FB: Liberty League

[Frank Rossi]

There is no comparison.....the '05 Liberty League was head and shoulders above the '09 version.......even WPI lost only 3 games, to Union, RPI & 'Bart.

Without looking it up, the 'points for' and 'points against' differential has to be worlds different from '05 to '09 for U.  Entering the season, I thought this years Union team had a lot of similarities to the '05 group......there lies my disappointment.

So trading Susquehanna for Coast Guard wasn't an improvement for the overall strength of the LL?  And the fact that the LL didn't exist two years earlier, making recruiting a tougher task for schools like Merchant Marine and WPI as a selling point, doesn't bolster the case that the 2009 LL may actually be stronger, from top to bottom, than the 2005 LL?  

[union89]

There is no comparison.....the '05 Liberty League was head and shoulders above the '09 version.......even WPI lost only 3 games, to Union, RPI & 'Bart.

Without looking it up, the 'points for' and 'points against' differential has to be worlds different from '05 to '09 for U.  Entering the season, I thought this years Union team had a lot of similarities to the '05 group......there lies my disappointment.

So trading Susquehanna for Coast Guard wasn't an improvement for the overall strength of the LL?  And the fact that the LL didn't exist two years earlier, making recruiting a tougher task for schools like Merchant Marine and WPI as a selling point, doesn't bolster the case that the 2009 LL may actually be stronger, from top to bottom, than the 2005 LL?  

Look at OOC win's....look at the season's Hobart & RPI had.....I'm kind of surprised you are even comparing the two years......you said, "and in '05, the LL was not nearly as good from top to bottom."  '09 is a brutal year for the LL.....'05 was the LL's banner year thus far.

Maybe I'm way off base....can other's please interject their opinions of the LL in '05 compared to '09.

[Frank Rossi]

There is no comparison.....the '05 Liberty League was head and shoulders above the '09 version.......even WPI lost only 3 games, to Union, RPI & 'Bart.

Without looking it up, the 'points for' and 'points against' differential has to be worlds different from '05 to '09 for U.  Entering the season, I thought this years Union team had a lot of similarities to the '05 group......there lies my disappointment.

So trading Susquehanna for Coast Guard wasn't an improvement for the overall strength of the LL?  And the fact that the LL didn't exist two years earlier, making recruiting a tougher task for schools like Merchant Marine and WPI as a selling point, doesn't bolster the case that the 2009 LL may actually be stronger, from top to bottom, than the 2005 LL?  

Look at OOC win's....look at the season's Hobart & RPI had.....I'm kind of surprised you are even comparing the two years......you said, "and in '05, the LL was not nearly as good from top to bottom."  '09 is a brutal year for the LL.....'05 was the LL's banner year thus far.

Maybe I'm way off base....can other's please interject their opinions of the LL in '05 compared to '09.

My point is to go beyond the "Big Three" -- Union beat RPI by 7 in 2005... AND 2009.  Union beat Hobart by 10 in 2005... AND 2009.  I'm asking you to balance the strength of the teams below Union, Hobart and RPI.  You can't ignore the top-to-bottom strength when you begin comparing teams and calling other teams mediocre, especially basing these terms on the past for each of them.

[union89]

There is no comparison.....the '05 Liberty League was head and shoulders above the '09 version.......even WPI lost only 3 games, to Union, RPI & 'Bart.

Without looking it up, the 'points for' and 'points against' differential has to be worlds different from '05 to '09 for U.  Entering the season, I thought this years Union team had a lot of similarities to the '05 group......there lies my disappointment.

So trading Susquehanna for Coast Guard wasn't an improvement for the overall strength of the LL?  And the fact that the LL didn't exist two years earlier, making recruiting a tougher task for schools like Merchant Marine and WPI as a selling point, doesn't bolster the case that the 2009 LL may actually be stronger, from top to bottom, than the 2005 LL?  

Look at OOC win's....look at the season's Hobart & RPI had.....I'm kind of surprised you are even comparing the two years......you said, "and in '05, the LL was not nearly as good from top to bottom."  '09 is a brutal year for the LL.....'05 was the LL's banner year thus far.

Maybe I'm way off base....can other's please interject their opinions of the LL in '05 compared to '09.

My point is to go beyond the "Big Three" -- Union beat RPI by 7 in 2005... AND 2009.  Union beat Hobart by 10 in 2005... AND 2009.  I'm asking you to balance the strength of the teams below Union, Hobart and RPI.  You can't ignore the top-to-bottom strength when you begin comparing teams and calling other teams mediocre, especially basing these terms on the past for each of them.

When you look at strength of a conference, you can't say...."but disregard the Top 3".  When people compare the SEC to the PAC10, they are not comparing Vandy to Washington St. and saying....let's go beyond Florida, Alabama, LSU USC & Oregon.

In '05, Union & 'Bart won 1st Round NCAA games & RPI beat Fisher in an ECAC game....they only lost to each other in the regular season....4th place WPI had only 3 losses, to the 'Big 3'.  You can't say let's get beyond them and look to Coast Guard & St. Lawrence.  That debate is a waste of time and reserved for those looking to deflect away from the point at hand.

[Frank Rossi]

There is no comparison.....the '05 Liberty League was head and shoulders above the '09 version.......even WPI lost only 3 games, to Union, RPI & 'Bart.

Without looking it up, the 'points for' and 'points against' differential has to be worlds different from '05 to '09 for U.  Entering the season, I thought this years Union team had a lot of similarities to the '05 group......there lies my disappointment.

So trading Susquehanna for Coast Guard wasn't an improvement for the overall strength of the LL?  And the fact that the LL didn't exist two years earlier, making recruiting a tougher task for schools like Merchant Marine and WPI as a selling point, doesn't bolster the case that the 2009 LL may actually be stronger, from top to bottom, than the 2005 LL?  

Look at OOC win's....look at the season's Hobart & RPI had.....I'm kind of surprised you are even comparing the two years......you said, "and in '05, the LL was not nearly as good from top to bottom."  '09 is a brutal year for the LL.....'05 was the LL's banner year thus far.

Maybe I'm way off base....can other's please interject their opinions of the LL in '05 compared to '09.

My point is to go beyond the "Big Three" -- Union beat RPI by 7 in 2005... AND 2009.  Union beat Hobart by 10 in 2005... AND 2009.  I'm asking you to balance the strength of the teams below Union, Hobart and RPI.  You can't ignore the top-to-bottom strength when you begin comparing teams and calling other teams mediocre, especially basing these terms on the past for each of them.

When you look at strength of a conference, you can't say...."but disregard the Top 3".  When people compare the SEC to the PAC10, they are not comparing Vandy to Washington St. and saying....let's go beyond Florida, Alabama, LSU USC & Oregon.

In '05, Union & 'Bart won 1st Round NCAA games & RPI beat Fisher in an ECAC game....they only lost to each other in the regular season....4th place WPI had only 3 losses, to the 'Big 3'.  You can't say let's get beyond them and look to Coast Guard & St. Lawrence.  That debate is a waste of time and reserved for those looking to deflect away from the point at hand.

It's not a waste of time when you're the one saying that, based on scores against teams underneath them in the Liberty League this season, Union is mediocre.  That's your basic premise -- that on the scoreboard, they are not showing dominance.  My response is that they did not show too much more dominance in 2005 -- and that was when the LL wasn't as strong from top to bottom.  I'm trying to show you one of the issues related to relative dominance this year (and one reason why I do not believe the sky is falling for the LL at this point).

[Pat Coleman]

When you look at strength of a conference, you can't say...."but disregard the Top 3".  When people compare the SEC to the PAC10, they are not comparing Vandy to Washington St. and saying....let's go beyond Florida, Alabama, LSU USC & Oregon.

That's because Division I people aren't as smart as Division III people.

[union89]

There is no comparison.....the '05 Liberty League was head and shoulders above the '09 version.......even WPI lost only 3 games, to Union, RPI & 'Bart.

Without looking it up, the 'points for' and 'points against' differential has to be worlds different from '05 to '09 for U.  Entering the season, I thought this years Union team had a lot of similarities to the '05 group......there lies my disappointment.

So trading Susquehanna for Coast Guard wasn't an improvement for the overall strength of the LL?  And the fact that the LL didn't exist two years earlier, making recruiting a tougher task for schools like Merchant Marine and WPI as a selling point, doesn't bolster the case that the 2009 LL may actually be stronger, from top to bottom, than the 2005 LL?  

Look at OOC win's....look at the season's Hobart & RPI had.....I'm kind of surprised you are even comparing the two years......you said, "and in '05, the LL was not nearly as good from top to bottom."  '09 is a brutal year for the LL.....'05 was the LL's banner year thus far.

Maybe I'm way off base....can other's please interject their opinions of the LL in '05 compared to '09.

My point is to go beyond the "Big Three" -- Union beat RPI by 7 in 2005... AND 2009.  Union beat Hobart by 10 in 2005... AND 2009.  I'm asking you to balance the strength of the teams below Union, Hobart and RPI.  You can't ignore the top-to-bottom strength when you begin comparing teams and calling other teams mediocre, especially basing these terms on the past for each of them.

When you look at strength of a conference, you can't say...."but disregard the Top 3".  When people compare the SEC to the PAC10, they are not comparing Vandy to Washington St. and saying....let's go beyond Florida, Alabama, LSU USC & Oregon.

In '05, Union & 'Bart won 1st Round NCAA games & RPI beat Fisher in an ECAC game....they only lost to each other in the regular season....4th place WPI had only 3 losses, to the 'Big 3'.  You can't say let's get beyond them and look to Coast Guard & St. Lawrence.  That debate is a waste of time and reserved for those looking to deflect away from the point at hand.

It's not a waste of time when you're the one saying that, based on scores against teams underneath them in the Liberty League this season, Union is mediocre.  That's your basic premise -- that on the scoreboard, they are not showing dominance.  My response is that they did not show too much more dominance in 2005 -- and that was when the LL wasn't as strong from top to bottom.  I'm trying to show you one of the issues related to relative dominance this year (and one reason why I do not believe the sky is falling for the LL at this point).

I'm confused....is one of your points that St. Lawrence (loss @ home to Ithaca 45-0 & loss @ Alfred 38-16) & Rochester (loss @ home to CWR 45-14 & loss @ Alfred 51-14)....are much better in '09......not that Union & RPI are mediocre at best in '09?

I'm trying to show you that Union has not had one single game in '09 where they came out and looked dominant/impressive, against anyone.  In '05, the Dutchmen had only 2 games which were decided by under a TD.

The LL's 3rd place team in '05 would have easily won the League in '09.

[unionfan]

There is no comparison.....the '05 Liberty League was head and shoulders above the '09 version.......even WPI lost only 3 games, to Union, RPI & 'Bart.

Without looking it up, the 'points for' and 'points against' differential has to be worlds different from '05 to '09 for U.  Entering the season, I thought this years Union team had a lot of similarities to the '05 group......there lies my disappointment.

So trading Susquehanna for Coast Guard wasn't an improvement for the overall strength of the LL?  And the fact that the LL didn't exist two years earlier, making recruiting a tougher task for schools like Merchant Marine and WPI as a selling point, doesn't bolster the case that the 2009 LL may actually be stronger, from top to bottom, than the 2005 LL?  

Look at OOC win's....look at the season's Hobart & RPI had.....I'm kind of surprised you are even comparing the two years......you said, "and in '05, the LL was not nearly as good from top to bottom."  '09 is a brutal year for the LL.....'05 was the LL's banner year thus far.

Maybe I'm way off base....can other's please interject their opinions of the LL in '05 compared to '09.

My point is to go beyond the "Big Three" -- Union beat RPI by 7 in 2005... AND 2009.  Union beat Hobart by 10 in 2005... AND 2009.  I'm asking you to balance the strength of the teams below Union, Hobart and RPI.  You can't ignore the top-to-bottom strength when you begin comparing teams and calling other teams mediocre, especially basing these terms on the past for each of them.

When you look at strength of a conference, you can't say...."but disregard the Top 3".  When people compare the SEC to the PAC10, they are not comparing Vandy to Washington St. and saying....let's go beyond Florida, Alabama, LSU USC & Oregon.

In '05, Union & 'Bart won 1st Round NCAA games & RPI beat Fisher in an ECAC game....they only lost to each other in the regular season....4th place WPI had only 3 losses, to the 'Big 3'.  You can't say let's get beyond them and look to Coast Guard & St. Lawrence.  That debate is a waste of time and reserved for those looking to deflect away from the point at hand.

It's not a waste of time when you're the one saying that, based on scores against teams underneath them in the Liberty League this season, Union is mediocre.  That's your basic premise -- that on the scoreboard, they are not showing dominance.  My response is that they did not show too much more dominance in 2005 -- and that was when the LL wasn't as strong from top to bottom.  I'm trying to show you one of the issues related to relative dominance this year (and one reason why I do not believe the sky is falling for the LL at this point).

I'm confused....is one of your points that St. Lawrence (loss @ home to Ithaca 45-0 & loss @ Alfred 38-16) & Rochester (loss @ home to CWR 45-14 & loss @ Alfred 51-14)....are much better in '09......not that Union & RPI are mediocre at best in '09?

I'm trying to show you that Union has not had one single game in '09 where they came out and looked dominant/impressive, against anyone.  In '05, the Dutchmen had only 2 games which were decided by under a TD.

The LL's 3rd place team in '05 would have easily won the League in '09.

I think this way underestimates how thoroughly mediocre the '05 Union team was during the regular season.  We're talking about a squad that needed a hail mary in the last minute to beat a 5-6 F&M team, a 75-yard int return in the last minute to beat a 2-7 Coast Guard team, and OT to beat a 3-7 Kings Point team.

To my mind, this 2009 and 2005 Union teams continue to be nearly identical stories.  In '05, Union didn't gel its talent in the last two games of the year, and the real difference there was an O line that really came together at the end of the year.

This year's squad faces a similar decision point. If the O line can become consistent and Drew can stop making mistakes, and in doing so let the defense spend less than 40 minutes a game on the field, this team can be as good if not better than the '05 team.  But that's a big if...

In the end I actually think this year's team has more potential than we had in '05, because the defense is so much better.  (I think this is probably the best Union D since 2000, which has tended to get lost in the mix this year...)

[Jonny Utah]

I was thinking a few things about this discussion.

-Is SJFs blwout loss to Mt. Union in the back of all of our minds when we have these discussions of what eastern teams or leagues are good this year?  If SJF only lost to MUC by 7 or so, wouldn't we all be looking at the eastern region in a totally different way.  I find myself to think that way anyway.  Im like, hell, if SJF has no chance against MUC, how the hell is any other eastern team going to compete?  Granted, SJF is not the #1 team in the east, but they can probably give anyone in the east a good football game and it would suprise me if they lost to anyone by more than 1 or 2 TDs.

-Ive seen 2 Union football football games live in the last 5 years.  Although its clear that the 2005 team was the better team, the 2009 teams still has the same balance that the 2005 team had.  I think Gallo might be right on the same level as both of those recievers Union had in 2005.  Although I dont think #1 this year is on the same level as either of them.  That hurts Gallo because teams can focus on him more.  Tom A is better than Coney, but Id say Coney is in the same ballbark.  The thing about Tom A from what I saw is that he could make big runs against unblocked defenders.  Coney I think needs a little more help but he can find the holes pretty well as well.

-And is it me, or does Union traditionally play down to bad teams throughout the regular season?  Without looking at the scores, it seems that they always have had trouble with St. Lawrence, even when St. Lawrence may have been one of the worst teams in the east.  And that goes back to even when I played in the mid 1990s and St. Lawrence was probably worse.  We would beat them by 50 at the half but Union would squeak by (and even lost to them a few times).  And union always ended up in the playoff mix at the end of those years.

-That being said, I think the 2009 Union team can be the best team in the east, but would lose to mount union by 50 in the playoffs.  But who knows.  I havent seen Mt. Union either.

[pumkinattack]

I'm not buying that the league has as much parity or that the bottom is that much stronger.  SLU, MMA and WPI are going to probably finish with five collective league wins this year and as more of the year shakes out I become more convinced that the MMA win over SU has everything to do with SU losing Palazzi the week before.  SU's backup couldn't do ish when he came into the Hobart game.  

The reason it looks like the bottom has gotten better is that Hobart and RPI has declined a little this year and an experienced, senior laden SU team with an all league RB has stepped up just enough to slide into the #2 slot.  Yeah, SU for CGA is an upgrade, but as Lew points out they really turned out to be a short term interloper.  At the end of the day SLU and MMA are no better than ever before, WPI has jumped around 4th to 7th place in the conference and are still there.  Rochester is looking at 4-6 or possibly 5-5.  

This year's league is defined by experienced teams at key positions knowing how to do enough to win conference games.  Neither U or SU has done anything on the road that's impressive, though, and I still maintain that good road wins are a good indicator of quality.  I'll also root for Union in the playoffs, and I'd bet that they win against SU at home.  On top of that, the LL rep is probably hitting the road for a playoff game.  

And Frank, that Hobart - Lyco game looks good on paper and I remember Lyco coming out (in the snow) and looking big and physical, but they weren't that impressive.  They didn't hit, couldn't get a surge on the line and the QB wasn't a great thrower.  It was also the only game last year where Hobart fed the ground game that I've been begging for for two years, which I think made a huge difference compared with some of their other offensive performances last year.

[dlippiel]

Great discussions going on here on the LLPP! Looking back at the last two pages dlip feels he may be able to draw up a few conclusions here (of course these conclusions may suck ass so please feel free to hammer them):

-As a result of the conference kicking the **** out of itself this year, the fact that Bart and RPI have been a bit down (definitely not bad though) from their usual selves, a senior team in Susquehanna having it's first success here in the LL, and a front running Union team who is not dominating so-called "weaker" teams that some of us feel they "could" or "should;" plus the fact that the LL's OOR/OOC results have not been very good at all, many of us feel, that in comparison to the traditional top 10-15 conferences in the nation, as well as the top teams from other regions, the LL as a whole, and the winner of the LL will not come into the first round as a favorite like in years past: ex. Union fav over IC, RPI fav over TCNJ, and Bart fav of Lyco. So while none of us feel the LL is awful by any means, or not a solid conference, some of us feel that the LL is just not holding the water it has held in previous years because of the aforementioned reasons as well as not sporting three nationally strong teams in Bart, RPI, and Union kicking ass into the last weeks of the season as usual.

Listen, Frank made a great point about this Union team, one that dlip believes wholeheartedly is true, that Union can play with and/or beat almost any team in the nation this year with the talent they have (hope that is what you were saying Frank, if not let dlip apologizes ahead of time). Absoutely but dlip also feels we must take into account that as fans we have seen only flashes of this potential this year. These flashes have been accompanied by some disappointing play where some of us re left shaking our heads. Not in a negative way but trying to be objective and having high expectations for the team we love. dlip thinks that this team does in fact mirror past U teams in regards to the fact of playing down to competition and playing up to competition. Obviously the U didn't steam role in 05 through it's regular season squeaking out a few. This is similar to this year with U of R, SLU, and even RPI yesterday. From here on out dlip is going to accept this team for who they are and whatever it is they accomplish. He is not going to pretend though that he does not feel they have underachieved thus far in regards to their potential but he is also going to focus on the positives and continue to believe that this team can and will do something special here in 09. 

[redswarm81]

My point is to go beyond the "Big Three" -- Union beat RPI by 7 in 2005... AND 2009.  Union beat Hobart by 10 in 2005... AND 2009.  I'm asking you to balance the strength of the teams below Union, Hobart and RPI.  You can't ignore the top-to-bottom strength when you begin comparing teams and calling other teams mediocre, especially basing these terms on the past for each of them.

When you look at strength of a conference, you can't say...."but disregard the Top 3".  When people compare the SEC to the PAC10, they are not comparing Vandy to Washington St. and saying....let's go beyond Florida, Alabama, LSU USC & Oregon.

In '05, Union & 'Bart won 1st Round NCAA games & RPI beat Fisher in an ECAC game....they only lost to each other in the regular season....4th place WPI had only 3 losses, to the 'Big 3'.  You can't say let's get beyond them and look to Coast Guard & St. Lawrence.  That debate is a waste of time and reserved for those looking to deflect away from the point at hand.

Objection, assumes facts not in evidence.  No one (except U89) said "but disregard the Top 3."

I think the Tank's point is well taken, as is the Poohbah's.   On one of these boards around here, someone mentioned a couple of weeks ago that the NJAC gets plenty of favorable attention on account of Rowan and Cortland St., but at the same time the NJAC has some truly sucky teams--we're talking sucky at the organic level.  Cellular suckiness.  Molecular suck.  Take a look at Buff St.'s and WestConn's record for the past 8 or 9 years--institutional suck.  Mo'ville St. hasn't been around all that long, but they're showing no signs of mediocre, much less good.

On the other hand, the LL's traditional bottom dwellers (a group that does NOT include WPI) have all shown either improvement over the past several years, or at least an ability to win a few games in most years.

I think part of the reason Frank's argument may be difficult for some to accept is that he's making it largely based on Union (properly, since he knows U better than any other team), and he's doing so in the shadow of the Dutchman's Shoes.  As he (correctly) mentioned early on, Shoesapalooza means nothing relative to anything other than to the Engineers and the Dutchmen on that day only.  It is a rivalry game, one of the best, and all bets--and all comparisons--are off.

Nothing explains the Muhlenberg loss, though.

[pumkinattack]

It's also not that SSQ has performed well in league itself that leads anyone to believe the league is weaker, but that they lost to 2 tds to Lyco, Lost to MMA, beat two of the cellar teams (this year) in the CC (Moravian and Juniata have 3 combined wins) and won their two big wins thus far (RPI and Hobart) at home.  

RS, your last comment is sort of the problem for the league this year.  Our top two teams have four combined losses to Muhlenburg, Salisbury, Lycoming and MMA.  And WPI has been 2-5, 4-3, 0-6, 1-6, 4-3 and currently 0-5 since joining the LL.  That's somewhere to the lower side of the league overall if you ask me with two decent years.  WPI's non-conference schedule is all NEFC (understandably given their location and travel in conference), so they're overall record looks a little better over that period.

[pumkinattack]

Just looking at 2005:

UofR lost to JHU 9-7, lost at SJF 58-32 and won at Gettysburg 41-20
MMA lost at Kean by 8, at Claremont Mudd Scripps by 7 and beat Dickinson in OT by 3
WPI won all their OOC games.  In fact, looking up WPI, they've never lost an OOC game since joining the LL. 
SLU did poorly and CGA did poorly.

So CGA is gone and that's good because they were a drag, but SLU is the same program they've been, I don't see MMA as being any better and same for UofR and WPI.  If the league's better, it's only because CGA left (and SSQ is better, but they're gone after this year).

[redswarm81]

It's also not that SSQ has performed well in league itself that leads anyone to believe the league is weaker, but that they lost to 2 tds to Lyco, Lost to MMA, beat two of the cellar teams (this year) in the CC (Moravian and Juniata have 3 combined wins) and won their two big wins thus far (RPI and Hobart) at home.  

RS, your last comment is sort of the problem for the league this year.  Our top two teams have four combined losses to Muhlenburg, Salisbury, Lycoming and MMA.  And WPI has been 2-5, 4-3, 0-6, 1-6, 4-3 and currently 0-5 since joining the LL.  That's somewhere to the lower side of the league overall if you ask me with two decent years.  WPI's non-conference schedule is all NEFC (understandably given their location and travel in conference), so they're overall record looks a little better over that period.

So how do WPI, SLU, UofR, MMA (and CGA, for that matter) compare to WestConn, Buffalo St., and Morrisville St?