big issue we are all making it out to be?

Count up the wins here:

- Regional W/L - TIE
- SoS - Advantage MONTCLAIR (and should remain that way)
- Head-to-Head - TIE
- Common Opponents - Advantage ITHACA (under this scenario)
- Against Ranked - Advantage MONTCLAIR (win vs. Wesley)

Monclair clearly leads Ithaca.

Not to put my head in the lion's mouth here but Frank, explain why the Wesley win matters here.  It appears as though the criteria in question only factors in wins against opponents ranked in the region.  Isn't Wesley technically in the South Region? So, assuming IC wins out, the Bombers would be 2-1 against ranked East Region opponents while Montclair would be 0-2...right?

- Regional W/L - TIE
- SoS - Advantage MONTCLAIR (and should remain that way)
- Head-to-Head - TIE
- Common Opponents - Advantage ITHACA (under this scenario)
- Against Ranked - Advantage ITHACA (right?)

[Frank Rossi]

-Frank, (Im not going to post the whole thing again, but wouldnt a two loss IC get in over a 2 loss Montclair?

Currently, absolutely not.

Damn it Utah.....how clear does my man Frank need to make this for you!!!

Yea, currently Ithaca has not played Alfred or Cortland.  But if both IC and Montclair finish the season with 2 loses, IC would beat them for the pool C (common opponent Cortland)

Montclair's SoS (OWP & OOWP) and quality win vs. Wesley would put them over the top, by my estimation.  When I said "currently," I was assuming both win out and was focusing more on SoS issues.  Ithaca could finish fourth in its conference.

Still in reading the FAQ for playoff determination I see this....

The following primary criteria (not in priority order) will be reviewed
followed by....
• Win-loss percentage against regional opponents.
• Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP).
- Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP).
• In-region head-to-head competition.
• In-region results versus common regional opponents.
• In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.

This is telling me that SOS might not be the big issue we are all making it out to be?

Count up the wins here:

- Regional W/L - TIE
- SoS - Advantage MONTCLAIR (and should remain that way)
- Head-to-Head - TIE
- Common Opponents - Advantage ITHACA (under this scenario)
- Against Ranked - Advantage MONTCLAIR (win vs. Wesley)

Monclair clearly leads Ithaca.

Not to put my head in the lion's mouth here but Frank, explain why the Wesley win matters here.  It appears as though the criteria in question only factors in wins against opponents ranked in the region.  Isn't Wesley technically in the South Region? So, assuming IC wins out, the Bombers would be 2-1 against ranked East Region opponents while Montclair would be 0-2...right?

- Regional W/L - TIE
- SoS - Advantage MONTCLAIR (and should remain that way)
- Head-to-Head - TIE
- Common Opponents - Advantage ITHACA (under this scenario)
- Against Ranked - Advantage ITHACA (right?)

First, if Ithaca beats Cortland, Cortland will no longer be ranked, smart money would say.  Second, the Wesley game would be considered because Wesley is considered as in-region for Montclair.  The "region" being discussed is not the "East Region" since the NCAA Selection Committee does not seed by regions any longer.  The only use of the word "region" left is based on the region of the team(s) in question.  So, Montclair would be 1-1 and Ithaca would be 0-1 or 0-2 depending on the positioning of Hartwick.

[JQV]

Got it.

So, when we talk about rank, then it is rank at the time the selection is made and not rank at the time the game is played?

[Knightstalker]

Jose that is correct, they do one final regional ranking when the selections are made that is not released to the public and that is what they use to determine rankings.

[Jonny Utah]

But this isnt an even scoring point for point system here either right?  I mean it even uses the word (or Pat did) "reviewed" in terms of looking at the factors.

I mean, lets say it comes down to Alfred or Hobart for the pool C and both teams have two loses, I dont care what the SOS, common opponents or wins vs. ranked teams is, Hobart will get in over Alfred for the pool C right?

And I would think ICs win over Cortland late in the season (wins vs. common opponents) would count more than SOS (kind of crappy system anyway we can all agree) or a win versus a ranked opponent at the begininng of the year right?

[Jonny Utah]

-Frank, (Im not going to post the whole thing again, but wouldnt a two loss IC get in over a 2 loss Montclair?

Currently, absolutely not.

Damn it Utah.....how clear does my man Frank need to make this for you!!!

Yea, currently Ithaca has not played Alfred or Cortland.  But if both IC and Montclair finish the season with 2 loses, IC would beat them for the pool C (common opponent Cortland)

Yeah whatever Utah.  Enjoy the ECACs against Plymouth.  :-)

You just better hope an 8th ranked IC doesnt head into troy for another beatdown of the second most overated team in d3football history.....(2001 RPI being #1, but you cant blame them, there were no seniors that were any good on that team.....)

[Jonny Utah]

-Frank, (Im not going to post the whole thing again, but wouldnt a two loss IC get in over a 2 loss Montclair?

Currently, absolutely not.

I want to have Frank stop wasting his time with the SOS stuff because I dont think it matters as much as he thinks (or I thought)

Damn it Utah.....how clear does my man Frank need to make this for you!!!

I want to have Frank stop wasting his time with the SOS stuff because I dont think it matters as much as he thinks (or I thought)

[Frank Rossi]

But this isnt an even scoring point for point system here either right?  I mean it even uses the word (or Pat did) "reviewed" in terms of looking at the factors.

I mean, lets say it comes down to Alfred or Hobart for the pool C and both teams have two loses, I dont care what the SOS, common opponents or wins vs. ranked teams is, Hobart will get in over Alfred for the pool C right?

And I would think ICs win over Cortland late in the season (wins vs. common opponents) would count more than SOS (kind of crappy system anyway we can all agree) or a win versus a ranked opponent at the begininng of the year right?

The timing of the win vs. Cortland does not matter unless the teams are tied after consideration of the secondary criteria listed, as the Manual continues:

"Should a committee find that evaluation of a team's win-loss percentage during the last 25 percent of the season is applicable (i.e., end of season performance), it may adopt such criteria with approval from the championships."

So, Hartwick's WNEC loss will matter.  Montclair's win vs. Wesley will matter.  Ithaca's win against Cortland will matter.  However, they will not matter differently because they happened early or late unless the Committee can't reach a decision deep into the process.  I think the decision in this situation would be easy.

You bring up head-to-head competition -- but there is no head-to-head here.  I agree that if you have head-to-head competition in which the two teams have the same (or nearly the same based on the 9/10 game distinction) winning percentages, you will have a definite advantage.  Why?  Well, part of it is because if the teams are that close, then they both will be ranked.  So you get the benefit of winning a primary criterion AND the benefit of a "Quality Win" when that other primary criterion is viewed.  So, unless the remaining two criteria (SoS and common opponents) are so out of whack, head-to-head victories will dominate a discussion.

So, no, it's not a "point scoring system" -- but Montclair has a clear advantage even with the Cortland issue.  The Wesley win seems to forgive that.

[Jonny Utah]

But this isnt an even scoring point for point system here either right?  I mean it even uses the word (or Pat did) "reviewed" in terms of looking at the factors.

I mean, lets say it comes down to Alfred or Hobart for the pool C and both teams have two loses, I dont care what the SOS, common opponents or wins vs. ranked teams is, Hobart will get in over Alfred for the pool C right?

And I would think ICs win over Cortland late in the season (wins vs. common opponents) would count more than SOS (kind of crappy system anyway we can all agree) or a win versus a ranked opponent at the begininng of the year right?

The timing of the win vs. Cortland does not matter unless the teams are tied after consideration of the secondary criteria listed, as the Manual continues:

"Should a committee find that evaluation of a team's win-loss percentage during the last 25 percent of the season is applicable (i.e., end of season performance), it may adopt such criteria with approval from the championships."

So, Hartwick's WNEC loss will matter.  Montclair's win vs. Wesley will matter.  Ithaca's win against Cortland will matter.  However, they will not matter differently because they happened early or late.

You bring up head-to-head competition -- but there is no head-to-head here.  I agree that if you have head-to-head competition in which the two teams have the same (or nearly the same based on the 9/10 game distinction) winning percentages, you will have a definite advantage.  Why?  Well, part of it is because if the teams are that close, then they both will be ranked.  So you get the benefit of winning a primary criterion AND the benefit of a "Quality Win" when that criterion is viewed.  So, unless the remaining two criteria (SoS and common opponents) are so out of whack, head-to-head victories will dominate a discussion.

So, no, it's not a "point scoring system" -- but Montclair has a clear advantage even with the Cortland issue.  The Wesley win seems to forgive that.

So what if Alfred and Hobart are going for the pool C bid, and Alfred has 6 of the 7 criteria in their favor? or 4 of 7 for that matter?