The Top 10 Eastern Region teams of the D3football.com Era

[pg04]

If the people participating on this thread want to exclude them just to save us all the hassle of having arguments where there's not enough data to compare them, I completely understand, however.

Agreed.  Hence why they were put in the Honorable mention and not top 10 of my poll...

[K-Mack]

I guess my point is since the NESCAC wants to be separate, why give them the kudos of votes in the D3.com poll?

Generally speaking, we don't. But the theory for including them would be strangely akin to the theory behind the top 25 as a whole: To attempt to identify the 25 best teams in Division III.

As long as they are in Division III (and that might not be all that long), there's an argument for it being a worthwhile pursuit.

This is one voter that doesn't vote for the NESCAC.  If all their sports programs refused to compete in the NCAA playoffs, it would be admirable.  Singling out football smacks of hypocrisy.

Secondly they offer no actual proof that they can compete on a National level.

See, I don't think that's right, to make up your mind to never vote for a NESCAC team. That smacks of bitterness. And there's no actual proof they can't compete.

When we first ranked conferences way back when, we had the NESCAC pretty low, based partly on the strength of the other New England football teams and the East as a whole at that time. And partly it was based on what we thought.

I got an e-mail that opened my mind on it, saying that NESCAC compete for athletes that have a chance to play Division I-AA and II, which is true of a lot of Division III schools and conferences. NESCAC schools often compete nationally in other sports (though I really only count basketball in the non-country-club test) and are in well-organized athletic departments backed by well-funded boosters. They have facilities comparable to other similarly-sized institutions.

Finally, I asked Pat to pay to send me to a game between top NESCAC teams so we could give it the old eye test. And while that's a rather small sample size to go on, if I had seen anything extraordinarily crappy, it wouldn't take but a short time to find out.

Pat has seen both NEFC and NESCAC as recently as last season. Maybe he could speak more authoritatively on the subject.

Point is, in subsequent conference rankings, even though we'd seen a few games ourselves, we felt like it was wiser just to not rank them. Because there just isn't enough to go on, especially since playoff performance and non-conference record are major factors in our conference rankings. So in essence, Pat and I both agree with all of you.

But, when it comes to listing the teams I think are the 25 best in the country, I think I have enough to consider the NESCAC same as I consider all the other conferences. If other voters don't, that's fine.

Anyway, I don't want to beat this any further into the ground, but I just don't get around to these parts of the board that often and wanted to respond to as much as I could while I had time.

[K-Mack]

I just don't understand the point of the rule.  Was it originally based on some kind of "like minded institution" logic?  That seems like it would easily be thrown out the window given their success in other sports where they beat schools with different admissions philosophies.  So why just football?

Been dying to get the NESCAC presidents (who apparently make the final call) on record with this, but the one year I actually started researching the story, about 4-5 presidents had been on the job a year or less, meaning they basically were likely just doing what had always been done and hadn't been involved in the decision-making process 

I'm to the point where I think there are other stories that deserve our attention, but that doesn't mean we should pretend NESCAC doesn't exist (kinda makes us the bigger men though, since they pretend we all don't)

I agree it's Ivy-influenced, and I also think it's silly (I trot this out in the 'playoffs would never work in I-A arguments too) to say playoffs take up too much time since only 1/9 of them would have to worry about it, and maybe for an extra week or two, max.

Although in my conversation with Gennaro Leo in the article linked back on p. 12, he made a very convincing case for getting the season over with.

And in all honestly, a lot of us played seasons where the playoffs were not an option. So I sort of respect the ol' regular season means everything/enjoy the games/know that the last week is the last week theories.

Still, nothing beats playoffs. This will not be debated.

That means you Herbstreit, Corso and May. Stop with the Plus-1 BS.

[Ralph Turner]

K-Mack, I think that we need to include baseball, ice hockey, track and field, volleyball   and cross country in the non-country-club sports for the NESCAC.

Remember the D-1 CWS in 2003 when Stanford and Rice squared off.  Those SAT's were pretty good there.

[K-Mack]

K-Mack, I think that we need to include baseball, ice hockey, track and field, volleyball   and cross country in the non-country-club sports for the NESCAC.

Remember the D-1 CWS in 2003 when Stanford and Rice squared off.  Those SAT's were pretty good there.

Yes, I didn't mean to imply that there were no other non-country club sports. I just meant I use football and basketball as a quick test to determine whether or not I can say School X is good at sports besides "country club" sports.

It is certainly not a scientific or even a very reliable test, but it is fast and available on the D3Sports.com network!

(adds baseball to test)

[frank uible]

My guess is that the majority of those wonderful international-quality Brazilian futebol players originate from the City of God and other favelas and not any country club.

[lewdogg11]

Holy Crap!!!  I just had to hop in the Delorean, take a trip back a while, and hop into the reflection room to remember what I typed in some of those messages.  1.21 Jigawatts!!!

And just for the record, my Boise State example did not smell particularly bad.  My comparison was that no one knew if they could be considered a top tier team, or just a really solid program vs. good (not great) competition.  You argue they were hanging with and beating power conference teams long before 2006.  Look it up.  Well, I looked it up...

2002
Record:  12-1
Notable Wins:  Utah State  63-38, Hawaii 58-31, Fresno State 67-21, Iowa St 34-16
Loss:  Arkansas 41-14
No real standout teams beat here.  Other than putting major points ont he board...

2003
Record:  12-1
Notable Wins:  BYU 50-12, Fresno State 31-17, Hawaii 45-28, # 19 TCU 34-31
Loss:  Oregon State 26-24
Again, nothing blowing me away here other than some of their offensive point totals.

2004
Record:  11-1
Notable Wins:  Oregon State 53-34, BYU 28-27, Fresno State 33-16, Hawaii 69-3, San Jose State 56-49, Nevada 58-21
Loss:  Bowl Game vs. #7 Louisville 44-40
Same thing.  Only ranked team they played(Louisville) they lost to.  And Louisville isn't in the same category as other top programs.

2005
Record:  9-4
Notable Wins:  San Jose State 38-21, Utah State 45-21
Losses:  #13 Georgia 48-13, Oregon State 30-27, #20 Fresno State 27-7, #18 Boston College 27-21
Can't beat a ranked team.  Hmmm.  Still sounds like a solid program.  But not a top tier.  And if they didn't add Georgia, and get BC in the bowl game, you would question how good they are...

2006
Record:  13-0
Notable Wins:  Oregon State 42-14, Hawaii 41-34, Utah 36-3, Fresno State 45-21, San Jose State 23-20, #11 Oklahoma 43-42
Losses:  None
FInally ran the table.  FInally beat a ranked team, albeit a #11 Oklahoma who was suspect to begin with.  Still made a name for themselves, FINALLY, as potentially being able to play with the big boys.

The point is, there is no point.  Boise State has looked amazing on TV for many years.  But they are showing 1 win of real quality, and it just happens to be their last game played at this point.

Some NESCAC teams look really good, really put together, very crisp, very athletic.  But they don't even have the losses to good(not great) programs outside of their conference.

Rowan LOOKED like they would beat Pacific Lutheran by 70 points in 1999.  The scoreboard showed differently.  Where the NESCAC top teams fall are nothing more than a guess, so if you want to rank them, break out your magic 8 ball, pull straws, flip coins...whatever you have to do.  It's all suspect, so why bother arguing about how good they are?

['gro]

LD, that is an all time great post. High ranks for comedy, actual knowledge, fact finding, it was the total package. Rich and compelling.

K-mack, appreciate your knowledge on the subject, and we know that you cover all the boards... but man, why come in so late with all that extra analysis?  Please don't let us find you outside the ESPN offices in september casting your vote for "who's now?". Also, I am a big fan of your midnight and later drive by postings... how do you do it?

[JT]

This is one voter that doesn't vote for the NESCAC.  If all their sports programs refused to compete in the NCAA playoffs, it would be admirable.  Singling out football smacks of hypocrisy.

Secondly they offer no actual proof that they can compete on a National level.

See, I don't think that's right, to make up your mind to never vote for a NESCAC team. That smacks of bitterness. And there's no actual proof they can't compete.

I'll resolve to keep an open mind going forward.  I wish they'd play out-of-conference, so I can get a feel for the league year in and out.  Future webcasts might help.

[Senor RedTackle]

Where do the 1992-94 RPI teams rank in this poll.....you know, the ones w/ Redtackle dominating the line of scrimmage?? ECAC playoff berths meant more back then!!

[lewdogg11]

Where do the 1992-94 RPI teams rank in this poll.....you know, the ones w/ Redtackle dominating the line of scrimmage?? ECAC playoff berths meant more back then!!

Somewhere in between Williams, Trinity, Mount Union, Becker, and Boise St.

[K-Mack]

Some NESCAC teams look really good, really put together, very crisp, very athletic.  But they don't even have the losses to good (not great) programs outside of their conference.

Rowan LOOKED like they would beat Pacific Lutheran by 70 points in 1999.  The scoreboard showed differently.  Where the NESCAC top teams fall are nothing more than a guess, so if you want to rank them, break out your magic 8 ball, pull straws, flip coins...whatever you have to do.  It's all suspect, so why bother arguing about how good they are?

Why bother?

Well, shi-, uh, er, shoot ... if that's your point, why bother posting here at all? Opinions, bias and subjectivity are a message board's foundation.

Like I said earlier, everything's suspect -- people argue all kinds of shoulda, coulda, wouldas from 'if he hadn't been injured' to 'if that game hadn't been on turf' -- so why stop when we get to the NESCAC?

If you don't want to consider the NESCAC possibilities, fine ... but why you want to censor opinions that other people may or may not care to hear is beyond me.

At least you broke out a Marty McFly reference for that, er, butt.

[K-Mack]

K-mack, appreciate your knowledge on the subject, and we know that you cover all the boards... but man, why come in so late with all that extra analysis?  Please don't let us find you outside the ESPN offices in september casting your vote for "who's now?". Also, I am a big fan of your midnight and later drive by postings ... how do you do it?

Real easy. I work 6 p.m.-2 a.m., so midnight is like 3 p.m. to me.

I come in late on discussions because I just click the little tab that takes me to that last post I made on the board ... whether or not it was weeks ago is irrelevant to me, at least in the offseason. If people care to revive the discussion, they will, if not, they'll skim/skip.

It helps when I'm bored and it's a slow day at work.

Now you guys know how I got the nickname "TiVo" among my fantasy league crew.

Who's Now? ... I don't really see that happening 

[K-Mack]

The North might be a little hard to compile 

True.  It would probably be a pretty anticlimactic process focused more on which Mount Union team was the best.  I'm not sure how much fans of other schools would enjoy that.

What? The race for the 10th spot would be all kinds of exciting.

Would it be a Mount Union non-national champion, or would it be some team a national champion MUC eliminated along the way

(revives more old stuff; catches up slowly)

[K-Mack]

And that's it folks!!    Thanks for the discussions and have at it on the first two picks...

Thanks for D3football.com for most of the stats!

Honorable Mention Teams:

Trinity 2003   8-0
Trinity 2004   8-0
Trinity 2005   8-0
Ithaca 2003   10-3
Springfield 2000   11-2
Springfield 2006   10-2
Union 2005   11-1
Rowan 2004   10-3
Montclair 2003 9-2
RPI 2001 8-1

As For the Trinity Teams, they were considered but as people have recently mentioned, I don't think it would be fair to put them in the top 10 without playing anyone in the east or being in the playoffs.

As For Widener, if they were included, probably would have been in the top 5.  However, I had already started this and had my teams set before they were brought into the discussion. 

Overall, I hope you enjoyed all this and continue discussions.

I am currently thinking about possibly doing another Top 10 topic soon (Not Right away, However). 

Hey ... Just caught up, and thought of a new excuse: I only have time to read when I'm not swamped with Kickoff '07 stuff ... solid, solid work.

I might have some room for this kind of "fan analysis" in Around the Nation ... let me holler at the guru. Of course, who needs the big time when you've got the LL board to impress?