FB: Liberty League

[Pat Coleman]

One led to the other, in Fisher's case.  ITH had Vosburgh on to discuss that a number of years back.  It's an important factor, indeed.

You know what nobody brings up though Frank, when we talk about East teams that scheduled tough? Teams like the Independent 2001 Buffalo State squad that played:

Two non D-III schools (Robert Morris, Mansfield)
8-2 Albion
5-5 Cortland
11-2 Rowan
11-2 Ithaca
11-1 Washington and Jefferson
9-2 Montclair
9-2 Brockport

Easily one of the toughest schedules you'll EVER see a team play. Five schools that made the NCAAs. Three that won a game when they were there. But they had gone 7-4 the year before, so why not.

They went 1-8 that season, followed by 1-9, 2-8, 4-6, 3-6, 3-7, 2-8, 1-9, 2-8, 4-6...

Now, I'm not advocating for Union to take on that kind of a schedule. But this idea that tough scheduling is going to bring about a better program down the line always seems to whistle past teams like Buff State, that didn't get better. Even when they picked off a big boy (like the Bengals beating W&J in 2003), it wasn't some springboard to greater things.

I'm not saying that the creampuff schedule needs to be Union's new normal. But they're a struggling program, and in the short term, it might be better to take it easier

Nothing but powers = bad idea.
Nothing but creampuffs = bad idea.

[Frank Rossi]

Exactly, Pat.

Let's look at the 2016 W/L records and SoS rankings of the teams leaving the LL and Union's OOC opponents (excluding Ithaca, since they remain via joining the LL):

2016 Opponents of Note:

WestConn 5-5, 191st
Western New England 11-1, 183rd
WPI 6-4, 85th
Springfield 5-5, 3rd
Merchant Marine 5-4, 53rd

Averages: 6.4-3.8 (0.627), 103rd

2017 Opponents of Note:

Husson 8-1, 219th
Coast Guard 3-7, 212th
Gallaudet 2-8, 236th
Curry 3-6, 149th
Morrisville State 1-9, 19th

Averages: 3.4-6.2 (0.354), 167th

Not only are the teams a healthy drop-off in terms of SoS ranking (25.8% lower in a 248-team field), but the teams' winning percentages drop off on average by 27%.  In a five-team sample, these numbers are significant.  Yet, nobody is going to sit there and say WPI and Merchant Marine were habitual powerhouses.  Union had some strong, medium, and lower-end teams on their schedule, but they skewed overall decent.  There's just no balance with the 2017 teams.  Yes, Ithaca, Hobart, SLU, and even RPI may be decent teams, but if the object here is that there's no expectation that Union wins the LL in 2017, then shouldn't they be playing at least one or two teams of the caliber of Hobart and SLU in their OOC schedule to be prepared for what they'll face later in the season against a more-meaningful conference opponent?  The object here is to eventually win a conference title, one would assume — and lining up a schedule like this probably doesn't do much to help get the players the experience they'll need to begin to make that a reality.  Time will tell.

[Pat Coleman]

No point in listing the 2016 games they were obliged to play.

[Frank Rossi]

No point in listing the 2016 games they were obliged to play.

Why not?  I'm reflecting what they replaced them with to show just how deep the overall schedule dropoff is.

[Pat Coleman]

I was just thinking you were giving them credit for scheduling a game they had no choice in scheduling. 

[dlippiel]

Dlip sees validity to both arguments/positions/opinions. He too concurs with Pat's comment referencing how both extremes of scheduling aren't necessarily beneficial to a programs growth. Dlip used to pride himself on Union's schedule, especially compared to the way RPI used to schedule. With that being said the times they have a changed.

Dlip likes Union's schedule because to him, it fits their realistic position in regards to getting some W's. The importance of getting at least a few W's IDHO is integral to the programs confidence and ability to attract new talent. The yesteryears of Union Football are gone. Anyone who wishes to apply that past success to the current state of the program, or where the program was at 0-10, is kidding themselves.

Union's fall from D3 football prominence was a huge one. Dlip isn't going to get into the reasons why it fell (see Frank for details), but it fell. To believe that getting back up by scheduling over your head two seasons after going 0-10 with a complete change of coaching staff is the way just doesn't make sense to dlip. It's not like Union's scheduling HS JV teams. Union still has to play strong programs like Bart and SLU, solid programs like Ithaca and RPI. Those in conference games alone, right now are prestigious enough to draw interest in recruits looking to play a high level of D3 FB at this point. Dlip doesn't know about others but he would prefer to skip another streak on consecutive loses to OOC teams. That was painful as hell.

This program and staff are doing exactly what they need to do for now to start putting the pieces back together and get this program back on track. As of now, to dlip, this debate is really senseless for a team that honestly may still be below .500 come LL play. That's just the reality and dlip is ok with that.

[unionpalooza]

Frank, think you land on what is probably a good rule of thumb - OOC SoS lining up with your conference SoS.  Union's skews softs this year, but given the tailspin that was the end of the Audino years I think that's sensible, and I'd argue the Husson game is good prep for the tougher conference games that follow.

I tend to think Union's past OOC decisions were at least a part of that tailspin, btw - for a decade, the OOC competition was much steeper than the conference. From 2007-2015, a period in which Union was actually above .500 in the LL (33-28), Union's aggregate OOC record was 4-24.  (Indeed, when Union beat West Conn in week 2 of last year, that was its first OOC win in five years.)  That added up to a lot of losses, and meant most seasons began 0-3 or 0-2, none of which I think was good for the health of the program in the long run.

Exactly, Pat.

Let's look at the 2016 W/L records and SoS rankings of the teams leaving the LL and Union's OOC opponents (excluding Ithaca, since they remain via joining the LL):

2016 Opponents of Note:

WestConn 5-5, 191st
Western New England 11-1, 183rd
WPI 6-4, 85th
Springfield 5-5, 3rd
Merchant Marine 5-4, 53rd

Averages: 6.4-3.8 (0.627), 103rd

2017 Opponents of Note:

Husson 8-1, 219th
Coast Guard 3-7, 212th
Gallaudet 2-8, 236th
Curry 3-6, 149th
Morrisville State 1-9, 19th

Averages: 3.4-6.2 (0.354), 167th

Not only are the teams a healthy drop-off in terms of SoS ranking (25.8% lower in a 248-team field), but the teams' winning percentages drop off on average by 27%.  In a five-team sample, these numbers are significant.  Yet, nobody is going to sit there and say WPI and Merchant Marine were habitual powerhouses.  Union had some strong, medium, and lower-end teams on their schedule, but they skewed overall decent.  There's just no balance with the 2017 teams.  Yes, Ithaca, Hobart, SLU, and even RPI may be decent teams, but if the object here is that there's no expectation that Union wins the LL in 2017, then shouldn't they be playing at least one or two teams of the caliber of Hobart and SLU in their OOC schedule to be prepared for what they'll face later in the season against a more-meaningful conference opponent?  The object here is to eventually win a conference title, one would assume — and lining up a schedule like this probably doesn't do much to help get the players the experience they'll need to begin to make that a reality.  Time will tell.

[dlippiel]

BTW, Union scrimmages Utica College tomorrow at Frank Bailey field starting at 3PM.

[Frank Rossi]

Word is that the school has leveled off its drop of resources toward football after offing Audino.  The current schedule scenario suggests to me they're trying to somehow shade the drop by manufacturing wins -- to hell with the Union Football tradition in the process. 

I don't fault Behrman in that equation since he wasn't part of that tradition and obviously needs wins to boost his own résumé.  But someone at the top of the food chain there was involved with the heyday of Union Football and is sitting there allowing this to continue in this manner.  This doesn't look like a rebuilding, it looks like a plateauing at mediocrity based on what's left after Men's and Women's D1 Ice Hockey divide the resources. 

For those who have been close to the program for a while, it's not a schedule we're proud of and not something we'll try to justify based on a set of wrongs we feel were done in the first place (oh, we gutted the program resources, so we lost lots of games, so now we have to play lower-level teams to "rebuild" the program using wins as the sign of the rebuild).  There's something inherently ridiculous about that cycle, and at the end of the day, it robs the players of the opportunity to be part of that Union Football tradition as more and more alumni feel like the program is a shell of itself from situations like this schedule.  It does have ramifications.

[unionpalooza]

Frank, your well-known grudge against the Union AD oozes through this post.  That's fine - you are of course entitled to your own view - but no one should take this as the shared view of those "close to the program."

Also, is there a fierce Union "tradition" of tough OoC scheduling that I am unaware of?  The proud 1990s heydays were creampuff city, as I recall...

Word is that the school has leveled off its drop of resources toward football after offing Audino.  The current schedule scenario suggests to me they're trying to somehow shade the drop by manufacturing wins -- to hell with the Union Football tradition in the process. 

I don't fault Behrman in that equation since he wasn't part of that tradition and obviously needs wins to boost his own résumé.  But someone at the top of the food chain there was involved with the heyday of Union Football and is sitting there allowing this to continue in this manner.  This doesn't look like a rebuilding, it looks like a plateauing at mediocrity based on what's left after Men's and Women's D1 Ice Hockey divide the resources. 

For those who have been close to the program for a while, it's not a schedule we're proud of and not something we'll try to justify based on a set of wrongs we feel were done in the first place (oh, we gutted the program resources, so we lost lots of games, so now we have to play lower-level teams to "rebuild" the program using wins as the sign of the rebuild).  There's something inherently ridiculous about that cycle, and at the end of the day, it robs the players of the opportunity to be part of that Union Football tradition as more and more alumni feel like the program is a shell of itself from situations like this schedule.  It does have ramifications.

[Frank Rossi]

Ummmmm... For a poster that just came on board, you seem to know plenty about me, except for the communications I have with former players on a regular basis.  It's not a grudge with the AD -- hell, we invited him to join us on ITH to share his side of the resource story and haven't heard back.  It's common sense that the school seems to refuse to address: that when you go 10-0 in 2005 and 0-10 in 2015, and the number of slots dwindles precipitously, the cause of your ills is probably more based on resource deprivation than coaching.  I've yet to hear an acknowledgment to that degree.  But I'd be happy to share the notes I've received from folks close to the program over the past year that would explain my basis for my statements.  And the attendances at the booster club events this summer seem to be consistent with my statements as well.

On the bright side, at least the AD's apparent favorite-son sport, Men's Ice Hockey, emulated the Football program recently.  They lost by just a touchdown to Penn State hockey (10-3) in the first round of the Frozen Four tourney.  Oh, wait...

[dlippiel]

Word is that the school has leveled off its drop of resources toward football after offing Audino.  The current schedule scenario suggests to me they're trying to somehow shade the drop by manufacturing wins -- to hell with the Union Football tradition in the process. 

I don't fault Behrman in that equation since he wasn't part of that tradition and obviously needs wins to boost his own résumé.  But someone at the top of the food chain there was involved with the heyday of Union Football and is sitting there allowing this to continue in this manner.  This doesn't look like a rebuilding, it looks like a plateauing at mediocrity based on what's left after Men's and Women's D1 Ice Hockey divide the resources. 

For those who have been close to the program for a while, it's not a schedule we're proud of and not something we'll try to justify based on a set of wrongs we feel were done in the first place (oh, we gutted the program resources, so we lost lots of games, so now we have to play lower-level teams to "rebuild" the program using wins as the sign of the rebuild).  There's something inherently ridiculous about that cycle, and at the end of the day, it robs the players of the opportunity to be part of that Union Football tradition as more and more alumni feel like the program is a shell of itself from situations like this schedule.  It does have ramifications.

If this tends to be the case Frank dlip doesn't think you'll see Behrman stick around. Nothing about him, to dlip, signals that he has any aspirations of being mediocre. As a matter of fact dlip knows for a fact that Coach simply hates to lose. No, to dlip he has a clear plan in his mind of what he needs to do, regardless of the situation surrounding him. The scheduling to dlip is a result of two possibilities. 1.) With the loss of WPI, MMA, and Springfield coach wanted to do whatever it took to get 10 games on the schedule. 2.) Coach wanted to create a schedule that provides him with the opportunity to have a chance to generate some W's as he rebuilds. dlip thinks it's more likely the latter. He wants (my thoughts here not his) to bring some form of success to a program that has pissed off and turned away so many fans and alum that he must not only succeed on the field but instill confidence in those alum/fans/possible recruits that this ship can turn around.

If the resources have now been altered to simply provide a program of mediocrity than either he will defy that by overachieving or be gone once he realizes that the support he thought he was going to receive isn't there. dlip is siding with the opinion that he'll overachieve.

dlip does not believe Coach Behrman does anything without a plan and the goal of becoming a consistent winner and working toward to top of the D3 pack. Whether that happens or not like you said earlier, we shall see.

[Bombers798891]

Nothing but powers = bad idea.

Yes, I said that in my post, when I stated that I wasn't advocating for Union to take on that type of schedule. My point was not that Buff State's 2001 schedule is what teams should shoot for. It was that playing a tough schedule does not always springboard a program to the next level. It worked for Fisher. It didn't work for Buffalo State.

Nothing but creampuffs = bad idea.

I also said I didn't think this easy schedule should be Union's new normal. I have no idea if it is or not. I just think it's not a big deal that a team that has gone 2-20 OOC over the past several years has decided to lessen the load.

I genuinely don't know if tough scheduling is that big a deal. I mean, coaches always say it helps when it works, but I got to thinking about the Curry/Hartwick and Curry/IC playoff games in 2007 and 2008. The E8 was ranked 4th/5th among the conferences by d3football at the time, while the NEFC was in the mid 20s, just a few spots up from the bottom. It didn't seem to matter

[dlippiel]

Nothing but powers = bad idea.

Yes, I said that in my post, when I stated that I wasn't advocating for Union to take on that type of schedule. My point was not that Buff State's 2001 schedule is what teams should shoot for. It was that playing a tough schedule does not always springboard a program to the next level. It worked for Fisher. It didn't work for Buffalo State.

Nothing but creampuffs = bad idea.

I also said I didn't think this easy schedule should be Union's new normal. I have no idea if it is or not. I just think it's not a big deal that a team that has gone 2-20 OOC over the past several years has decided to lessen the load.

I genuinely don't know if tough scheduling is that big a deal. I mean, coaches always say it helps when it works, but I got to thinking about the Curry/Hartwick and Curry/IC playoff games in 2007 and 2008. The E8 was ranked 4th/5th among the conferences by d3football at the time, while the NEFC was in the mid 20s, just a few spots up from the bottom. It didn't seem to matter

Best point of the day bombers. dlip agrees that if Union is still scheduling like this in 4 years dlip won't be pleased. However for now if the shoe fits...

[dlippiel]

Frank, your well-known grudge against the Union AD oozes through this post.  That's fine - you are of course entitled to your own view - but no one should take this as the shared view of those "close to the program."

Also, is there a fierce Union "tradition" of tough OoC scheduling that I am unaware of?  The proud 1990s heydays were creampuff city, as I recall...

Word is that the school has leveled off its drop of resources toward football after offing Audino.  The current schedule scenario suggests to me they're trying to somehow shade the drop by manufacturing wins -- to hell with the Union Football tradition in the process. 

I don't fault Behrman in that equation since he wasn't part of that tradition and obviously needs wins to boost his own résumé.  But someone at the top of the food chain there was involved with the heyday of Union Football and is sitting there allowing this to continue in this manner.  This doesn't look like a rebuilding, it looks like a plateauing at mediocrity based on what's left after Men's and Women's D1 Ice Hockey divide the resources. 

For those who have been close to the program for a while, it's not a schedule we're proud of and not something we'll try to justify based on a set of wrongs we feel were done in the first place (oh, we gutted the program resources, so we lost lots of games, so now we have to play lower-level teams to "rebuild" the program using wins as the sign of the rebuild).  There's something inherently ridiculous about that cycle, and at the end of the day, it robs the players of the opportunity to be part of that Union Football tradition as more and more alumni feel like the program is a shell of itself from situations like this schedule.  It does have ramifications.

dlip thinks Frank is refering to the 2000's where the Dutchmen scheduled OOC games against the likes of Springfield, Mulenburg, Salisbury, Ithaca, Utica, etc. dli does believe that Audino worked hard to schedule challenging opponents. So in one way he did raise the bar scheduling wise IDHO which in some ways to some makes this change in schedule such a huge drop off.

Also, dlip knows and respects Frank very very much. To dlip, Frank as much as anyone he has ever met near the Union Program offers solid and reliable insight into what went on. dlip steers clear of that stuff but always put as much stock as possible into Frank's point of view regarding the downswing. **** was super complicated IDHO.

Regardless of all this, how nice is it to be talking D3 College football? Can't ****ing wait for the scrimmage tomorrow fellas. Let's see where the next couple years take us. Like dlip said before. His belief in Coach Behrman runs deep. He truly believes Behrman will take Union Football to a place where we all want it to be.