East Region Fan Poll

[Bombers798891]

In a one point road loss where the losing team outgained the winner by 45%, I'll naturally think the losing team was a better team that got beat.

I'm looking at the Cortland-Montclair boxscore and I don't see what you see.

http://d3football.com/seasons/2011/boxscores/20111008_hrvs.xml

Cortland: 294 passing yards + 136 rushing yards = 430 total yards
Montclair: 259 passing yards + 151 rushing yards = 410 total yards

If my math is right, this is about a 5% difference, not 45%

[RedDragonFan]

I agree with LD on this one, and removing Kean from the equation now, that the fact that Cortland now has two losses in the league and that Montclair has zero, I just have no idea how Cortland can be ranked ahead of Montclair, especially with Montclair winning the H2H match-up.

What makes football great compared to other sports, in my opinion, is the fact that the head to head match ups are so important.  Every game single matters.  I mean, if MUC had two similar losses to Cortland this season in their league where there was a perceived (although probably real) domination of their opponents in every aspect of the game except the scoreboard...they would still be on the outside looking in come playoff time.  You only get one shot at a team...nothing else really, truly matters...which is why H2H match-ups is the first tie-breaker, and always will be.

And clandfan, Cortland may be better than they were in 2010...but unlike 2010, they didn't get it done when they had to, and their "poor" season doesn't simply break down to 2 plays. 

- Let's take a look at the Kean game first, where you mentioned a failed 4th and goal at the Kean 2 yard line.  What about the previous 3 plays?  Cortland has a 1st and Goal at the 5 yard line, and then proceeded to run the ball for no gain on 1st down.  Then Cortland ran it again for 3 yards on 2nd down.  On third down it said Pitcher had a run/gain for no yards...so either it was a draw or he scrambled after dropping back.  Next was the incomplete pass on 4th and 2.  Good or great teams find a way to score...at home...with a first and goal at the 5 yard line...not complain that a failed 4th and 2 cost them the game.  Honestly...in that situation, I give all the credit in the world to the Kean defense.

- Now for Montclair...yes...there appears to have been "blown" coverage on Montclair's final drive to the tune of a 41 yards that set up the final FG that ultimately won the game for Montclair.  Or...it could have just been a great play/call going deep on 3rd and 4 at their own 42...it all depends on which sideline you are rooting for.   But the question that should be asked is why didn't Cortland respond after the FG?  You are acting like that FG was the final play of the game...but in reality, there was 1:16 remaining on the clock.  After the KO, Cortland had the ball at their own 37 yard line and 1:11 left to play, down by 1 point.  Going a little over 40 yards to get a shot at a 35 yard FG in just over one minute is not unheard of.  But how did Cortland respond?  A scramble by Pitcher, followed by 3 straight incomplete passes.  Also...I would challenge you that Cortland was lucky to get back in the game after being down 31-14 late in the 3rd.  What about getting a safety late in the game to put you up 33-31, and then getting the ball back on the KO at about the 50 with just under 5 minutes to go and a chance to run out the clock?  Again...good or great teams find a way to get that done...and Cortland didn't.

I am actually not ripping Cortland here...they were my preseason #1, and are still ranked in my top 10 despite two early losses where they had a chance to win both games on multiple occasions and failed to do so.  But let's not pretend that their "poor" season breaks down to 2 plays.  Teams that are "better" than they were the year before (when they made the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament) find ways to win both of those games when presented with multiple opportunities.  Personally though...I hope Montclair runs the table now so that we have a chance to keep MUC out of the East.

As much as my heart wants to agree with Clandfan, I do agree with Yanks.  While two plays going different would have changed the outcome to wins for Cortland, they didn't and Cortland had not just those two but multiple, good, solid opportunities to win the games. Cortland is no doubt a strong team and can compete at high levels but they needed to finish those two games. Yanks is right, the Montclair game they needed to run out the clock and didn't and Kean, at home no less, they didn't get it done 4 plays from the 5.  They had the opportunites and needed to find a way and didn't. 

[SJFF82]

Are you voter #1?  Everyone has pretty much fessed up but voter 1

If everyone is so interested, yes, I am the stubborn as hell voter #1.  I like to try and stay out of the "parsing every ballot" discussions since I don't want to keep anyone from joining in the future for fear they'll have to spend hours discussing why they placed each team where they did.  We've had a hard enough time getting 7 voters this year!

But feel free to say Kaz is a d-bag rather than voter #1 from now on.

No one is calling anyone a d-bag, minus maybe Charles...

It's just interesting how you had 2 teams behind Cortland that both beat them.  It's not wrong, it just didn't make a heck of a lot of sense to a few people.  Especially since both(Kean/Montclair) were undefeated at the time.  Now that Kean has lost to a previous 0 win Brockport(although they've played pretty much every team close), I can understand it.  I like to rank the teams on a week by week basis rather than trying to stay static and guess what the end of the year will look like.  In that case, we could just keep our pre-season polls and talk about it at the end of the year.

or in this case....we can just objectively rank teams by their record, PF, PA and any other objective statistics we want to plug in, instead of using our subjective opinions.

[AUKaz00]

In a one point road loss where the losing team outgained the winner by 45%, I'll naturally think the losing team was a better team that got beat.

I'm looking at the Cortland-Montclair boxscore and I don't see what you see.

http://d3football.com/seasons/2011/boxscores/20111008_hrvs.xml

Cortland: 294 passing yards + 136 rushing yards = 430 total yards
Montclair: 259 passing yards + 151 rushing yards = 410 total yards

If my math is right, this is about a 5% difference, not 45%

Weird.  Somehow I ended up on the Rowan-Cortland boxscore.  Sorry about that.

[Frank Rossi]

Let me be more blunt about the Cortland effect:

2010:

9/11 at Kean * •  W, 24-12  BX RC 
9/18 vs. Buffalo State * •  W, 35-7  BX RC 
9/25 at Western Connecticut * •  W, 45-0  BX RC 
10/2 at New Jersey * •  W, 37-0  BX RC 
10/9 vs. Brockport State * •  W, 35-0  BX RC 
10/16 at Rowan * •  L, 20-17   
10/23 at Morrisville State * •  W, 42-6  BX 
10/30 vs. Montclair State * •  W, 10-9  BX RC 
11/6 vs. William Paterson * •  W, 38-7  BX RC 
11/13 vs. Ithaca •  W, 20-17  BX RC 
11/20 vs. Endicott  W, 49-35  BX RC 
11/27 vs. Alfred  L, 34-20  BX RC RC 

2011:

9/3 vs. Buffalo State * •  W, 28-12  BX RC 
9/17 vs. Kean * •  L, 21-16  BX RC RC 
9/24 at Rowan * •  W, 31-28  BX RC 
10/1 vs. Morrisville State * •  W, 55-14  BX RC 
10/8 at Montclair State * •  L, 34-33  BX RC 
10/15 at Western Connecticut * •  W, 56-10  BX 

We're not just talking about 2 plays, and even if Cortland were undefeated, I would not be feeling comfortable about making a statement that the team is better than or as good as they were in 2010.  The team has taken a step back this year, and the scores alone are pointing to that, let alone the W/L record.  I am not impressed by the body of work so far, even if we were talking about a 5-1 team right now.  Montclair has not won impressively for the most part, but their play has been a helluva lot more consistent than this list of games shows.

[Bombers798891]

Let me be more blunt about the Cortland effect:

2010:

9/11 at Kean * •  W, 24-12  BX RC 
9/18 vs. Buffalo State * •  W, 35-7  BX RC 
9/25 at Western Connecticut * •  W, 45-0  BX RC 
10/2 at New Jersey * •  W, 37-0  BX RC 
10/9 vs. Brockport State * •  W, 35-0  BX RC 
10/16 at Rowan * •  L, 20-17   
10/23 at Morrisville State * •  W, 42-6  BX 
10/30 vs. Montclair State * •  W, 10-9  BX RC 
11/6 vs. William Paterson * •  W, 38-7  BX RC 
11/13 vs. Ithaca •  W, 20-17  BX RC 
11/20 vs. Endicott  W, 49-35  BX RC 
11/27 vs. Alfred  L, 34-20  BX RC RC 

2011:

9/3 vs. Buffalo State * •  W, 28-12  BX RC 
9/17 vs. Kean * •  L, 21-16  BX RC RC 
9/24 at Rowan * •  W, 31-28  BX RC 
10/1 vs. Morrisville State * •  W, 55-14  BX RC 
10/8 at Montclair State * •  L, 34-33  BX RC 
10/15 at Western Connecticut * •  W, 56-10  BX 

We're not just talking about 2 plays, and even if Cortland were undefeated, I would not be feeling comfortable about making a statement that the team is better than or as good as they were in 2010.  The team has taken a step back this year, and the scores alone are pointing to that, let alone the W/L record.  I am not impressed by the body of work so far, even if we were talking about a 5-1 team right now.  Montclair has not won impressively for the most part, but their play has been a helluva lot more consistent than this list of games shows.

Turnovers. It's all about the turnovers. Nothing else explains it.

The rush defense is better--opponents are averaging 2.3 yards per carry, as opposed to the 2.7 last season. The pass defense is better--opponents have a 52.7% completion percentage, 9.2 yards per catch and a 95.4 rating, as opposed to the 55.7%, 11.6 YPC and 115.5 rating, they had last season. Cortland's sack totals are up as well, with 18 through six games, as opposed to the 31 in 12 games last year. The red zone defense is allowing TD's at the same rate (50%) than last year

Cortland's running backs are down a bit--averaging 4.1 yards a carry as opposed to 4.6 last season. But, the passing game is much better, completing 60.8% of its' passes, at 14.9 yards a catch for a 161.4 rating, as opposed to last season's 55.1%, 11.4 YPC and 120.4 rating. The sacks are down, as Cortland's only allowed four in six games, after allowing 18 last season. The offense has been much better in the red zone

Cortland's offense is actually scoring 5.5 more points a game this season. The defense is allowing 7.6 more, but almost all of their statistics are as good or better. Except for turnovers.

Last season, Cortland forced 34 in 12 games, nearly three a game. This year? Six in six. That's a huge difference, and it's really the only major difference. (Cortland's special teams are a little weaker, and it cost them the Kean game, but still) Last year, Cortland picked off 21 passes. This year? Three.

That's a lot of interceptions turning into incompletions, keeping drives alive, and allowing a team more opportunities to score.

This is exactly what happened with Ithaca. First five weeks, they force 18 turnovers, and the defense looks otherwordly. Last week? One, and they get shredded.

I know you're an evidence guy Frank, so I know you'll appreciate it

[clandfan]

Frank, with all due respect, all you can legitimately say is their record is not as good as last year's.  You fail to consider that the comparison of point differentials that you use as evidence are possibly reflective of the bottom being stronger, not the top being weaker.  I actually saw Buff St....much improved.  Ask Montclair if Morrisville is improved.  Ask Kean if Brockport is improved.  There is even greater parity in the NJAC...it is our curse.  The top echelon still beat the lower echelon but the gap is narrowing. 

You aren't impressed with the body of work for any of us in the NJAC..what is the body of work?  We only play each other...Cortland, at least has played the upper echelon teams and has performed better statistically than those teams who have only played the lower echelon.  Kean, Rowan, Montclair all have to play each other yet.  Cortland's loss to Kean is now even worse you would have us believe.  Kean is somehow now defined by their loss to Brockport as opposed to their win over Wesley.  Will we see Wesley now drop in the poll due to their loss to lowly Kean?   

I am sure that someone will point to my bias and I certainly have one or I wouldn't be wasting my time defending my team.  But bias or not, I have actually seen Kean, Montclair, Rowan, Buff St., Morrisville and I have seen Cortland for the past umpteen years.  Cortland is an overall stronger team than last year, the bottom of the league (except for West. Conn) is stronger...the NJAC is stronger.  Crunch the numbers as you will.  I will stick by my opinion. Cortland's record is an underestimate of their ability.

[clandfan]

Let me be more blunt about the Cortland effect:

2010:

9/11 at Kean * •  W, 24-12  BX RC 
9/18 vs. Buffalo State * •  W, 35-7  BX RC 
9/25 at Western Connecticut * •  W, 45-0  BX RC 
10/2 at New Jersey * •  W, 37-0  BX RC 
10/9 vs. Brockport State * •  W, 35-0  BX RC 
10/16 at Rowan * •  L, 20-17   
10/23 at Morrisville State * •  W, 42-6  BX 
10/30 vs. Montclair State * •  W, 10-9  BX RC 
11/6 vs. William Paterson * •  W, 38-7  BX RC 
11/13 vs. Ithaca •  W, 20-17  BX RC 
11/20 vs. Endicott  W, 49-35  BX RC 
11/27 vs. Alfred  L, 34-20  BX RC RC 

2011:

9/3 vs. Buffalo State * •  W, 28-12  BX RC 
9/17 vs. Kean * •  L, 21-16  BX RC RC 
9/24 at Rowan * •  W, 31-28  BX RC 
10/1 vs. Morrisville State * •  W, 55-14  BX RC 
10/8 at Montclair State * •  L, 34-33  BX RC 
10/15 at Western Connecticut * •  W, 56-10  BX 

We're not just talking about 2 plays, and even if Cortland were undefeated, I would not be feeling comfortable about making a statement that the team is better than or as good as they were in 2010.  The team has taken a step back this year, and the scores alone are pointing to that, let alone the W/L record.  I am not impressed by the body of work so far, even if we were talking about a 5-1 team right now.  Montclair has not won impressively for the most part, but their play has been a helluva lot more consistent than this list of games shows.

Turnovers. It's all about the turnovers. Nothing else explains it.

The rush defense is better--opponents are averaging 2.3 yards per carry, as opposed to the 2.7 last season. The pass defense is better--opponents have a 52.7% completion percentage, 9.2 yards per catch and a 95.4 rating, as opposed to the 55.7%, 11.6 YPC and 115.5 rating, they had last season. Cortland's sack totals are up as well, with 18 through six games, as opposed to the 31 in 12 games last year. The red zone defense is allowing TD's at the same rate (50%) than last year

Cortland's running backs are down a bit--averaging 4.1 yards a carry as opposed to 4.6 last season. But, the passing game is much better, completing 60.8% of its' passes, at 14.9 yards a catch for a 161.4 rating, as opposed to last season's 55.1%, 11.4 YPC and 120.4 rating. The sacks are down, as Cortland's only allowed four in six games, after allowing 18 last season. The offense has been much better in the red zone

Cortland's offense is actually scoring 5.5 more points a game this season. The defense is allowing 7.6 more, but almost all of their statistics are as good or better. Except for turnovers.

Last season, Cortland forced 34 in 12 games, nearly three a game. This year? Six in six. That's a huge difference, and it's really the only major difference. (Cortland's special teams are a little weaker, and it cost them the Kean game, but still) Last year, Cortland picked off 21 passes. This year? Three.

That's a lot of interceptions turning into incompletions, keeping drives alive, and allowing a team more opportunities to score.

This is exactly what happened with Ithaca. First five weeks, they force 18 turnovers, and the defense looks otherwordly. Last week? One, and they get shredded.

I know you're an evidence guy Frank, so I know you'll appreciate it

Well Done Bombers, impressive research...I hate crunching the numbers.  I know what I see.  The turnover evidence is pretty powerful.  It is clear that we are not getting the takeaways and we can not ignore the importance of that but Frank's declaration of Cortland being a worse team is just dead wrong.

[Frank Rossi]

But it goes back to an argument we had a year ago concerning the DelVal/Wesley barnburner.  It's the sword and shield issue of turnovers.  We questioned whether or not DelVal was strong because they forced either 5 or 6 turnovers but still lost by just 3 points, if memory serves.

The point is that the forcing of turnovers DOES define the strength of a team and its defense.  Usually, it points to effectiveness in reach a QB since most turnovers initiate with either poor passes under duress or sack/fumbles.

And as for other teams getting better -- if every team is getting better, according to you, then it's just as bad a situation for Cortland since, as you said, the relative comparison basis is only the NJAC teams for the most part.  Honestly, I don't fully see this.  I think the truth lays in the middle.  Kean could still prove to be a two-game wonder.  Morrisville plays well for a half and then fades.  I'm not ready to crown these teams as world beaters yet, since Rowan has shown a dropoff, too, including in the OOC game.  Remember, I was very up on the NJAC after Kickoff showed the conference rankings, and so far, it's been a pretty shaky experience.

Again, Cortland has to prove something still this season for me (and I think many others) to shake off the losses and fair play thus far.  Else, we're watching a carbon copy of Union 2005 vs. Union 2006 (lots of players back after a great season, big letdown).

[rams1102]

I like getting better each week, and flying under the radar.

[Bombers798891]

But it goes back to an argument we had a year ago concerning the DelVal/Wesley barnburner.  It's the sword and shield issue of turnovers.  We questioned whether or not DelVal was strong because they forced either 5 or 6 turnovers but still lost by just 3 points, if memory serves.

The point is that the forcing of turnovers DOES define the strength of a team and its defense.  Usually, it points to effectiveness in reach a QB since most turnovers initiate with either poor passes under duress or sack/fumbles.

And as for other teams getting better -- if every team is getting better, according to you, then it's just as bad a situation for Cortland since, as you said, the relative comparison basis is only the NJAC teams for the most part.  Honestly, I don't fully see this.  I think the truth lays in the middle.  Kean could still prove to be a two-game wonder.  Morrisville plays well for a half and then fades.  I'm not ready to crown these teams as world beaters yet, since Rowan has shown a dropoff, too, including in the OOC game.  Remember, I was very up on the NJAC after Kickoff showed the conference rankings, and so far, it's been a pretty shaky experience.

Again, Cortland has to prove something still this season for me (and I think many others) to shake off the losses and fair play thus far.  Else, we're watching a carbon copy of Union 2005 vs. Union 2006 (lots of players back after a great season, big letdown).

I have to agree with Frank here...partly. Forcing turnovers can be partly about luck--for example, recovering fumbles is, mostly, a 50-50 proposition. So seeing Cortland with 15 forced fumbles and only three recoveries shows a bit of bad luck. But, the interception total shows either the team isn't forcing bad throws or the corners/safeties aren't as good at getting them. The sack total is up, so I feel like they are getting to the passer, and the completion percentage says the passes aren't being caught, merely falling incomplete. It seems to me that Cortland's DB's just aren't making plays like the 2010 team was (mainly Joe Lopez). That's a tangible difference.

However, I think this Cortland team might be as good as last year's. Look, nearly everything else is the same or better as it was last year. Special teams cost them against Kean, but the overall picture looks good in my view. Sure, the turnovers are down, but it's a more balanced offensive team, that is still tough against the pass and run.

Sometimes really good teams screw things up. The 2004 Bombers did. They blew two winnable games and there you go. I'd argue the 2010 Fisher team was as good as Springfield/Alfred, but same thing happened. Cortland might be really good, but they let the Kean game get away thanks to being unable to finish drives and a couple of special teams disasters, and the defense couldn't get the one stop it needed against Montclair. Such is life

[Doid23]

As Bill Parcell's once said, "You are what your record says you are."

[softballrz]

Everywhere, but the d3 fan poll.

[lewdogg11]

Everywhere, but the d3 fan poll.

[dlippiel]

Everywhere, but the d3 fan poll.

dlip is gonna smite you here for your ignorance alone dude. If you have any questions just refer to the picture from Lew's last post to remind you of the reality of your opinion.