East Region Playoff Discussion

[DanPadavona]

GOOD teams don't lose to a 4-5 team that was pounded by other East teams throughout the year.  You just don't lose games like that if you want to claim you are "the best in the East".  Sorry.....that just doesn't cut it. 

So you've established that DV is not a good team.  So by your logic, Wesley isn't good either since they barely squeaked past them on their home turf. 

[skunks_sidekick]

Please stop.  Wesley turned the ball over HOW many times in that game?  And still won......enough said.

[skunks_sidekick]

And I didn't say they weren't a good team....they have proven they are not an elite team, and certainly not worth a #1 seed (or a #2/3).

[DanPadavona]

You clearly said they were not a good team.  You even capitalized GOOD.  And since when were turnovers not caused by defense and only attributed to offensive mistakes?

But you are helping me make my point.  DV will be a 4,5, or 6 seed in the East and they still took Wesley to the wire on the road.  There is depth to the East.  You may argue that there is not if you choose, but I am at least providing examples to suggest that Rossi knows what he is talking about.

[pg04]

I really think you "Rossiites" live in a fantasy world 

[Mr. Ypsi]

You clearly said they were not a good team.  You even capitalized GOOD.  And since when were turnovers not caused by defense and only attributed to offensive mistakes?

But you are helping me make my point.  DV will be a 4,5, or 6 seed in the East and they still took Wesley to the wire on the road.  There is depth to the East.  You may argue that there is not if you choose, but I am at least providing examples to suggest that Rossi knows what he is talking about.

I posed a question yesterday that has so far gone unanswered: can anyone assess how many of Wesley's turnovers were turnovers as opposed to takeaways?  The same stat can reflect sloppy offense or killer defense.

[maxpower]

What we have a problem with here is that people on both sides of this debate are starting at a different point. Those who start with skepticism about the East need to see a statement made before they'll take the East seriously. Those who start with an affinity for the East need to see the teams losing consistently before they'll believe that the East is weak.

I have to say I'm in the skeptics camp. In order to be convinced that the East is not weaker, I need to start seeing some big non-region wins. In the playoffs, or even not. The fact that there's different teams in the playoffs every year, very few of whom are undefeated, and NONE of whom challenge UMU, makes me in the "guilty until proven innocent" camp re: the East.

[MasterJedi]

The way I see it in that game DelVal played a good game while Wesley didn't. This belief goes with the way I see the East region: a lot of average teams that can play good/great games from time to time. The East isn't bad, they just don't have any elite teams, just a lot of average teams that when they play good can beat anyone else in the East.

[skunks_sidekick]

What we have a problem with here is that people on both sides of this debate are starting at a different point. Those who start with skepticism about the East need to see a statement made before they'll take the East seriously. Those who start with an affinity for the East need to see the teams losing consistently before they'll believe that the East is weak.

I have to say I'm in the skeptics camp. In order to be convinced that the East is not weaker, I need to start seeing some big non-region wins. In the playoffs, or even not. The fact that there's different teams in the playoffs every year, very few of whom are undefeated, and NONE of whom challenge UMU, makes me in the "guilty until proven innocent" camp re: the East.

I believe that is a spot-on, fair assessment Max.  Kudos.......

[JT]

WTF happened to Del Val yesterday The East is ****ed...

I call this dropping a dlipism.

[usee]

What we have a problem with here is that people on both sides of this debate are starting at a different point. Those who start with skepticism about the East need to see a statement made before they'll take the East seriously. Those who start with an affinity for the East need to see the teams losing consistently before they'll believe that the East is weak.

I have to say I'm in the skeptics camp. In order to be convinced that the East is not weaker, I need to start seeing some big non-region wins. In the playoffs, or even not. The fact that there's different teams in the playoffs every year, very few of whom are undefeated, and NONE of whom challenge UMU, makes me in the "guilty until proven innocent" camp re: the East.

I believe that is a spot-on, fair assessment Max.  Kudos.......

It's actually far simpler than that in my mind. Frank Rossi is arguing the East faces unique challenges that result in a lack of respect. He argues the East deserves more respect and tries to show how they match up as well as the North or any other region. I disagree with the presupposition that the East faces anything unique that isn't also prevalent in other regions.

You don't have to make any subjective judgement on East strength vs North/West/South strength to determine if the same factors are influencing teams equally.

[DanPadavona]

USee -

A better question to ask than "Is the East facing more challenges than X Region?" is "Does Mount Union and Whitewater have few challenges to face than the most other teams?"

It may be true that Baldwin-Wallace, Otterbein, Capital, etc have a similar amount of competing schools in their radius as Ithaca, Union, and Cortland.  I haven't studied this.  But the North Region is not dominating D3.  Mount Union and Whitewater are dominating D3.  So to me, the only relevant question to ask at this point is what advantages (other than coaching) do Mount Union and Whitewater possess that other schools (including those from their own regions/conferences) do not possess.

Perhaps that should be a subject for Keith's future ATN columns.

The only issue I take is the assumption that the North has more elite teams beyond Mount Union because of the 3 or 4 undefeated programs.  Trine is running the table against Apples.  Fisher is going 8-2 against Oranges.  UW-Stevens Point is comparing itself to Mangos.  None of these teams can compare its situation to the other.  We don't know if Trine would be 7-3 in the E8 or 10-0.  Would Stevens Point be 10-0 and considered "Elite" if they were in the MIAA?  So to me, a 8-2 vs 9-1 vs 10-0 debate is meaningless when there is no basis for comparison between the teams. 

Put Cortland, Rowan or Ithaca in the ECFC if you want to see a 10-0 East Region team.  Then you can call them "Elite" and deserving of a #1 seed. 

[pg04]

Wow.  Montclair is selected but sent elsewhere, Rowan out, and Salisbury in the region, playing Del Val (that lost really cost Del Val) and ALfred is 6 seed but hosting SUNY-Maritime. 

[skunks_sidekick]

Well I guess we will get to see just how good del Val is in a few weeks.  Well that is if they can win their first round game which is in doubt.

[DanPadavona]

What is the "off-the-field reason" alluded to which requires #3 Maritime to travel to #6 Alfred?