FB: Liberty League

[pumkinattack]

Robert Shiller (you may have heard of him from the Case Shiller Index - real estate) wrote a book in 1999 calling the stock market "crash" called Irrational Exhuberance.  In that book he discussed that market down cycles are more than a year or two.  Go look at the S&P 500 from 2000 to now and see where we went.  There's money to be made in any situation, good or bad, so I'm not a pessimist, but clearly this is a long term flat to down cycle.  

Additionally, a great book came out a year or two ago called the Black Swan.  It theorizes about how we never account for "black swan" events.  Things that are in the 2.5% tails of a bell curve.  Take those two together and you can understand whats going on to some degree.  Or you can just think about this:

http://data1.blog.de/blog/v/verzaubert/img/Dawn-Marie-and-Torrie-Wilson_01.jpg

[Jonny Utah]

I think a team two tiers below can win from time to time.  Additionally, as I mentioned, the winner of Wick/AU would move up in my view.  Otherwise, Wick with a blowout loss to Ithaca and a loss to AU would still be one tier below SJF? 

I noticed your discussion about Florida.  I bet that Ole Miss (even with Oher and Nutt, two very big assets) is probably two tiers below Florida right now.  Same with Oregon State over USC.  You've been exploring the concept of getting outschemed.  Maybe that happened with SJF. 

I also agree with tgp, gro, et al that the LL doesn't deserve any love.  Its hard to make the case for anyone except Del Valley in the east right now.  What makes it harder is how inbred it gets since there haven't been a lot of out of conference games between two competitive teams.  Salisbury/SJF may tell us a lot more. 

At this point in the season I would not put these teams two tiers apart.  Its not science, but Hartwick has seperated themselves from the St. Lawrences, Susquehannas, Springfields and Unions at this point in the season.

D1 is a different ballgame.  Teams like Ol' Miss and Stanford can beat the Floridas and USCs, but the Mt Unions and Wisconson Whitewaters are not going to lose to the Muskingums or Puget Sounds.  Although St. Lawrence has always been kind of an enigma, knocking off top east teams every few years or so when they may have been one of the worst teams in the country.

And I think your 100% right about SJF.  You can outscheme them.  Probably the same thing with RPI.  Just by looking at that clip you can tell their offense can probably put up 50 in any given game.

[Frank Rossi]

Robert Shiller (you may have heard of him from the Case Shiller Index - real estate) wrote a book in 1999 calling the stock market "crash" called Irrational Exhuberance.  In that book he discussed that market down cycles are more than a year or two.  Go look at the S&P 500 from 2000 to now and see where we went.  There's money to be made in any situation, good or bad, so I'm not a pessimist, but clearly this is a long term flat to down cycle.  

Additionally, a great book came out a year or two ago called the Black Swan.  It theorizes about how we never account for "black swan" events.  Things that are in the 2.5% tails of a bell curve.  Take those two together and you can understand whats going on to some degree.  Or you can just think about this:

http://data1.blog.de/blog/v/verzaubert/img/Dawn-Marie-and-Torrie-Wilson_01.jpg

Fundamentals are back right now -- the dollar has re-corrected over 40% of its drop against the Euro over the last few weeks, oil is back around $89/barrel in after-hours and gas is at $2.08/gallon (before taxes and gas station profits -- normally a 60-70 cent difference from the pump when the price cycles through, meaning about $2.75 is where unleaded should be if the market instantaneously took into account all price movements).  P/E ratios are ridiculously low for quality companies.  We have a plan in place to begin recycling some liquidity over the next six months.  I really believe that we're in a position for a pretty decent recovery once the new RTC begins its operations. 

Remember, the real start of the economic downturn was the hyperinflation of energy prices and the high price of imports.  The mortgage crisis was exacerbated by these issues as consumers couldn't weather both high mortgage payments (especially those who didn't belong with mortgages in the first place at the amounts they were loaned) AND an energy shock.  If customers are permitted to refinance their instruments at lower 30-year fixed rates over the next year, consumer spending should return in a strong way by mid-2009. 

In short, enough of this "depression" talk I hear all over the place -- we're finishing out a pretty ugly cycle right now and should weather it just fine as long as no other shock occurs in the system.

- Frank

[Jonny Utah]

JU just got gas at $2.99 last night!

[pumkinattack]

That's fair.  I may be biased, but I keep thinking Union is better than their record, but I'd absolutely agree that Wick is better than SLU, Springfield and Norwich.  

As an excercise, though, would Wick have been two tiers away from SJF (the East's best rep) last year, as a body of work, had they lost their 4 OT game to Utica (making them 6 -4 including that absurd loss to the NEFC school)?  Seems like, despite that win, the sentiment was that they were the fourth best team in the conference last year.  

Or, maybe I have SJF too high at the moment (in tier 1).  What about this, SJF pounds Salibury and Wick loses to AU?  Does that make it a two tier differential?  

It all goes back to my point that, based on the first 3 - 5 games, we don't know what we have in the East, other than that Del Valley has some top notch wins.  

Its clearly not as much fun to discuss when the answer is really there's not enough info, so that's why I like debating this.  

If Hobart destroys Union (not saying that will happen), does that make them look better?  At that point Union is 1 - 4 with only a win against Springfield?  I don't think Bart or RPI can get much love until they play each other even if they are both undefeated so this is all the more frustrating to fans of Bart and RPI.  At least there is more debate amongst E8 teams.  

[Jonny Utah]

That's fair.  I may be biased, but I keep thinking Union is better than their record, but I'd absolutely agree that Wick is better than SLU, Springfield and Norwich.  

As an excercise, though, would Wick have been two tiers away from SJF (the East's best rep) last year, as a body of work, had they lost their 4 OT game to Utica (making them 6 -4 including that absurd loss to the NEFC school)?  Seems like, despite that win, the sentiment was that they were the fourth best team in the conference last year.  

Or, maybe I have SJF too high at the moment (in tier 1).  What about this, SJF pounds Salibury and Wick loses to AU?  Does that make it a two tier differential?  

It all goes back to my point that, based on the first 3 - 5 games, we don't know what we have in the East, other than that Del Valley has some top notch wins.  

Its clearly not as much fun to discuss when the answer is really there's not enough info, so that's why I like debating this.  

If Hobart destroys Union (not saying that will happen), does that make them look better?  At that point Union is 1 - 4 with only a win against Springfield?  I don't think Bart or RPI can get much love until they play each other even if they are both undefeated so this is all the more frustrating to fans of Bart and RPI.  At least there is more debate amongst E8 teams.  

Yea, all you know about SJF is that

-They beat Rochester in a close game
-They smoked Ithaca in the second half and beat them bad (and IC smoked Hartwick)
-They lost to Mt. Union by 4 tds (better than anyone else this year)
-They struggled with Buff St. offensively.
-Last year they were clearly the best in the east up till the MUC game (including spanking Ithaca, Hobart, Alfred and Rochester)

[Frank Rossi]

I think a team two tiers below can win from time to time.  Additionally, as I mentioned, the winner of Wick/AU would move up in my view.  Otherwise, Wick with a blowout loss to Ithaca and a loss to AU would still be one tier below SJF? 

I noticed your discussion about Florida.  I bet that Ole Miss (even with Oher and Nutt, two very big assets) is probably two tiers below Florida right now.  Same with Oregon State over USC.  You've been exploring the concept of getting outschemed.  Maybe that happened with SJF. 

I also agree with tgp, gro, et al that the LL doesn't deserve any love.  Its hard to make the case for anyone except Del Valley in the east right now.  What makes it harder is how inbred it gets since there haven't been a lot of out of conference games between two competitive teams.  Salisbury/SJF may tell us a lot more. 

At this point in the season I would not put these teams two tiers apart.  Its not science, but Hartwick has seperated themselves from the St. Lawrences, Susquehannas, Springfields and Unions at this point in the season.

D1 is a different ballgame.  Teams like Ol' Miss and Stanford can beat the Floridas and USCs, but the Mt Unions and Wisconson Whitewaters are not going to lose to the Muskingums or Puget Sounds.  Although St. Lawrence has always been kind of an enigma, knocking off top east teams every few years or so when they may have been one of the worst teams in the country.

And I think your 100% right about SJF.  You can outscheme them.  Probably the same thing with RPI.  Just by looking at that clip you can tell their offense can probably put up 50 in any given game.

Jonny -

No offense, but you're singing about Hartwick after one win -- and they're giving up 40+ a game.  To me, what Susquehanna did Saturday night was more amazing than what Hartwick did, but I can't use that as a basis to make Susquehanna a Tier 1 or Tier 2 team yet.  While I can appreciate your loyalty to the E8, I think you need to look at Hartwick's true issues this year.  You should NEVER give up nearly 70 points to a conference opponent if you're in the same or a slightly lower tier than them -- and Ithaca spanked them for 69.  I think THAT result is more telling of a team, since it's been confirmed by their other games to this point so far.  Remember, Hartwick still is the first team to lose to an NEFC team in the playoffs last year -- and the SJF game only gives slight credibility back to the program right now when viewed with other results this season.

My feeling is this:  the team I'm confused about is SJF, not Hartwick.  Saturday's result was more fitting of SJF's season so far.  It seems like they are underachieving (see MUC, ROC).  Ithaca was not performing well either (Lycoming and King's were not strong performances before the SJF loss).  I think you're overthinking Hartwick here and underthinking SJF and Ithaca to this point.

- Frank

[pumkinattack]

Robert Shiller (you may have heard of him from the Case Shiller Index - real estate) wrote a book in 1999 calling the stock market "crash" called Irrational Exhuberance.  In that book he discussed that market down cycles are more than a year or two.  Go look at the S&P 500 from 2000 to now and see where we went.  There's money to be made in any situation, good or bad, so I'm not a pessimist, but clearly this is a long term flat to down cycle.  

Additionally, a great book came out a year or two ago called the Black Swan.  It theorizes about how we never account for "black swan" events.  Things that are in the 2.5% tails of a bell curve.  Take those two together and you can understand whats going on to some degree.  Or you can just think about this:

http://data1.blog.de/blog/v/verzaubert/img/Dawn-Marie-and-Torrie-Wilson_01.jpg

Fundamentals are back right now -- the dollar has re-corrected over 40% of its drop against the Euro over the last few weeks, oil is back around $89/barrel in after-hours and gas is at $2.08/gallon (before taxes and gas station profits -- normally a 60-70 cent difference from the pump when the price cycles through, meaning about $2.75 is where unleaded should be if the market instantaneously took into account all price movements).  P/E ratios are ridiculously low for quality companies.  We have a plan in place to begin recycling some liquidity over the next six months.  I really believe that we're in a position for a pretty decent recovery once the new RTC begins its operations. 

Remember, the real start of the economic downturn was the hyperinflation of energy prices and the high price of imports.  The mortgage crisis was exacerbated by these issues as consumers couldn't weather both high mortgage payments (especially those who didn't belong with mortgages in the first place at the amounts they were loaned) AND an energy shock.  If customers are permitted to refinance their instruments at lower 30-year fixed rates over the next year, consumer spending should return in a strong way by mid-2009. 

In short, enough of this "depression" talk I hear all over the place -- we're finishing out a pretty ugly cycle right now and should weather it just fine as long as no other shock occurs in the system.

- Frank

I don't really know where we are going.  I was one of those "smart" people buying CDO's and leverage loans for a bank and investment fund who was downsized over the summer (just accepted a new position, but I don't start for two weeks, so I'm boozing and tooling around on this board now).  I do think that deleveraging of the world is going to take a couple of years.  This isn't RTC for a couple of reasons.  For one, its mostly financial assets (ever hear of a bespoke synthetic corporate CDO investment?  We bought a bunch of them and they were backed by CDS of the crappiest companies you've ever heard of including Bombarider, JetBlue, Deluxe Corp, Kodak, etc. and we had hundreds of millions of them with Lehman and Bear as the counterparty to the CDS).  RTC involved much more "hard" underlying assets or were whole loans (no one has any idea how to work out various tranches of RMBS).

We could do well and I believe the combination of the intagible protestant ethic and spirit of capitalism in the US (along with the most freedom in the world, whether it can be improved or not) means we will be relative winners and continue to be prosperous.  In theory we've ascended to a higher value-added area knows as human capital services, but I'd like to see our economy produce more tangible goods.  Fin Services commanded a higher portion of GDP than any industry in history (incl auto or grocery stores, which at one point dominated) in 2006 and grew from there.  We clearly need to rebalance a little.  

While a little tipsy, I hate to be so dulling topics so:

http://popcultured.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/eliza-dushku.jpg

[Jonny Utah]

I think a team two tiers below can win from time to time.  Additionally, as I mentioned, the winner of Wick/AU would move up in my view.  Otherwise, Wick with a blowout loss to Ithaca and a loss to AU would still be one tier below SJF? 

I noticed your discussion about Florida.  I bet that Ole Miss (even with Oher and Nutt, two very big assets) is probably two tiers below Florida right now.  Same with Oregon State over USC.  You've been exploring the concept of getting outschemed.  Maybe that happened with SJF. 

I also agree with tgp, gro, et al that the LL doesn't deserve any love.  Its hard to make the case for anyone except Del Valley in the east right now.  What makes it harder is how inbred it gets since there haven't been a lot of out of conference games between two competitive teams.  Salisbury/SJF may tell us a lot more. 

At this point in the season I would not put these teams two tiers apart.  Its not science, but Hartwick has seperated themselves from the St. Lawrences, Susquehannas, Springfields and Unions at this point in the season.

D1 is a different ballgame.  Teams like Ol' Miss and Stanford can beat the Floridas and USCs, but the Mt Unions and Wisconson Whitewaters are not going to lose to the Muskingums or Puget Sounds.  Although St. Lawrence has always been kind of an enigma, knocking off top east teams every few years or so when they may have been one of the worst teams in the country.

And I think your 100% right about SJF.  You can outscheme them.  Probably the same thing with RPI.  Just by looking at that clip you can tell their offense can probably put up 50 in any given game.

Jonny -

No offense, but you're singing about Hartwick after one win -- and they're giving up 40+ a game.  To me, what Susquehanna did Saturday night was more amazing than what Hartwick did, but I can't use that as a basis to make Susquehanna a Tier 1 or Tier 2 team yet.  While I can appreciate your loyalty to the E8, I think you need to look at Hartwick's true issues this year.  You should NEVER give up nearly 70 points to a conference opponent if you're in the same or a slightly lower tier than them -- and Ithaca spanked them for 69.  I think THAT result is more telling of a team, since it's been confirmed by their other games to this point so far.  Remember, Hartwick still is the first team to lose to an NEFC team in the playoffs last year -- and the SJF game only gives slight credibility back to the program right now when viewed with other results this season.

My feeling is this:  the team I'm confused about is SJF, not Hartwick.  Saturday's result was more fitting of SJF's season so far.  It seems like they are underachieving (see MUC, ROC).  Ithaca was not performing well either (Lycoming and King's were not strong performances before the SJF loss).  I think you're overthinking Hartwick here and underthinking SJF and Ithaca to this point.

- Frank

Im not singing about them.  But the fact is they beat a team that beat Rochester, so I would put them in the same group wouldnt you?  And I didnt even do that, I put them in their own group with Rochester.  Where would you put them?  And its not like they have more than one loss either.

[dlippiel]

SJF is just a big question mark to me. I still am reeling from the loss to wick. I think the loss to wick was huge because if you are talking about a team that is supposed to be the best in the east, or in the top 3 (but has represented the east recently on a national level) how the hell do they lose to a team who gave up 69 points to IC, lost to freaking Curry last year, and gave up 70 some to utica the year before. I think with wick last year is fair game because they are a similar team this year. I think after this loss to get back to the "top" of the east they must beat up on Salsbury (which I don't think is going to happen).

I also agree that LL teams Bart and RPI can't get poll love (wish I had a picture of a stripper here) without beating each other. Whomever wins RPI/Hobart will be the clear winner in the LL (If it is Bart they must also beat UR for this to happen). I said it last night on inside the huddle. LL needs a NCAA win sooner than later!

[Frank Rossi]

I think a team two tiers below can win from time to time.  Additionally, as I mentioned, the winner of Wick/AU would move up in my view.  Otherwise, Wick with a blowout loss to Ithaca and a loss to AU would still be one tier below SJF? 

I noticed your discussion about Florida.  I bet that Ole Miss (even with Oher and Nutt, two very big assets) is probably two tiers below Florida right now.  Same with Oregon State over USC.  You've been exploring the concept of getting outschemed.  Maybe that happened with SJF. 

I also agree with tgp, gro, et al that the LL doesn't deserve any love.  Its hard to make the case for anyone except Del Valley in the east right now.  What makes it harder is how inbred it gets since there haven't been a lot of out of conference games between two competitive teams.  Salisbury/SJF may tell us a lot more. 

At this point in the season I would not put these teams two tiers apart.  Its not science, but Hartwick has seperated themselves from the St. Lawrences, Susquehannas, Springfields and Unions at this point in the season.

D1 is a different ballgame.  Teams like Ol' Miss and Stanford can beat the Floridas and USCs, but the Mt Unions and Wisconson Whitewaters are not going to lose to the Muskingums or Puget Sounds.  Although St. Lawrence has always been kind of an enigma, knocking off top east teams every few years or so when they may have been one of the worst teams in the country.

And I think your 100% right about SJF.  You can outscheme them.  Probably the same thing with RPI.  Just by looking at that clip you can tell their offense can probably put up 50 in any given game.

Jonny -

No offense, but you're singing about Hartwick after one win -- and they're giving up 40+ a game.  To me, what Susquehanna did Saturday night was more amazing than what Hartwick did, but I can't use that as a basis to make Susquehanna a Tier 1 or Tier 2 team yet.  While I can appreciate your loyalty to the E8, I think you need to look at Hartwick's true issues this year.  You should NEVER give up nearly 70 points to a conference opponent if you're in the same or a slightly lower tier than them -- and Ithaca spanked them for 69.  I think THAT result is more telling of a team, since it's been confirmed by their other games to this point so far.  Remember, Hartwick still is the first team to lose to an NEFC team in the playoffs last year -- and the SJF game only gives slight credibility back to the program right now when viewed with other results this season.

My feeling is this:  the team I'm confused about is SJF, not Hartwick.  Saturday's result was more fitting of SJF's season so far.  It seems like they are underachieving (see MUC, ROC).  Ithaca was not performing well either (Lycoming and King's were not strong performances before the SJF loss).  I think you're overthinking Hartwick here and underthinking SJF and Ithaca to this point.

- Frank

Im not singing about them.  But the fact is they beat a team that beat Rochester, so I would put them in the same group wouldnt you?  And I didnt even do that, I put them in their own group with Rochester.  Where would you put them?  And its not like they have more than one loss either.

With all due respect to Rochester, they are 1-3 right now.  So perhaps you're giving too much credit all around?  Difference to me is that Rochester has a defense -- defense wins games.  Hartwick just hopes to run a footrace every game, and that's not going to get them recognition except in the "really high scores this week" column.  It worked against SJF -- not against Ithaca or Curry.  Hartwick may be at best a 6-3 team this year -- and that factors in simply awful OOC scheduling.

[Frank Rossi]

Robert Shiller (you may have heard of him from the Case Shiller Index - real estate) wrote a book in 1999 calling the stock market "crash" called Irrational Exhuberance.  In that book he discussed that market down cycles are more than a year or two.  Go look at the S&P 500 from 2000 to now and see where we went.  There's money to be made in any situation, good or bad, so I'm not a pessimist, but clearly this is a long term flat to down cycle.  

Additionally, a great book came out a year or two ago called the Black Swan.  It theorizes about how we never account for "black swan" events.  Things that are in the 2.5% tails of a bell curve.  Take those two together and you can understand whats going on to some degree.  Or you can just think about this:

http://data1.blog.de/blog/v/verzaubert/img/Dawn-Marie-and-Torrie-Wilson_01.jpg

Fundamentals are back right now -- the dollar has re-corrected over 40% of its drop against the Euro over the last few weeks, oil is back around $89/barrel in after-hours and gas is at $2.08/gallon (before taxes and gas station profits -- normally a 60-70 cent difference from the pump when the price cycles through, meaning about $2.75 is where unleaded should be if the market instantaneously took into account all price movements).  P/E ratios are ridiculously low for quality companies.  We have a plan in place to begin recycling some liquidity over the next six months.  I really believe that we're in a position for a pretty decent recovery once the new RTC begins its operations. 

Remember, the real start of the economic downturn was the hyperinflation of energy prices and the high price of imports.  The mortgage crisis was exacerbated by these issues as consumers couldn't weather both high mortgage payments (especially those who didn't belong with mortgages in the first place at the amounts they were loaned) AND an energy shock.  If customers are permitted to refinance their instruments at lower 30-year fixed rates over the next year, consumer spending should return in a strong way by mid-2009. 

In short, enough of this "depression" talk I hear all over the place -- we're finishing out a pretty ugly cycle right now and should weather it just fine as long as no other shock occurs in the system.

- Frank

I don't really know where we are going.  I was one of those "smart" people buying CDO's and leverage loans for a bank and investment fund who was downsized over the summer (just accepted a new position, but I don't start for two weeks, so I'm boozing and tooling around on this board now).  I do think that deleveraging of the world is going to take a couple of years.  This isn't RTC for a couple of reasons.  For one, its mostly financial assets (ever hear of a bespoke synthetic corporate CDO investment?  We bought a bunch of them and they were backed by CDS of the crappiest companies you've ever heard of including Bombarider, JetBlue, Deluxe Corp, Kodak, etc. and we had hundreds of millions of them with Lehman and Bear as the counterparty to the CDS).  RTC involved much more "hard" underlying assets or were whole loans (no one has any idea how to work out various tranches of RMBS).

We could do well and I believe the combination of the intagible protestant ethic and spirit of capitalism in the US (along with the most freedom in the world, whether it can be improved or not) means we will be relative winners and continue to be prosperous.  In theory we've ascended to a higher value-added area knows as human capital services, but I'd like to see our economy produce more tangible goods.  Fin Services commanded a higher portion of GDP than any industry in history (incl auto or grocery stores, which at one point dominated) in 2006 and grew from there.  We clearly need to rebalance a little.  

While a little tipsy, I hate to be so dulling topics so:

http://popcultured.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/eliza-dushku.jpg

The '90s real estate crash proved one thing on the rebound -- you don't need real estate/homebuilding to spark an economic upturn necessarily.  So while it can cause a crash to the economy, it won't necessarily cause a permanent submersion effect once you are able to move beyond the worst of it.  We're ripe to begin that process soon - the evidence I see is that an overcorrection of the market, which we are witnessing right now, usually wakes up investors once the fear mongering is over.  Today's rebound in the Dow stocks would be some indication that there IS a bottom in the market forming, even when no truly new news led to a sudden sinking feeling today.  At -800, which would've been the largest point drop ever at 2:30pm if we had closed, panic did not set in -- that's huge right now.  So, while I think we still have some bankruptcy and job bleeding yet to come, I also believe that the US right now might be in the BEST position to begin a turnaround -- the rest of the world didn't want to face that they were over-leveraged in US credit markets, and now their bleeding is beginning.  I don't see the same amount of foreign exposure by US companies that I used to see during previous international economic scares.  It's in the other direction right now (see the activity of the US Dollar the past few weeks for evidence).  NYC economically may have a fit because of this, but the rest of the country may be ready to turn.

[labart96]

TGP would like to interrupt this fascinating financial discussion with some hard hitting LL analysis:

Hobart 16 - St Lawrence 10 recap

Hobart (4-0, 2-0) earned it's 17th consecutive win over the St Lawrence Saints (0-5, 0-2) the hard way last Saturday in Canton, NY.  Once again the Statesmen offense struggled to move the ball and the defense had to come up with big stops (including three interceptions) to defeat a winless, but still very determined Saints football team.

SLU opened up the scoring with a TD in the second quarter and took a 7-3 lead into the half.  Fortunately Hobart scored on its opening possession of the second half to take the lead for good driving 77 yards in five plays.  SR RB Anthony Hobaica capped off the drive with an 11 yard rushing TD.  After a failed PAT, Hobart hung onto a slim 9-7 lead until an Andrew Marlier 20 yard TD to make it 16-7 late in the third quarter.

Hobart relied on its special teams and defense to shut down the Saints in the fourth quarter.  The Statesmen D was once again lead by All-America candidate LB Justin Hager (13 tackles) as well as SR DT Ryan Aruck (12 tackles).  FY DB Drake Woodard collected his fifth interception on the season earning him another league Rookie of the Week award.  Woodard currently leads the league in interceptions and is on pace to break former All-American's Bill Palmer '94 and Eric Newsome '02's Hobart season record of nine.

Comments on the Larries' game:

Will the real Statesmen Football team please stand up?

TGP will give Hobart some credit for being undefeated, but IMO, this Statesmen squad has not performed as though they are one of five remaining unbeaten teams in the entire East Region (RPI, Cortland State, Montclair and Curry College are the only other undefeated eastern teams at this point in the season.  Cortland and Montclair face off this Saturday in a key New Jersey Athletic Conference show down).  The first two weeks, the Hobart offense looked good and the defense looked questionable.  The problems have flip flopped in the last two league games (great defense, bad offense).  In general, special teams (strong in the kick-off and punt return/coverage but hit and miss on the FG and PAT departments) have been decent but nothing to write home about.

So what's the deal?  Some pundits indicate that Hobart could be a nationally ranked program at this point in the season, but their inability to dominate/put away their opponents (especially against two traditional league "cellar dwellers") have many pollsters scratching their heads.

Last Saturday, for instance, Hobart and SLU were basically dead even in most key categories, with turnovers (3 for SLU, 0 for Hobart) really being the difference maker in the game:
   HOB   SLU
1 Downs   17   21
Rushing   148   102
Passing   137   181
Total Off   285   283
Penalties   6 for 61   6 for 64
Punts   6 for 230   6 for 241
TOP   26:42:00   33:18:00
3dconv   4 for 14   8 for 16

Maybe these stats indicates the parity in the league when a first place team can be played head-to-head (and in some cases outperformed) by a last place team?  Maybe it says something else? 

We may have a better idea after this weekend....

The Union Game (aka Don't Duck the Futchmen)

This Saturday Hobart welcomes it's long time rival Union College (1-3, 0-2) to Boswell Field.  This will be the 92nd meeting between the two schools, with Union holding a slight edge on the overall series (41-48-2).  Only the University of Rochester has played more games (100 all time) against the Statesmen.  Hobart defeated Union last season in Schenectady, 30-20, behind the arm of QB Andy Strom '08 (210 yards and 3 TDs) and the Statesmen defense (held Union to 89 yards rushing).

A traditional national powerhouse, Union is off to a disappointing start this season.  Based on the significant number of underclassmen being given playing time by Union Coach Audino, it appears as though the Dutchmen could be looking to the future .  Despite Union's struggles, a Hobart victory is far from a lock.  I have no doubt that Union would relish playing the role of spoiler in Hobart's pursuit of a league championship.  Hobart on the other hand, could use this game as an opportunity to make a statement to the rest of the league (the east region and to the nation), if they can move to 5-0 at the mid-season's mark.

My keys for Hobart for this weekend include:
1.  Keying on/shutting down Union's FY RB Chris Coney (leads the LL with 125 yds/game avg, # 1 in scoring, #1 all-purpose yards, etc ).  This is a big issue for Hobart especially since they are currently giving up 162.5 yds/game rushing (although they did a decent job keeping Susquehanna and SLU's rushing games in check).  Hobart will need better performances from their OLBs and DEs to keep Coney contained in between the tackles.
2.  Forcing Union into 3rd and longs (Union is last in the league in converting third downs)
3.  Confuse/pressure FY QB Andrew Connolly into making mistakes.  Bart's DB's have been ball hawks collecting 6 INTS so far this season.
4.  Let the Rt Rev suit up and play on the OL for Union (sources indicate the Rt Rev will be in attendance and consuming mass quantities of the holy spirits in/near the Hobart SAA tent).

Although Union is down, Hobart better not count them out.  TGP expects a close contest with the defense once again bailing the Statesmen out of hot water late in the game.  So, for the record, TGP will predict a 21-17 win for the Statesmen on Saturday.  Not the "statement" Hobart needs to silence it's critics, but it will be enough to go to 5-0 and 3-0 in the conference. 

The game will be on WEOS (www.weos.org), ECAC.tv and/or other live stats/video feeds from either Hobart and Union's football websites.

[Jonny Utah]

I think a team two tiers below can win from time to time.  Additionally, as I mentioned, the winner of Wick/AU would move up in my view.  Otherwise, Wick with a blowout loss to Ithaca and a loss to AU would still be one tier below SJF? 

I noticed your discussion about Florida.  I bet that Ole Miss (even with Oher and Nutt, two very big assets) is probably two tiers below Florida right now.  Same with Oregon State over USC.  You've been exploring the concept of getting outschemed.  Maybe that happened with SJF. 

I also agree with tgp, gro, et al that the LL doesn't deserve any love.  Its hard to make the case for anyone except Del Valley in the east right now.  What makes it harder is how inbred it gets since there haven't been a lot of out of conference games between two competitive teams.  Salisbury/SJF may tell us a lot more. 

At this point in the season I would not put these teams two tiers apart.  Its not science, but Hartwick has seperated themselves from the St. Lawrences, Susquehannas, Springfields and Unions at this point in the season.

D1 is a different ballgame.  Teams like Ol' Miss and Stanford can beat the Floridas and USCs, but the Mt Unions and Wisconson Whitewaters are not going to lose to the Muskingums or Puget Sounds.  Although St. Lawrence has always been kind of an enigma, knocking off top east teams every few years or so when they may have been one of the worst teams in the country.

And I think your 100% right about SJF.  You can outscheme them.  Probably the same thing with RPI.  Just by looking at that clip you can tell their offense can probably put up 50 in any given game.

Jonny -

No offense, but you're singing about Hartwick after one win -- and they're giving up 40+ a game.  To me, what Susquehanna did Saturday night was more amazing than what Hartwick did, but I can't use that as a basis to make Susquehanna a Tier 1 or Tier 2 team yet.  While I can appreciate your loyalty to the E8, I think you need to look at Hartwick's true issues this year.  You should NEVER give up nearly 70 points to a conference opponent if you're in the same or a slightly lower tier than them -- and Ithaca spanked them for 69.  I think THAT result is more telling of a team, since it's been confirmed by their other games to this point so far.  Remember, Hartwick still is the first team to lose to an NEFC team in the playoffs last year -- and the SJF game only gives slight credibility back to the program right now when viewed with other results this season.

My feeling is this:  the team I'm confused about is SJF, not Hartwick.  Saturday's result was more fitting of SJF's season so far.  It seems like they are underachieving (see MUC, ROC).  Ithaca was not performing well either (Lycoming and King's were not strong performances before the SJF loss).  I think you're overthinking Hartwick here and underthinking SJF and Ithaca to this point.

- Frank

Im not singing about them.  But the fact is they beat a team that beat Rochester, so I would put them in the same group wouldnt you?  And I didnt even do that, I put them in their own group with Rochester.  Where would you put them?  And its not like they have more than one loss either.

With all due respect to Rochester, they are 1-3 right now.  So perhaps you're giving too much credit all around?  Difference to me is that Rochester has a defense -- defense wins games.  Hartwick just hopes to run a footrace every game, and that's not going to get them recognition except in the "really high scores this week" column.  It worked against SJF -- not against Ithaca or Curry.  Hartwick may be at best a 6-3 team this year -- and that factors in simply awful OOC scheduling.

Im giving Hartwick and Rochester less credit than Ithaca, RPI or Hobart yes, and more than Union, Wnec and Springfield.

And you cant include Curry into this, or you would also have to include LLs horrible perfermormance last year.  You simply cant do it.

And their defense did a decent job in 1/3 of their games this year wouldnt you say?  Beating top 25 team?

Frank, why dont you predict how each team will do at the end of the season, and I will do the same.  We will also rank all the teams right now.

[Jonny Utah]

-RPI will go 9-0, beat Curry or Plymouth St in the first round, and then lose to Albright or Del Vall in the second round (MAC 2nd team gets at large bid)

-Hobart will go 7-2, losing to RPI and either Union or Rochester.  They will lose to the MAC/NJAC champ in the first round

-Union goes 4-5

-Rochester 5-4

-SJF goes 7-3, losing to either Salisbury or Alfred, and then beats Cortland/Ithaca in the first round, beats Ithaca/Cortland in the second round and loses to MAC champ in third round (Albright/Del Val)

-Ithaca goes 7-3, beats Montclair in the first round, and loses to SJF in the second round.  Or loses to SJF in the first round.

Hartwick goes 6-3 and misses the playoffs.

Norwich goes 2-8

Springfield goes 4-6

Alfred goes 6-4

Susquenna goes 4-6

Merchant Marine goes 3-7

WPI goes 8-2 and either beats or loses to Ithaca in the first round and then loses to SJF in the second round Or they beat the NJAC second team in the second round. or whomever else because my scenerio is too confusing right now to figure out.  But I stand by my records.