FB: Liberty League

[Frank Rossi]

Until the NCAA fixes the selection criteria, there's just no upside to playing Wesley for a team like Hobart.  Remember how it ended up hurting DelVal for most of last season in the rankings.  It's a team like Wesley that ends up suffering most under the current circumstance, unfortunately.

[dlippiel]

To be honest dlip would like to see this match-up. He would like to see all eastern teams, especially strong eastern teams like Bart and others step up and raise the quality of their schedules. Frank is right though, from what we have seen regarding the selection committee and seeding it almost does no one, especially teams that have opportunities to go undefeated, to take the risk of losing. Even if it is against a high quality opponent. dlip would love to see Wesley come to Shocktown or vice-versa.

[labart96]

Agree - it would be nice to see, but to Frank's point, there's no real incentive for teams trying to make the tourney.

Besides, Hobart already has 3 pretty solid OOC games with Dickinson, CMU and Fisher.

[union89]

Gimme a break....no one from the LL is going to get a Pool B or C in the foreseeable future....play Wesley, WWW or Mount...it will only make you better in the long run.

Stop over-thinking EVERYTHING......

[Frank Rossi]

Gimme a break....no one from the LL is going to get a Pool B or C in the foreseeable future....play Wesley, WWW or Mount...it will only make you better in the long run.

Stop over-thinking EVERYTHING......

Teams in 7- and 8-team conferences stand a better chance because of the mechanics of SoS computations than teams in 9- or 10-team conferences in Pool C determinations.  What you just espoused is called "subjectivity," which currently has been minimized in the selection process.  The LL stands as good a chance as any other team in the country of winning a Pool C bid if the teams win their non-conference games.  And that's the point: only Pool C candidates that win ALL of their OOC games are really considered anymore based on the present selection criteria.  We don't write these rules -- they're there in black and white and discussed here annually at length.

By the way, showing your own level of understanding here, Pool B isn't a question for the LL -- it is an AQ conference.

[Pat Coleman]

Gimme a break....no one from the LL is going to get a Pool B or C in the foreseeable future....play Wesley, WWW or Mount...it will only make you better in the long run.

Stop over-thinking EVERYTHING......

I don't think he's overthinking it if TGP and dlip (and I, by the way) agree with him.

[lewdogg11]

Gimme a break....no one from the LL is going to get a Pool B or C in the foreseeable future....play Wesley, WWW or Mount...it will only make you better in the long run.

Stop over-thinking EVERYTHING......

I don't think he's overthinking it if TGP and dlip (and I, by the way) agree with him.

What I think is being 'overthought' is the ultimate goal here. If your goal is to simply limp into the playoffs, then go for it and schedule Husson as your OOC. If your goal is to compete for the national championship, you only become the best by playing and beating the best. DVC played and lost to Wesley last year, but they took care of business otherwise(for the most part) and had an identity of where they stood nationally and why they weren't quite up to par with the top tier.

Making the playoffs is great, if you were St. Lawrence last year, but winning in the playoffs is a different animal and can only be done consistently if you challenge your team.

[Bombers798891]

What I think is being 'overthought' is the ultimate goal here. If your goal is to simply limp into the playoffs, then go for it and schedule Husson as your OOC. If your goal is to compete for the national championship, you only become the best by playing and beating the best. DVC played and lost to Wesley last year, but they took care of business otherwise(for the most part) and had an identity of where they stood nationally and why they weren't quite up to par with the top tier.

Making the playoffs is great, if you were St. Lawrence last year, but winning in the playoffs is a different animal and can only be done consistently if you challenge your team.

Ok, but can we be honest here: How many teams in the LL can set a realistic goal of competing for the national title? Right now, the best any team can hope for is winning until they run into UWW/MUC. Would playing a tougher OOC schedule make you more likely to beat, say an E8 team, or MAC team in the playoffs? I guess.

But I think the current nature of D3 football has altered the realism of some of those goals, so I think some teams have set the bar at a different level and adjusted accordingly

[lewdogg11]

What I think is being 'overthought' is the ultimate goal here. If your goal is to simply limp into the playoffs, then go for it and schedule Husson as your OOC. If your goal is to compete for the national championship, you only become the best by playing and beating the best. DVC played and lost to Wesley last year, but they took care of business otherwise(for the most part) and had an identity of where they stood nationally and why they weren't quite up to par with the top tier.

Making the playoffs is great, if you were St. Lawrence last year, but winning in the playoffs is a different animal and can only be done consistently if you challenge your team.

Ok, but can we be honest here: How many teams in the LL can set a realistic goal of competing for the national title? Right now, the best any team can hope for is winning until they run into UWW/MUC. Would playing a tougher OOC schedule make you more likely to beat, say an E8 team, or MAC team in the playoffs? I guess.

But I think the current nature of D3 football has altered the realism of some of those goals, so I think some teams have set the bar at a different level and adjusted accordingly

And the loser mentality of the East Region continues.

[Frank Rossi]

Well, then it's the loser mentality of over 230 teams, since right now it appears there's a lock at the top no matter what the teams do.

Look, there's a balance issue here that you need to remember.  Again, let's go back to DelVal in 2010.  Assume that Widener/DelVal was for the MAC Championship last year.  Widener wins it.  DelVal now has to rely on Pool C.  Oh, wait, DelVal lost to Wesley by a razor-thin margin.  Doesn't matter -- DelVal wouldn't have even been considered for Pool C last year, despite its resume.

The present fact is clear:  you MUST go undefeated in OOC games to be a Pool C candidate (we haven't had a situation where there weren't enough one-loss teams for Pool C in quite some time).  So, a team like Hobart needs to take a step back and say to itself, "Yes, we want to play a very good team in the regular season, but we also want to make sure we keep our options open for Pool C purposes.  What would accomplish these dual goals?"  Playing a normally top-five Wesley team would be suicidal at best.  Wouldn't Hobart get the same thing accomplished by playing a team like Fisher?  Or perhaps trying to schedule DelVal?

If I were an AD at a Liberty League school, my approach to OOC scheduling starting in 2012 (when Springfield is in the mix) would be to schedule my OOC games before league play.  I'd start Week 1 with a moderate ECFC or NEFC team (a team my team SHOULD beat).  Week 2 would be an upper-echelon ECFC or NEFC team (a team that would be a challenge, but that we should still be able to beat in most years).  My Week 3 opponent would be a mid- to upper-echelon Empire 8 team (a team that would be a challenge in most years to help lead into the LL season with some good experience).

Now, look at what I've accomplished.  Let's say my team goes 3-0 in OOC games.  We're still Pool C-eligible.  We've also kept an eye on the SoS numbers since our OWP figures (which are 2/3 of the equation) will be helped by two of the three opponents (understood here that we can't predict how good teams will be two years in advance, but there are definite trends that would tend to tell us what teams should transcend others).  As long as two of the three OOC opponents finish two games over .500 and as long as the third opponent doesn't finish below two games below .500, my team has an advantage over any NJAC team in the Pool C mix, assuming we end up losing the LL with one league loss.  Why?  NJAC teams will have SoS figures that will not have a variance outside .480 to .520.  Our SoS would likely head closer to .550.

So, tell me how Wesley would fit into this equation any better than an excellent team like SJF for Hobart.  Someday, maybe the NCAA will create an equation or allow humans to reward a team like Hobart for playing a team like Wesley based on Top 25 polls and the strength of schedules based on playing more ranked teams despite an extra loss.  This was discussed in depth at this year's AFCA meeting, and even the Selection Committee Chair for the last two years has come out to state on "In the HuddLLe" and at the AFCA meeting that there needs to be an element of subjectivity allowed beyond what we currently have in the selection process (the NCAA uses the same criteria for a 9- or 10-game sport like football that it does for a 30-game sport like baseball or basketball, which doesn't really work based on statistical variances in such a small sample size).  The ball is in the NCAA's court right now, but until that change is made, coaches like Mike Cragg know what's wrong with the system and won't place themselves out there to become sacrificial lambs without some reward.

This isn't limited to the LL.  The CCIW loves to tout their OOC record across their conference.  However, did any of those teams step up to play UMU, UWW, Wesley or UMHB?  UWW has 2 or 3 OOC slots to fill, and I don't know of any of those CCIW or also in-region MWC teams stepping up to play UWW in the regular season (please, someone correct me here if I'm wrong).

Let's face it -- programs don't tout themselves like this: "Yeah, we played a Top 3 team last season and played them reasonably well despite missing the playoffs."  They tout themselves like this: "We went to the playoffs five out of the last six years, winning a couple of those games."  If you're a high school recruit, which sounds better to you?

[Jonny Utah]

I think the OCC issue lies somewhere in the middle, but I tend to lean towards having a stronger OCC schedule than a lighter one.  In Hobarts case, they do have SJF as an OCC and adding Wesley might be too much, but like we all know (and say with our eastern negativity for all our teams), Hobart is not going to win a national championship next year no matter who they play, but if they were going to win it, they would probably beat Wesley and SJF right?

Look, there's a balance issue here that you need to remember.  Again, let's go back to DelVal in 2010.  Assume that Widener/DelVal was for the MAC Championship last year.  Widener wins it.  DelVal now has to rely on Pool C.  Oh, wait, DelVal lost to Wesley by a razor-thin margin.  Doesn't matter -- DelVal wouldn't have even been considered for Pool C last year, despite its resume.

This may be true but DelVal didn't lose to Widener, and if they did lose to them they shouldn't be in the playoffs in the first place.  Now you can ask your self : "Would they have gotten in if they had lost to Widener but beaten Crappy State instead of Wesley"?  Maybe maybe not, but a team that is going to lose to Widener, would proably have dropped a game to Lycoming, Wilkes, Albright etc wouldn't you say?

Saying you must go undefeated in pool c is only true in the past, and does not mean that you have to be undefeated in the future to get a pool c bid.  Again you have to ask yourself if there were any undeserving teams that got shafted out of a pool c bid in recent years.  There aren't many.

[Jonny Utah]

And this argument can be used in d1 and 1-aa football scheduling wouldn't you all say?

[Bombers798891]

What I think is being 'overthought' is the ultimate goal here. If your goal is to simply limp into the playoffs, then go for it and schedule Husson as your OOC. If your goal is to compete for the national championship, you only become the best by playing and beating the best. DVC played and lost to Wesley last year, but they took care of business otherwise(for the most part) and had an identity of where they stood nationally and why they weren't quite up to par with the top tier.

Making the playoffs is great, if you were St. Lawrence last year, but winning in the playoffs is a different animal and can only be done consistently if you challenge your team.

Ok, but can we be honest here: How many teams in the LL can set a realistic goal of competing for the national title? Right now, the best any team can hope for is winning until they run into UWW/MUC. Would playing a tougher OOC schedule make you more likely to beat, say an E8 team, or MAC team in the playoffs? I guess.

But I think the current nature of D3 football has altered the realism of some of those goals, so I think some teams have set the bar at a different level and adjusted accordingly

And the loser mentality of the East Region continues.

I've never understood why we can't actually be rational and say, that, as things currently stand, LL teams don't really have a realistic goal of winning a title. Does it do a team like St. Lawrence any good to set a goal of a Stagg Bowl right now? I'm all for striving to improve, but let's actually set reachable goals here. Start small. Maybe a team from the LL getting out of the second round for the first time since when, RPI in '03?

It's a simple fact: Most teams are not good enough to compete for national titles. Why is that so wrong to admit? In something like D-III football, where there are 200+ teams, a majority of them are not of that caliber, and that's before you get into the whole MUC/UWW mess. The playing field of college sports is too uneven for everyone to compete equally, even at the D-III level.

Now does this mean the LL can't turn it around? Of course not. But it takes time. What team out of that conference was a serious title contender? '03 RPI? '05 Union? The conference's "best" team went 6-4 last year. The conference champion finished with a losing record. Amazingly, I'm not banking on a title contender emerging. So maybe that means I have a loser mentality. But impartially looking at it, what other conclusion is there to draw?

[lewdogg11]

What I think is being 'overthought' is the ultimate goal here. If your goal is to simply limp into the playoffs, then go for it and schedule Husson as your OOC. If your goal is to compete for the national championship, you only become the best by playing and beating the best. DVC played and lost to Wesley last year, but they took care of business otherwise(for the most part) and had an identity of where they stood nationally and why they weren't quite up to par with the top tier.

Making the playoffs is great, if you were St. Lawrence last year, but winning in the playoffs is a different animal and can only be done consistently if you challenge your team.

Ok, but can we be honest here: How many teams in the LL can set a realistic goal of competing for the national title? Right now, the best any team can hope for is winning until they run into UWW/MUC. Would playing a tougher OOC schedule make you more likely to beat, say an E8 team, or MAC team in the playoffs? I guess.

But I think the current nature of D3 football has altered the realism of some of those goals, so I think some teams have set the bar at a different level and adjusted accordingly

And the loser mentality of the East Region continues.

I've never understood why we can't actually be rational and say, that, as things currently stand, LL teams don't really have a realistic goal of winning a title. Does it do a team like St. Lawrence any good to set a goal of a Stagg Bowl right now? I'm all for striving to improve, but let's actually set reachable goals here. Start small. Maybe a team from the LL getting out of the second round for the first time since when, RPI in '03?

It's a simple fact: Most teams are not good enough to compete for national titles. Why is that so wrong to admit? In something like D-III football, where there are 200+ teams, a majority of them are not of that caliber, and that's before you get into the whole MUC/UWW mess. The playing field of college sports is too uneven for everyone to compete equally, even at the D-III level.

Now does this mean the LL can't turn it around? Of course not. But it takes time. What team out of that conference was a serious title contender? '03 RPI? '05 Union? The conference's "best" team went 6-4 last year. The conference champion finished with a losing record. Amazingly, I'm not banking on a title contender emerging. So maybe that means I have a loser mentality. But impartially looking at it, what other conclusion is there to draw?

You're exactly right, it's not going to happen overnight, but you NEED to start somewhere.  Making the playoffs back in the 16 team field was an accomplishment.  Making the 32 team field, not so much.  Win your conference and you are in.  Pretty simple right?  And if you don't and you are good enough to get a Pool C, then you deserve it.  Going 8-1 or 9-1 and NOT winning your conference with OOC wins against Endicott and Utica really does a lot for you.  It doesn't have to be Wesley, or Mount Union, but why not Montclair, or DVC, or Rowan, or even Salisbury.  Maybe a National Championship goal is lofty, but making the playoffs and knowing you can't win is a loser mentality.  Just a few years ago, you could argue whether the E8 or LL had the better conference.  The LL has been laughable since.

Put a good product on the field, play some good teams, and WIN!  I'm sick of the East accepting that they just aren't as good as other regions.  Get some good coaches, recruit good players, and put a good product on the field.  And STOP overthinking everything otherwise and being happy to 'make' the playoffs.

[Frank Rossi]

This may be true but DelVal didn't lose to Widener, and if they did lose to them they shouldn't be in the playoffs in the first place.  Now you can ask your self : "Would they have gotten in if they had lost to Widener but beaten Crappy State instead of Wesley"?  Maybe maybe not, but a team that is going to lose to Widener, would proably have dropped a game to Lycoming, Wilkes, Albright etc wouldn't you say?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQNqa0zIYs

Also, name me the last two-loss team to get into the playoffs through Pool C.