East Region Fan Poll

[Frank Rossi]

I've always found it interesting that many of the best games Mount seems to get pre-Whitewater come from these supposedly weaker East teams. In 2006, Fisher gave them all they could handle, losing by 12. In 2007, Ithaca gave them a better game than anyone in the OAC did in the regular season, to mention nothing of the 48 point win Mount had in the semi-finals over Bethel. In 2008, Cortland hung with them a lot longer in the regional finals than Wheaton did in the National semis. Last year, Del Valley did no worse than Bethel in the national semis. Sure, lots of times, East teams get boat-raced by Mount. So what? Like that's some new thing exclusive to the East?

This is a really good counter argument to mine and a very defensible position. +K to you.

Yes, it's a defense also to the idea that the East deserves exposure in the Semis perhaps as much as any other region -- and that perhaps the East's biggest problem continues to be the abundance of cross-scheduling that goes on between its best teams DURING the regular season.  I've been beating this drum for two years -- show me another region with this phenomenon to this degree.  I doubt you can.  So, yes, it makes sense that the East statistically looks poor; SOMEBODY HAS TO LOSE THESE REGULAR SEASON IN-REGION GAMES BETWEEN STRONG EAST TEAMS.

[lewdogg11]

Of course, I am fighting a losing battle here, since no one else seems to agree with me.  Oh well, 

I actually think we DO see eye to eye.  I think the Regional criteria is BS.  If you play a different division that is 1 thing, but out of Region...It shouldn't matter.  if you lose to a d3 team, you lose to a d3 team.  Would I LIKE to see a Regional bracket?  Sure.  I think it would bring a lot of Regional competitiveness to the playoffs.  Do I think the East beats on itself worse than other Regions?  Yeah, i think that is entirely possible as well.  i think the other Regions may be top loaded, much more so than the East.

That said, I based my playoff predictions on the current setup, and unless they changes, it's like fighting a losing battle to argue about it.  So under the current conditions, I think the 'Eastern/Northernish South/Easternish North' bracket could have 3 'out of region teams'.

[wesleydad]

pg04, eventhough you took a shot at me the other day i gave you a plus 1 for your point.

i agree with gordon about del val.  i have seen 12 different teams play this year and they would be the 3rd or 4th best team i have seen.  if you need to see who i have seen go to the around the mid atlantic thread on the south region and check out my travels so far.  I also know my opinion is also subjective, but i like gordon have been lucky enough to see some of the top teams in the country over these past 6 or so years and that is what i base my subjectivity on.  But, if del val goes 10 - 0 then i would have no issue with them being the #1 seed in the east.  this has been great reading so far and i look forward to seeing what else comes out.  some of you are really good with the information that you post.

finally, frank's point about the east is right on as far as i am concerned.  the weekly battles around the east make my travel plans tough since i have several games to choose from if wesley is to far of a drive or they are not playing a competitive game.

[Bombers798891]

SOMEBODY HAS TO LOSE THESE REGULAR SEASON IN-REGION GAMES BETWEEN STRONG EAST TEAMS.

Where I will slightly disagree with Frank here is to say, that often what keeps East teams from going 10-0 is their own ability to beat teams they are better than

For example, in 2009 Montclair loses to a 6-5 Wilkes team by 27? Really? Kings beat Wilkes for crying out loud. FDU Florham played them to a 7-6 game. And there's a rational explanation for why Montclair gets taken behind the woodshed?

Or why couldn't Ithaca have beaten a Fisher team that went 6-4 in the regular season in 2008? That Fisher team was not that good, even excluding the MUC game. Ithaca was the better team that season, but the fact that Fisher is in their head made it irrelevant apparently.

That same year, Hobart is 4-0, and hosting a 1-3 Union. So naturally Union wins.

Or how about Fisher losing to a Wick team they were clearly better than in 2007?

Every year from 2007-2010, some East region team loses a game to someone they shouldn't, and winds up going 9-1. Were those tough games? Sure, with the exception of the Wilkes game, IMO. But if you want to be a #1 seed, you should win those types of games. So I don't have sympathy for the region on that level. My frustration comes not from these 9-1 teams not getting a #1 seed, but what I feel is a pre-emptive discounting of possible 10-0 teams every year based on the logic of "Well, they don't play well against Mount in the playoffs"

I've always been a fan of proving it to me. So an East team needs to go 10-0 to get a #1 seed in my view (Sorry Hobart. 8-0 in that conference doesn't come close). But if that happens, they should get the #1 seed.

Because if they can't, what's the point? We've had six straight title games with the same two teams (although thankfully I think Whitewater is primed to go down this season) and we're breaking away from the regional aspect of the game in a way that ensures the greatest dynasty in college football history has an easier road to the playoffs. If a team winning every game on a full schedule isn't enough to at least keep MUC out of the region, why not just let MUC and UWW play 15 weeks in a row and crown the winner supreme champion of all time, and the rest of us can play for orange slices and a trip to Pizza Hut?

[pg04]

pg04, eventhough you took a shot at me the other day i gave you a plus 1 for your point.

Sorry, I was probably out of line with the comment about you thinking EVERY team sucks.  In fact you've turned out to be right on about a lot of stuff.  +K to you as well

[Pat Coleman]

SOMEBODY HAS TO LOSE THESE REGULAR SEASON IN-REGION GAMES BETWEEN STRONG EAST TEAMS.

Where I will slightly disagree with Frank here is to say, that often what keeps East teams from going 10-0 is their own ability to beat teams they are better than

I agree. The North Region's Keans don't seem to lose to Brockport State.

  I almost Wonder, if it were Wesley who had been moved in 4 years in a row, would we be having this discussion? It is my opinion that we probably wouldn't be. 

I'm sure we wouldn't be. It's a NIMBY discussion. It's turned into a "they shouldn't be allowed to do this" thing rather than a "let's play well enough that they can't do this" thing.

[Frank Rossi]

I think a lot of these lesser-team losses come down to pure fatigue in many cases.  I think DelVal was experiencing that in Game 10 last year in the Widener shocker (I know they had the Wesley loss, but just as an example).  If you look past the MIAC, WIAC, CCIW and ASC, I don't see this level of competition whereby teams are just toast by Game 9 or 10 and drop an unexpected matchup to the degree we see in the East.

[Pat Coleman]

There's fatigue in other regions.

[jmcozenlaw]

Yes........Mount Union and UWW look very fatigued come the playoffs. What??

[Frank Rossi]

I agree. The North Region's Keans don't seem to lose to Brockport State.

Remember in 2009 when you hacked at the Committee Chair on "In the HuddLLe" about making statements like this -- when she stated that a comparison tool used was something like a team losing to the South Region's #5 ranked team vs. another team losing to the West Region's #3 ranked team (making the second a stronger team than the first)?  Wouldn't your statement need some refinement that wouldn't be able to escape from the somewhat hypocritical treatment of comparing Kean and Brockport to another conference's teams?  In other words, can you even identify another region's Kean and Brockport with any reasonable level of certainty based on the differences in regions?

[Pat Coleman]

No. I think the difference between those two teams we were talking about then is not the same as the distance between Kean and Brockport -- and that is the relevant comparison here, not what you're trying to say.

[Frank Rossi]

No. I think the difference between those two teams we were talking about then is not the same as the distance between Kean and Brockport -- and that is the relevant comparison here, not what you're trying to say.

Excuse the cliche, but it's all relative.  That's the point.

[SJFF82]

Edit (Addendum): Also, wouldn't the NCAA want to attempt to line up the 4 teams they determine are the best to meet in the National Semifinals?  I don't think this is a horrible thing to do...

...except it often doesnt materialize....last year the Tommies HAD to get a #1 because we had to have the 4 best be #1....well funny thing happened on the way to Salem....they didnt even make it out of the North bracket that muc was shipped out of to make way for them

...and then, Bethel, who beat them 12-7, got MUCinized the next week....same 'ol story.....

So they were wrong, now they aren't allowed to be wrong when picking the "top 4 teams"?  I know that the NCAA Basketball tournament always matches the top 4 teams in the National Semifinals...

  I almost Wonder, if it were Wesley who had been moved in 4 years in a row, would we be having this discussion? It is my opinion that we probably wouldn't be.

agree PG, but comparing major college BB tourney to D3 football playoffs, where kids playing for Kean think Linfield is a kind of chocolate, is apples and oranges.

[SJFF82]

Does this mean you guys should be listening to me about Ithaca? After all, if 82 is supposed to be impressed by 80+ games over seven years, then what's 200+ over the last 24? Shouldn't Pep be anointed the all-knowing sage of Alfred?

Go back and look at what SJF82 initially asked.  He was looking for input from someone who has seen Del Val more than once this year.  I have so I offered input.  He's not obliged to take it. I wasn't offended that he didn't.

And actually I do personally put more weight in your view of Ithaca than other posters who aren't as familiar with the school.

while I certainly appreciate your opinion on Del Val, and when its top observer claims they aint one of the Top 5 I have no basis to debate, I did not ask how good they were nor did I claim they were Top 5, or one of the "Top 4" in the land.

That was Pat's implication of my posts because he refuses to address the point that I did make (and several other posters have as well)

I believe you that DVC aint one of the 4 best in the land....

The point I clearly made was that a 10-0 DVC team (regardless of their perceived National Ranking) has earned and deserves the #1 EAST REGION ranking?

That is the question PC, that you cant answer, so dont claim someone else answered it and that I ignored it.  Gordanmann was not even responding to my post....go back and look at the thread.  He responded to Pumpkin attack's post.

Why is it called the East Region in the play-offs?

Bombers does make some good pts about The East teams shooting themselves in the foot, but what we have been discussing of late is the perception that a 10-0 East team may still play second fiddle to MUC.

Show me the team from the North that has recently played MUC closer or further into a Region final or National semi than SJF, IC, or Cortland.

I have shown you how the North pushed its best team out the door last year for the Tommies who couldnt score 2 TDs against Bethel in the Region finals.  Without looking, I believe a similar scenario has played itself out in the North a few times since MUC has been coming East.

The fact is, that whatever team replaces MUC in the NORTH, usually doesnt even win the Region, and even if they do, they get smoked by MUC anyway.

If that so called #1 cant win the North Region, then what evidence is there that they are a Top 4 team???  Because PC sarcastically says so???

[pg04]

Why is it called the East Region in the play-offs?

Just to Clarify, the NCAA uses no such designation to the playoff brackets any longer.