East Region Playoff Discussion

[HScoach]

The East should hope that Mount is the #1 seed this year, because if there EVER was a year that they MAY be vulnerable, this is the year. 

Hmmm, that sentiment sounds familiar.   Were you reading Page 179?


I find all the pissing & moaning in the East to be rather humorous.  The North dealt with for years.  Wheaton is 9-0 in the playoffs against anyone not named Mount Union.  0-6 against Mount.  Until a consistent East team reaches the level of Wheaton, I have no sympathy. 


In regards to the previous posts complaining about JCU barely winning the East back in '02,  JCU would have been a low seed in the North too, yet they went on the road 3 times and won.  If the NCAA would have taken a high seed from the North and than that team barely win the East, then you'd have a point about how strong the East is and how weak the North is.  But when a low seed from one region goes on the road and wins another region, what other conclusion is to be drawn from that?  Upsets happen and a lesser team can win a game they shouldn't if things break right, but 3 of them?

I've seen many times people pointing to SJF's 26-14 loss to Mount as being a testament of how good SJF (and the East) was, even though Kmic ran for 371 yards.  If you are going to discredit JCU's close wins because of extenuating circumstances and selectively pick out certain points to make you argument, but overlook the big picture, then I'll point to Mount hiding Micheli's passing ability as the only reason SJF was within 30 points of Mount.  LK knew the only team that could touch his Raiders was UWW in the Stagg and he wanted a trick up his sleeve and since the East posed no threat to Mount, he could simply run Kmic over and over again.   

Coach,
You are usually level headed and even keeled on here so I wont be too abrasive- but that was probably the most arrogant thing i have ever heard you say re UMU.. Even if it were true- and I doubt that highly- it was 4 years ago- why the hell come back and post crap like that.
Honestly....
Enjoy your team. they are with out a doubt the best ive seen, but i will end my compliments there and hope that there is at least one UMU fan that thinks that your post was too much

I posted that because it sounds just as crazy and stupid to you guys as your arguments about the "East getting screwed" when a 9-1 team doesn't get the #1 seed sounds to us.  You don't like hearing the theory that LK hid Greg Micheli's arm from Whitewater and we don't like hearing that the East should be full of 9-1 and 8-2 teams when the West and North are 1/2 full of undefeated teams.    

I knew that would get a rise out of your guys and I did so on purpose!  If you really want to know what I think about this year's playoffs, go back and read my post on November 1st on Page 179.

The opinions of 99% of us posting on D3 are so devoid of wide based actual facts since we have such a small sample size to pull from makes most of our theories little more than fan-laced guesses.    We all have our agendas and hopes.  Some wear them more openly then others, but very few of us other than Keith and Pat, bring an open mind to a discussion.

When Mount was shipped east for the first time, I was more than shocked that the NCAA had the balls to do so.  I thought Mount had gotten screwed by being shipped OUT of the North.  I, and some others, figured the NCAA was out to make Mount's path as tough as possible, not easier.  And I honestly worried about those playoffs more than most years because I knew nothing about the East teams.  I knew what the North brought to the table and knew if Mount stayed healthy and played well they'd be fine, but the last memory I had of the East was those big, fast, nasty Rowan teams.  After a few years of playing the East, it's my opinion that they're good, but not great.  Just like the South is, and the North w/o Mount and the West w/o Whitewater.    

But until the East can produce a 10-0, I don't think the North or South should be penalized for having a ton of undefeated teams and the East rewarded with a bunch of 1 and 2 loss teams.

[Jonny Utah]

The east has produced plenty of 10-0 teams.  Curry, Suny Maritime, Plymouth State, Worcester State........

But this is kind of our issue.  Our 1 and 2 loss teams are better than our 0 loss teams.  A lot of that has to do with the AQ (which we have come to accept), but this is kind of like the d1 arguement.  Does 10-0 Boise State deserve a national championship shot over 9-1 Alabama/Auburn/Oregon/?

[fisheralum91]

Coach you got the reaction that you wanted...
Whatever

[Frank Rossi]

Again, HScoach, with all due respect, North quality teams should actually schedule each other, and so should the South and West -- then we'd see a lot less, if any, X-0 teams.  Nobody seems to be jumping on that discussion point in Keith's article.  Why?  Because the 12-quality teams lumped into 4 conferences argument and scheduling each other every year pretty much is true?  Again, Wins and Losses are not the only things that show strength/lack thereof.

[Bombers798891]

DelVal has earned another week of practice and another quality game in the playoffs.  It DOES matter longterm for these teams.  You're getting into a circular argument that you might want to be careful of -- you ask "WHY CAN'T THE EAST GET A STRONG TEAM ON PAPER ANYMORE?" and then claim that it doesn't matter what round the East's leader plays UMU?  It DOES matter.  Keith and Pat talk about the 15 extra weeks of practice and quality opponents UMU and UW-W have under their belt for their seniors?  How can any East team get to that point under current circumstances?  Like I said, the NCAA can't claim this is a national system until it aids teams in breaking down the regional structure THROUGHOUT the season by subsidizing 50 out-of-region games to aid in comparisons.  At a cost of $250,000 (which the NCAA would partially recoup in a gate recoupment agreement with the teams involved), this could be done and help create matchups we've never seen before.  This is an instance where the NCAA needs to put its money where its mouth is, or it needs to stop trying to break down the regional walls until the Semifinals. 

Frank, as I've told you numerous times, I'm sympathetic to a team like Delaware Valley, which IMO, should be given a lot of credit for scheduling an elite team OOC on the road. I would have no problem with them as a #1 seed this season. But you've kind of used DVC this season to base your entire argument of tougher OOC schedules being the issue for east teams and have ignored other facts.

I simply believe that East Region teams have blown their chances at #1 seeds in two additional ways you don't mention:

1. Losing games in conference-- Examples: The entire E8 from 2006-2009. The entire LL from 2006-2009. The NJAC in 2010 and 2007.

2. Losing a game to a mediocre OOC opponent (or multiple ones)-- Examples: 2010 Alfred (Rochester + RPI) and St. Lawrence (Wick). 2009 Montclair (Wilkes)

Sure, you're right on DVC this season. And yeah, Cortland had to deal with Ithaca in 2008. (Of course, Ithaca could have been a #1 seed too--see point 1)

But is asking Alfred to beat Rochester and RPI that much? Really, Montclair loses by 27 to a team King's whipped? Ithaca loses by 31 to a four-loss Fisher? All of those games cost the East Region an unbeaten, and none of them were equivalent to going to Wesley.

[Bombers798891]

BTW, something I've wondered, non- #1 related

Would a 9-1 Fisher that wins a Pool C be seeded ahead of an 8-2 Alfred it lost to H2H? What about a 7-3 Alfred? How much does the H2H override records in a case like that

[HScoach]

Again, HScoach, with all due respect, North quality teams should actually schedule each other, and so should the South and West -- then we'd see a lot less, if any, X-0 teams.  Nobody seems to be jumping on that discussion point in Keith's article.  Why?  Because the 12-quality teams lumped into 4 conferences argument and scheduling each other every year pretty much is true?  Again, Wins and Losses are not the only things that show strength/lack thereof.

I would love to see that too.   One of our biggest complaints is that Wittenberg from the NCAC won't play Mount as an opener even though they used to be in, and owned, the OAC back in the 70's and early 80's.  Witt set up series with Capital  back before Cap was any good, but unfortunately by the time the games were played Capital had Rocky Pentello at QB and were good.  Capital beat the crap out of Witt and they ended that series in a hurry.

The CCIW and NCAC seems to be the conferences doing the most ducking.  It's hard to get an accurate read on the OAC's non-league plan would be as we only have 1 open date, but it seems like they don't purposely shy away from good competition.  Capital played Wesley this year, Ohio Northern opened with North Central in 08/09 year and played a WIAC team this season (albeit a bad one).  Jeesz, even lowly Marietta traveled to St John's (MN) a few years ago.  I don't think there is a league wide plan to schedule really tough openers, but I don't think it's an avoidance issue either.

[Yanks 99]

But until the East can produce a 10-0, I don't think the North or South should be penalized for having a ton of undefeated teams and the East rewarded with a bunch of 1 and 2 loss teams.

If you have a ton of undefeated teams in the North and South Region, that tells me two things.  1) The South Region teams won't change a thing...as they get to avoid MUC or UWW until at worst the semi-finals by doing nothing different then what they are doing now.  2) North Region teams that are rolling through the regular season undefeated that don't play in MUC's conference, or during the regular season in some sort of non-conference game, won't change a thing...like the South Region teams, they watch MUC get shipped off to the East without every playing them in the regular season. 

Then both of these Regions get to sit back and tell the East to "get better" or "look at how many Final Four apperances our Region teams have over yours" as a reason to why they are so much better.

[JT]

All of it gets pretty moot when the OAC can't compete with Mount. One regular season defeat in 2005 (1st since 1994) by Ohio Northern and ONU couldn't hold serve.  At 9-1 Mount won the league, ONU wound up 7-2.  Last time Mount did not win the OAC... 1991.

This tells me that you need superior talent, otherwise if its close, you stand a great chance of being outcoached.

What it really comes down to, and I haven't seen 'em in person in a while, is the oline and dlines.  Mount's are far superior on average than their opponents over the years.  When a team can pressure up front w/o blitzing, is when you stand a good chance.  If you can run on Mount too, even better.

Still the South and West get a pass, and the North gets a semi-finalist it wouldn't get under normal circumstances.

[pg04]

IMO, the south is quasi-equal to the East.  Neither has had a national champion in decades. However, The West seems like it's been stronger in the long run with Linfield, WIAC, MIAC, etc. 

[Yanks 99]

IMO, the south is quasi-equal to the East.  Neither has had a national champion in decades. However, The West seems like it's been stronger in the long run with Linfield, WIAC, MIAC, etc. 

I agree...that is why I focused on the North (minus MUC) and the South Regions...

[theoriginalupstate]

I don't think we can use 2002 as a sample anymore.  

Tell that to the Guru...

I was responding to someone who had already brought it up, but with incomplete information. Namely, you, Upstate.

Don't act like you don't bring it up every chance you get...

[pg04]

I think I'd really enjoy a Wheaton or North Central vs. Del Val or Fisher and see what happens.  

[Jonny Utah]

All of it gets pretty moot when the OAC can't compete with Mount. One regular season defeat in 2005 (1st since 1994) by Ohio Northern and ONU couldn't hold serve.  At 9-1 Mount won the league, ONU wound up 7-2.  Last time Mount did not win the OAC... 1991.

This tells me that you need superior talent, otherwise if its close, you stand a great chance of being outcoached.

What it really comes down to, and I haven't seen 'em in person in a while, is the oline and dlines.  Mount's are far superior on average than their opponents over the years.  When a team can pressure up front w/o blitzing, is when you stand a good chance.  If you can run on Mount too, even better.

Still the South and West get a pass, and the North gets a semi-finalist it wouldn't get under normal circumstances.

Good Point.  I've seen them live once (2007) and I have to say their lines were great, but it is their potential for big plays that impressed me.  Of course Garcon helped with that a little, but Kmic was able to break 3-4 huge plays that simply put Ithaca away.  If he ran the ball 25 times, 20 of them weren't great, but 5 of them were game breakers.  Also a credit to MUCs blocking receivers and other backs getting to the second level.  Those guys are huge too.

[AUKaz00]

BTW, something I've wondered, non- #1 related

Would a 9-1 Fisher that wins a Pool C be seeded ahead of an 8-2 Alfred it lost to H2H? What about a 7-3 Alfred? How much does the H2H override records in a case like that

I would presume so.  Fisher is higher in the Regional Rankings, so they should be seeded higher.  

And don't think I didn't catch your little reverse-mojo statement of Alfred being the "favorite to win the E8."  I think Fisher still has a better chance than Alfred, but that speaks more to my insecurity as a Saxon fan playing Ithaca than anything else.