FB: Liberty League

[Ice Bear]

Excited to see IC enter the tougher portion of their schedule (well, Rochester is next week, but still).

This, like all games for them now, is a must-win for Hobart, though they are still going to need a lot of help to either engineer a three way tie (what is the tiebreak in that case?) or get Union to lose twice.

For IC, a win sets them up for a 7-0 vs. 7-0 clash against Union (I'll apologize to Rochester, St. Lawrence, or Buff State if I'm proven wrong) which would be a huge game for the perception of the LL. Union's  getting some in the polls, and although wins over St. Lawrence and Buff State won't likely make us think they're any more dangerous than they already are, they'll hopefully float a bit more.

And you're a Bart or Union fan disappointed that they're not getting the love you think the team deserves, IC is going to be right there for the taking.

What will be interesting to me is what happens after a possible Hobart win. While I think we're all in agreement that the Bombers are a very good team, particularly on offense, we've debated a bit why IC is ranked so high.

Are they just benefitting from some hype and undefeated float, waiting to get flushed like the 2014 team was (ranked #13 at 4-0 before being completely dropped from the rankings after a home loss to Buff State), which might hurt the perception of the win from Bart's perspective? Or would the Bombers still be considered a dangerous team and the Hobart win a testament to what the Statesmen have going for them this year—which would also elevate Union by proxy?

Lots of fun stuff to think about

Ice Bear says this is a great point. Ice says the Hobart win was HUGE for Union, especially considering the early cupcake schedule. Ice Bear says that Union has put itself in the position to run the whole ****ing thing. If they can defeat the Bombers, Engineers, and Statesmen in one season that will say a lot to Ice. Ice says even if they don't he'll still be proud as **** of the direction the program is headed with Behrman.

Ice says beating IC will be a very tall order. While IC has mostly taken large wet dumps on the U the Bombers are considered a huge rival in the eyes of old school Dutchmen faithful (from the 80's baby). To defeat this Bomber team, which seems excellent, would really put Behrman and U on the map as back from the dead in a big way.

Ice says remember, U has never won at Butter****. Never. That is no easy task. Much respect to IC and Hobart alike.

[UfanBill]

The LL tiebreaker is basically H2h, next level is wins over teams that are .500 plus.

In the event we had a Hobart, Ithaca, Union pile up at 9-1 (assuming the Hobart Beats IC, lost to Union, IC beats Union scenario - if Union ends 9-1 bc they lose the Shoes game, they still get the AQ with wins over HOB & IC. I suppose this is the same if IC ends up 8-2 just with a loss to Cort), then here's what helps each team's case:

HOB - BP, RPI. X factor is MSU - MSU needs beat CNU and ROW, otherwise no help for HOB there.
IC - Alfred, RPI, Cortland. X factor is SJF, at 3-3 now, but has to beat Cortland or Alfred to make it to 6-4.
UNI - RPI, HOB. X factors SC and Utica both are .500 now but have a cpl tough games remaining, both could end up 5-5 or worse.

Still trying to figure out who was smarter, Union playing beatable, but good teams (Springfield) or Hobart/Ithaca playing difficult teams (Brockport/ALfred/Cortland/MSU)

I don't believe Union's scheduling in any way is done with consideration of tie breaking scenarios. At this point coach Behrman's focus is on winning the Liberty League outright. As we've discussed the OOC opponents have been chosen to ready the team and future teams for the LL schedule. It's been working. If their weak OOC schedule costs them the tie-breaker AQ or a Pool C then so be it. 

[Bombers798891]

If there's a three-way tie between LL teams at 9-1, they'll almost certainly each have two wins over conference opponents who finished over .500. So the easiest way to think about this is strip those away and focus on the OOC opponents.

IC and Hobart each have one locked in your scenario. IC beats Cortland and Hobart has beaten Port. Union has none as of now.

But Hobart's and Union's path to a two such win are a lot trickier than IC's.

Barring some miracle win by Morrisville over Port, Hobart is hoping either Rowan wins out, or Montclair finds four wins in their last five.

Union is in even bigger trouble. Springfield needs to go 3-1 to get above .500, and since Utica has to lose to Union—and will probably lose to Brockport on the road—they've got to beat Morrisville and Alfred to get to six.

But the Bombers will almost certainly get a second such win. The only scenario in which they don't—barring a Hartwick upset—is Alfred losing to Fisher and Utica and Fisher losing to Morrsville.

I think it's very likely IC gets two OOC +.500 wins, while Union and Hobart get one.

[Bombers798891]

I don't believe Union's scheduling in any way is done with consideration of tie breaking scenarios. At this point coach Behrman's focus is on winning the Liberty League outright. As we've discussed the OOC opponents have been chosen to ready the team and future teams for the LL schedule. It's been working. If their weak OOC schedule costs them the tie-breaker AQ or a Pool C then so be it.

Frankly, I think this is the right call. Focus on winning your league, not hoping your OOC schedule wins you a complicated tiebreak or one of the vanishingly few Pool C spots.

[UfanBill]

Another part of Pool C consideration is strength of schedule. That's always kind of suspect to me. In many cases opponents are lined up years in advance. A game scheduled against say Springfield coming off their 10-1, 2017 season seems great for your SOS until they're not the same team 2 years later. Hobart had the best SOS in all of D3 last year and played better OOC opponents, beating all of them, this year yet their SOS is now lower.  Springfield now has the #3 SOS. My point, you cannot tell how future opponents are going to fare when you add them to the schedule and you cannot control how they do subsequent to when you play them. To me the SOS factor is bogus.

[ITH radio]

If there's a three-way tie between LL teams at 9-1, they'll almost certainly each have two wins over conference opponents who finished over .500. So the easiest way to think about this is strip those away and focus on the OOC opponents.

IC and Hobart each have one locked in your scenario. IC beats Cortland and Hobart has beaten Port. Union has none as of now.

But Hobart's and Union's path to a two such win are a lot trickier than IC's.

Barring some miracle win by Morrisville over Port, Hobart is hoping either Rowan wins out, or Montclair finds four wins in their last five.

Union is in even bigger trouble. Springfield needs to go 3-1 to get above .500, and since Utica has to lose to Union—and will probably lose to Brockport on the road—they've got to beat Morrisville and Alfred to get to six.

But the Bombers will almost certainly get a second such win. The only scenario in which they don't—barring a Hartwick upset—is Alfred losing to Fisher and Utica and Fisher losing to Morrsville.

I think it's very likely IC gets two OOC +.500 wins, while Union and Hobart get one.

Yep, so basically IC can still technically win the LL even if they lose Saturday, they'd just need to win out LL play wise, including beating Union h2h to claim the tiebreaker.

[ITH radio]

Frankly, I think this is the right call. Focus on winning your league, not hoping your OOC schedule wins you a complicated tiebreak or one of the vanishingly few Pool C spots.

yep, that too

[Pat Coleman]

SOS itself isn't bogus simply because you can't easily control what your opponents will do. We don't measure schedules on what schools intended to play, just what they actually played, and that is definitely relevant.

[Bombers798891]

If there's a three-way tie between LL teams at 9-1, they'll almost certainly each have two wins over conference opponents who finished over .500. So the easiest way to think about this is strip those away and focus on the OOC opponents.

IC and Hobart each have one locked in your scenario. IC beats Cortland and Hobart has beaten Port. Union has none as of now.

But Hobart's and Union's path to a two such win are a lot trickier than IC's.

Barring some miracle win by Morrisville over Port, Hobart is hoping either Rowan wins out, or Montclair finds four wins in their last five.

Union is in even bigger trouble. Springfield needs to go 3-1 to get above .500, and since Utica has to lose to Union—and will probably lose to Brockport on the road—they've got to beat Morrisville and Alfred to get to six.

But the Bombers will almost certainly get a second such win. The only scenario in which they don't—barring a Hartwick upset—is Alfred losing to Fisher and Utica and Fisher losing to Morrsville.

I think it's very likely IC gets two OOC +.500 wins, while Union and Hobart get one.

Yep, so basically IC can still technically win the LL even if they lose Saturday, they'd just need to win out LL play wise, including beating Union h2h to claim the tiebreaker.

Yeah. Anything can happen in lots of these games, but I think it's likely that IC gets 2 wins over OOC +.500 and Hobart and Union get 1.

[Bombers798891]

SOS itself isn't bogus simply because you can't easily control what your opponents will do. We don't measure schedules on what schools intended to play, just what they actually played, and that is definitely relevant.

Who has said SOS is bogus? I think we're just saying teams should focus more on winning the AQ, rather than trying to figure out what sort of schedule sets them up best for a Pool C bid.

[Ice Bear]

SOS itself isn't bogus simply because you can't easily control what your opponents will do. We don't measure schedules on what schools intended to play, just what they actually played, and that is definitely relevant.

Ice Bear says it's much smarter and more realistic to schedule based on a focus of winning one's league than scheduling trying to play the SOS game with a pool bid as your aim. Unless of course UMUC or UMHB is in your league. In regards to this Ice is with Ufan...the SOS scheduling game is ****ing bogus.

Ice Bear says that if a team wants a very tough SOS because they believe it makes their team/program better than Ice is down wit dat fo sure!

Wu-Wednesday Mother****ers

[UfanBill]

SOS itself isn't bogus simply because you can't easily control what your opponents will do. We don't measure schedules on what schools intended to play, just what they actually played, and that is definitely relevant.

Exactly, any component of SOS that involves what your opponent does subsequent to when you play them OWP or even more irrelevant IMO what's their OOWP, (opponents opponents winning percentage) does seems to be totally out of your control and ultimately meaningless. As you say "we don't measure...on what schools intended to play" so why should your credentials relative to playoff consideration in any way be influenced by those results? It seems like a contradiction.   

[Pat Coleman]

SOS itself isn't bogus simply because you can't easily control what your opponents will do. We don't measure schedules on what schools intended to play, just what they actually played, and that is definitely relevant.

Who has said SOS is bogus? I think we're just saying teams should focus more on winning the AQ, rather than trying to figure out what sort of schedule sets them up best for a Pool C bid.

Here you go.

To me the SOS factor is bogus.

[Pat Coleman]

Exactly, any component of SOS that involves what your opponent does subsequent to when you play them OWP or even more irrelevant IMO what's their OOWP, (opponents opponents winning percentage) does seems to be totally out of your control and ultimately meaningless.

Out of control doesn't equate to meaningless, though. Even if you can't control the record of who you played against, nonetheless, you played against them.

The only way to make that meaningless is to run the table/win your automatic bid.

[Bombers798891]

SOS itself isn't bogus simply because you can't easily control what your opponents will do. We don't measure schedules on what schools intended to play, just what they actually played, and that is definitely relevant.

Exactly, any component of SOS that involves what your opponent does subsequent to when you play them OWP or even more irrelevant IMO what's their OOWP, (opponents opponents winning percentage) does seems to be totally out of your control and ultimately meaningless. As you say "we don't measure...on what schools intended to play" so why should your credentials relative to playoff consideration in any way be influenced by those results? It seems like a contradiction.

Pat is right here. Even the three way tie scenarios we're discussing essentially use SOS as the factor. You personally not liking it doesn't make it irrelevant.