East Region Playoff Discussion

[Knightstalker]

The East has not done well in the playoffs since Rowan was the Beast of the East.  Since Rowan has fallen off others have tried to become the new Beast of the East but have all fallen dramatically short.  Whether you liked him or not KC Keeler was the real deal as a head coach in D-III, his Rowan teams had better depth than any of the East teams do now and that was with a 100 man roster limit.  I am not putting down any of the East region teams, I want the East to do well, but the facts are there.  Keeler was a great recruiter, he could lose several starters and always had a kid ready to step up.  Caruso at UST seems to be that type of recruiter to KS.

[Bartman]

Nice sermon from the Rev, but Bartman is not feeling good about the Hobart game today. This was not our best effort and the team will tell you that. Although, our best  may not have been enough to beat an excellent UST squad(Bartman is rooting for Tom Cat advancement) , it sure would have felt better to know you did everything you could. The sting will be there for awhile.For the fans in the East, Hobart had an opportunity to represent well, but fell short and unfortunately the performance today will not serve to change impressions of the region. The Wesley loss last year gave us inspiration and this years UST  game will give us motivation in 2013.
That being said, let me say something about the season. The Hobart seniors should feel proud for the legacy they have left, which is a program that is ascending and hopefully dominating the Liberty League. The team gave the fans a season for the ages and we thank them for their dedication and the joy they have given to many of us. The parents travelled well and should be proud of a great bunch of boys that have become men and will go on to live" lives of consequence" and will draw on their success as a team in future endeavors in life. That is what  competing as a student athlete at Hobart is about. You have raised the standard of achievement in sports at Hobart, but more importantly learned how to succeed as a team in life. For the seniors, Hold your heads high and take your place as Football alums and root on those that remain.GO BART in 2013! 

[boobyhasgameyo]

Hobart had a very similar playoff outing to Fisher last year when you look at it.  2 playoff wins (though both of their wins were against out of region opponents where Fisher beat an east team and a south team) and both had ugly ends in Minnesota against St. Thomas.  That wasn't our best game against them either, but if it happens enough times...maybe we'd always get that impression but it's actually more of a case that St. Thomas is just that much better.  Who knows.  I was hoping Hobart would perform significantly better than Fisher given how last year went with Wesley combined with the fact St. Thomas was depleted and their freaking amazing WR who single handedly killed Fisher graduated.  But maybe the tiers of the past couple of years go 1) Mount Union and UWW until this season  2) UMHB and St. Thomas 3) Wesley and Linfield 4) A lot of other strong teams including where you will find some of the best eastern squads.   

Good season Hobart.  No shame in 12-1. 

By the way I am going to go out on a limb and say the championship game will be St. Thomas vs. Mount Union.  If that is the case, and if memory serves, St. Thomas is another purple jersey squad right?  It's clear to me that if Fisher wants to become a truly elite team they need to abandon the cardinal and become the Barneys or something.  Either that or do what I've been saying for years and do something to make yourself unique and that really stands out.  Paint the field Maroon!  Be like Boise State.  That will attract recruits. 

[HScoach]

skunks, if i did not have a prior commitment with some really good friends i would surely take you up on that offer.  i think you will have a game next week.  mount looked bored early, not so next week i figure.  bailey is really goood, but wesley had many chances to win the game.  with oshkosh beating linfield, looks like the winner next week wins it.  i will be at the stagg, you making it this year if mount does?

I'm not so sure about that.  Oshkosh will have an advantage in having played Mount the last 2 years to open the season.  Much like UWW was, they will not be in awe of playing Mount. 

[Frank Rossi]

Not a good showing in my opinion.  What signature win did the east win?  And against the #1 seeds then best of the east were not competitive.

Not saying region isn't solid overall, but it severely lacks elite teams.

This would make more sense if the following wasn't the breakdown of today's participants:

East - 2
South - 2
West - 3
North - 1

If the North is going to live and die by the fortunes of Mount Union every year, then I question the logic of undercutting the East to that degree today.

[pg04]

One could - I am not necessarily doing so - argue that the "strength" of North Central's one win  (over #8) is more impressive than anything either Hobart or Widener did. I think outside of UMU, only the CCIW is really formidible.

[Mr. Ypsi]

One could - I am not necessarily doing so - argue that the "strength" of North Central's one win  (over #8) is more impressive than anything either Hobart or Widener did. I think outside of UMU, only the CCIW is really formidible.

Just to add to that, Elmhurst (probably the third best team in the CCIW) lost to St. Thomas last week by THIRTY THREE points less than Hobart did.

[emma17]

Not a good showing in my opinion.  What signature win did the east win?  And against the #1 seeds then best of the east were not competitive.

Not saying region isn't solid overall, but it severely lacks elite teams.

This would make more sense if the following wasn't the breakdown of today's participants:

East - 2
South - 2
West - 3
North - 1

If the North is going to live and die by the fortunes of Mount Union every year, then I question the logic of undercutting the East to that degree today.

Frank, I appreciate your defense of the East region playoff teams.  But you seem to give no attention to the fact that the two East region teams lost by a combined total of 95 points.  I'm not knocking the East region as quite honestly, I don't know much about them being from the midwest.  But 95 points in the third round is simply too much of a disparity and shouldn't happen this deep in the playoffs.  The simple fact that the East had two teams in the third round isn't proof of their ability to play at the highest level- it's purely a function of who they played to get this far. 
I hope the East does produce a top tier team, it's good for D3 football.

[boobyhasgameyo]

Not a good showing in my opinion.  What signature win did the east win?  And against the #1 seeds then best of the east were not competitive.

Not saying region isn't solid overall, but it severely lacks elite teams.

This would make more sense if the following wasn't the breakdown of today's participants:

East - 2
South - 2
West - 3
North - 1

If the North is going to live and die by the fortunes of Mount Union every year, then I question the logic of undercutting the East to that degree today.

Frank, I appreciate your defense of the East region playoff teams.  But you seem to give no attention to the fact that the two East region teams lost by a combined total of 95 points.  I'm not knocking the East region as quite honestly, I don't know much about them being from the midwest.  But 95 points in the third round is simply too much of a disparity and shouldn't happen this deep in the playoffs.  The simple fact that the East had two teams in the third round isn't proof of their ability to play at the highest level- it's purely a function of who they played to get this far. 
I hope the East does produce a top tier team, it's good for D3 football.

Yeah and Hobart played against a Southern region team and a Northern region team to get there.  The east clearly doesn't have a team that can compete with the top 5 or 6 teams in the country.  But spare us on the strength of the regions as a whole which cannot be dictated by the presence (or lack thereof) of a couple elite teams in each region. 

[wesleydad]

Not a good showing in my opinion.  What signature win did the east win?  And against the #1 seeds then best of the east were not competitive.

Not saying region isn't solid overall, but it severely lacks elite teams.

This would make more sense if the following wasn't the breakdown of today's participants:

East - 2
South - 2
West - 3
North - 1

If the North is going to live and die by the fortunes of Mount Union every year, then I question the logic of undercutting the East to that degree today.

Frank, I appreciate your defense of the East region playoff teams.  But you seem to give no attention to the fact that the two East region teams lost by a combined total of 95 points.  I'm not knocking the East region as quite honestly, I don't know much about them being from the midwest.  But 95 points in the third round is simply too much of a disparity and shouldn't happen this deep in the playoffs.  The simple fact that the East had two teams in the third round isn't proof of their ability to play at the highest level- it's purely a function of who they played to get this far. 
I hope the East does produce a top tier team, it's good for D3 football.

Yeah and Hobart played against a Southern region team and a Northern region team to get there.  The east clearly doesn't have a team that can compete with the top 5 or 6 teams in the country.  But spare us on the strength of the regions as a whole which cannot be dictated by the presence (or lack thereof) of a couple elite teams in each region.

good points all.  as i see it, all this says is that the east does not currently nor recently had an elite, top 4 team.  i believed that from the middle of the season there was a large gap between the top 6 and the rest of the nation.  yesterday's results sort of confirm that.  #1 beats #9 by 50+, #4 beats #7 by 30 +, #2 beats #6 by 12, and #5 beats #3 in ot.  i dont think that either hobart or widener were considered top 10 teams at the start of the season but earned that ranking by how they played during the season.  the fact that both ended up in the top 10 is as much due to other presumed better teams losing while they kept winning.  i was surprised by the hobart result, not so of the widener one.  as was stated, who from the north has made the semis other than mount in the last 5 years?  the south has had wesley or umhb but no one else.  the west seems to be the best with several others besides uww.  i get to see plenty of east games since that is where i live and they have some pretty good teams, just not at the elite level.  take away mount and would the north be any different?

[HScoach]

Frank:  I appreciate your unwavering support for all things east, but I never said the whole region sucks.  Just that they currently lack teams that can compete with the top tier.  I strongly believe NCC's win over Cal Lutheran and a pretty competitive game against Linfield is better than Widener beating BWater St & Salisbury before getting drilled by Mount.   Ask the Whitewater guys about the strength of the 2010 NCC team that almost derailed their championship run.  Some of them believe that NCC was better than the Mount team they would beat in Salem.  And Wheaton has been a very good North Region team.  They lost to Mount in the semi-finals of 2008, but were competitive.  And I believe they've only ever lost 1 playoff game to any other team than Mount.  Wheaton is a good team that has always been a tough out.  If they'd have gotten the Pool C instead of BWater, I would bet my left nut that they'd have won their part of the bracket and been at Mount yesterday instead of Widener.

At least when SJF in 2006 and previously Rowan came to Mount, they were very competitive and made Mount play for 4 quarters.  Widener and the recent East teams (Montclair St, Albright, Alfred, Del Valley, Hobart, Cortland St) have not been real close.  Not saying you need to beat Mount to get my respect, just be competitive beyond halftime.  Or at least make the game be in doubt as we head to halftime.


And I completely understand the belief that the OAC is nothing but Mount Union and a bunch of crap teams.  However the 2nd place OAC team has done quite well in the playoff and usually wins until it sees Mount again. 

OAC losses to Mount in the playoffs:
2006 - Capital lost to Mount in Round 3 (2 wins)
2005 - Capital lost to Mount in the Round 3 (2 wins)
2002  -  John Carroll  lost to Mount in the SEMI-FINALS (3 wins)
2000  - Ohio Northern lost to Mount in Round 1 (0 wins)
1999 - Ohio Northern lost to Mount in Round 2 (1 win)
1997 –  John Carroll lost to Mount in Round 2 (1 win)

OAC losses against someone else:
Baldwin Wallace to Wheaton in 2nd round of 2003 (1 win)
Capital at Whitewater in Round 1 of 2007 (UWW was Nat Champs) (0 wins)
Otterbein to Franklin in 2008 round 1 (Franklin beat NCC in 2nd round, lost to Wheaton in regional final) (0 wins)
Heidelberg this year to Wittenberg (easily the worst of the OAC losses) (0 wins)

Overall, the 2nd place OAC team is a respectable 9-10 in the playoffs.  I challenge you to find another conference where their Pool C teams have a drastically better record.  Remove their losses to Mount, they're a very respectable 9-4.

[boobyhasgameyo]

Frank:  I appreciate your unwavering support for all things east, but I never said the whole region sucks.  Just that they currently lack teams that can compete with the top tier.  I strongly believe NCC's win over Cal Lutheran and a pretty competitive game against Linfield is better than Widener beating BWater St & Salisbury before getting drilled by Mount.   Ask the Whitewater guys about the strength of the 2010 NCC team that almost derailed their championship run.  Some of them believe that NCC was better than the Mount team they would beat in Salem.  And Wheaton has been a very good North Region team.  They lost to Mount in the semi-finals of 2008, but were competitive.  And I believe they've only ever lost 1 playoff game to any other team than Mount.  Wheaton is a good team that has always been a tough out.  If they'd have gotten the Pool C instead of BWater, I would bet my left nut that they'd have won their part of the bracket and been at Mount yesterday instead of Widener.

At least when SJF in 2006 and previously Rowan came to Mount, they were very competitive and made Mount play for 4 quarters.  Widener and the recent East teams (Montclair St, Albright, Alfred, Del Valley, Hobart, Cortland St) have not been real close.  Not saying you need to beat Mount to get my respect, just be competitive beyond halftime.  Or at least make the game be in doubt as we head to halftime.


And I completely understand the belief that the OAC is nothing but Mount Union and a bunch of crap teams.  However the 2nd place OAC team has done quite well in the playoff and usually wins until it sees Mount again. 

OAC losses to Mount in the playoffs:
2006 - Capital lost to Mount in Round 3 (2 wins)
2005 - Capital lost to Mount in the Round 3 (2 wins)
2002  -  John Carroll  lost to Mount in the SEMI-FINALS (3 wins)
2000  - Ohio Northern lost to Mount in Round 1 (0 wins)
1999 - Ohio Northern lost to Mount in Round 2 (1 win)
1997 –  John Carroll lost to Mount in Round 2 (1 win)

OAC losses against someone else:
Baldwin Wallace to Wheaton in 2nd round of 2003 (1 win)
Capital at Whitewater in Round 1 of 2007 (UWW was Nat Champs) (0 wins)
Otterbein to Franklin in 2008 round 1 (Franklin beat NCC in 2nd round, lost to Wheaton in regional final) (0 wins)
Heidelberg this year to Wittenberg (easily the worst of the OAC losses) (0 wins)

Overall, the 2nd place OAC team is a respectable 9-10 in the playoffs.  I challenge you to find another conference where their Pool C teams have a drastically better record.  Remove their losses to Mount, they're a very respectable 9-4.

Well shoot remove Fisher's losses to Mount Union and we are 8-2   

I would be curious to see what the E8's pool C record is (I honestly don't know if it's good or bad).  I am far too lazy to do the research however. 

[Upstate]

Going off top of my head I think the E8 has had 4 pool C bids...

Fisher
2006: 3-1 (Union, SC, Rowan, MUC)
2007: 2-1 (Bart, Curry, MUC)
2011: 2-1 (Hopkins, DVC, STU)

Ithaca
2007: 0-1 (MUC)

Take out Mt Union and the E8 is 7-1 in pool C play...

[Frank Rossi]

I don't think I singled out the OAC, so I'm not sure where that came from.  That said, if the dipstick is competitiveness against Mount Union, I think I remember just one scare since ONU beat Mount in 2005 in the school's entire OAC schedule (63 games in 7 years).  So, if you're asking me to use that as the end-all, be-all indicator, then you're really not convincing me of much.  That said, that's not how I derive relative strength since comparing results against Mount doesn't give you much statistical significance.  For instance, Widener yesterday tied the most points scored against Mount this season.  That must mean they have one of the most potent offenses in the country, right?  Hmmmm... That's the trouble you get in when you try to compare losses of 55 against losses of 25 -- it doesn't prove much.

I actually had a few OAC teams besides Mount in my ballot this season (BW, Ott, Heid).  So, I don't discount the strength overall.  However, what you're trying to focus in on is consistency -- and neither region (Mount excluded) has shown much of it.  What you're grasping at is the idea that there are a couple teams that showed glimmers of hope in the last five years in the North (Wheaton, NCC, etc.).  That begs the question:  since regions average 7-8 teams per year in the playoffs and the first two rounds generally have in-region matchups, didn't SOMEBODY have to win from the North and the East in those years?  Until last year, the regional crossover in the playoffs wasn't much to speak of, especially early on.  Since that crossover began, the East hasn't done terribly -- and if you toss out Mount in the analysis, I believe the East outperformed the North in these two years (it's either on par or better based on my quick glimpse).

I stick to my original statements yesterday -- no verdict can be drawn from yesterday about the overall relative strength from the East any more than the verdicts we've tried to reach in prior years.  My statement goes a step further, though, in saying that since the regional crossovers began last year, the East hasn't exactly, as LD would put it, dropped the deuce.  Once we get beyond Wesley, UMHB, Mount, UWW, Linfield and St. Thomas most years, there's not exactly much ability to spot the level of consistency.  The problem that we're spotting is that there is no East team in that pack of 6.  My response would be that the West was not as stacked as stated there a decade ago, so things do change as teams get better.  In five years, this conversation will be held in another region's message boards because things do change, as pointed out by another poster concerning the Rowan era.

[HScoach]

Frank:  I know you didn't bring up the OAC specifically, but was in general by others recently and I stuck that info into my response to you simply because I was too lazy to go hunting for posts that questioned it.  Sorry for going off on a tangent.

I guess we're both arguing the same thing, just saying it different ways and in turn, going in circles.   The East is lacking elite teams that can compete with the best of the West, North and South.  Get past the very top and I think all the regions are competitive.

Where I think we disagree is that the North has had teams really close to the top tier (Wheaton & NCC), whereas the East hasn't since Rowan.