East Region Fan Poll

[pg04]

Um, OK?

Thanks for that mature and convincing argument on the subject.  We all now agree with you. 

[Frank Rossi]

why all the dick measuring from years gone by?  these polls are nothing more then a snap shot in time?  yes, the nefc is historical weak, however this year, endicott and wnec are two competitive teams and should be part of any top 10 discussion until proved otherwise.

Pat, forgive me for referencing the fact I'm a Top 25 voter, but...

From where I come from, the idea of poll respect comes from a certain level of history based on a program's and conference's relative strengths.  Note Hobart's treatment after a rough couple years for the LL?  They're paying a price after a shellacking of SJF still today for the conference's lack of relative strength.  Why would we give an NEFC team any more credit at this point?  Eventually, if Endicott stays undefeated for a prolonged period of time, I'll weigh them into consideration, but Hobart just made my own Top 25 ballot this week for the first time.  You have to win some nationally relevant games to get national respect.  Salve's losses after the Union win and close Montclair game did more to hurt your conference than help it since the team looked to be above the normal NEFC fray.  Now, I don't know what to make of the teams except to say that the NEFC is still not at that national level yet.  The postseason will mean a lot again to confirm or refute this.

I'm not trying to tool on the NEFC.  I'm giving you an honest assessment here.  I'm more curious about how Keith came to a leap of faith so early based on the ballot he released with Endicott as high as he had them.  I'm not appalled by it since he still had Hobart above Endicott -- it's just a very interesting ballot stance five weeks into the season.

At the end of the day, polls should help Endicott want to prove the world wrong -- it's great bulletin board material right now.  However, recent posters with no historical perspective beating their chests don't really do much to help program reputations.  Call into public discourse the successes, by all means.  However, don't get pissy when voters continue to assess things on the relative basis the conferences created in the first place.

[rams1102]

I love the East Poll, but it is only a Poll and more things need to play out. It's really early. My order was Kean, Montclair and Salisbury. I personally don't think Kean is the best team, but they did beat Wesley and continue to win, so they must be #1 until they lose. You can argue who is 2 or 3 and everyone would be correct. Montclair's / Salisbury's tough cames are coming up and we will see how it all plays out. A bunch of fun and thanks everyone. 

[Yanks 99]

why all the dick measuring from years gone by?  these polls are nothing more then a snap shot in time?  yes, the nefc is historical weak, however this year, endicott and wnec are two competitive teams and should be part of any top 10 discussion until proved otherwise.

OK...normally, I would laugh this off...but I will take the step back for a second.  You say the NEFC is "historically weak"...and I agree, and I doubt you would honestly find anyone that would disagree with that statement.  Yet, you would like us to basically, and blindly, have Endicott and WNEC be part of the Top 10 discussion.   For full disclosure, below is my Top 10 list for this week.  After each of these teams, I will give a quick snap shot of who they have beaten to date this year and/or a reason that (in my opinion only) shows that they most certainly have not been historically weak:

1) Kean:  5-0, playing in a tough NJAC league, with key wins this year over Wesley (a regional power and borderline national power for sure, with only 3 regular season losses total over the past 6 seasons (including this season), and NCAA semi-final appearances in each of the past two seasons and 3 of the previous 5 seasons) and Cortland.
 
2) Montclair:  5-0, playing in a tough NJAC league, with a key win over Cortland, and looking to make the NCAA's for the third straight year.

3) Delaware Valley:  6-0, playing in a good MAC league, and looking to make the NCAA's for the third straight year.

4) Salisbury:  5-0, playing in a tough E8 league, with wins already this year over Ithaca and Springfield (with Wesley, Alfred, and St. John Fisher still on the plate) and making some serious a noise for a #1 Region seed in either the East (unlikely) or the South (most likely) if they hang on and run the table.  Averaging 45 points per game over some seriously strong competition.

5) Hobart:  4-0, playing in a down LL "league", but with a huge win at St. John Fisher at SJFC 56-20, and with a good chance to run the table for the rest of the year.

6) St. John Fisher:  4-1 overall, and still undefeated in E8 play, strange loss to Hobart that no one saw coming, but back to back wins over Alfred and Ithaca.

7) Alfred:  4-1 overall, with a loss to St. John Fisher, but a big win already this year against Springfield; big match-up this weekend against a strong Salisbury team and looking to return to the NCAA's (where they made the quarterfinals last year) for the third straight time.

8) Lycoming:  4-1, playing in a good MAC league, with good wins over Rowan (NJAC) and Albright, and only a 3 point loss to 5-1 Widener (at Widener).

9) Lebanon Valley:  4-1, playing in a good MAC league, with a good win over Albright, and only one loss to Delaware Valley

10) Cortland: 3-2, playing in a tough NJAC league, arguably with the toughest schedule so far to date (includes playing and losing to Kean and Montclair State, but beating a good Rowan team), been to the playoffs two of the last three seasons, including one NCAA quarterfinal appearance, and 3 monkey stomp wins over the NEFC teams in those two appearances.


Others getting votes that I considered this week (not including NEFC or ECFC teams here) but didn't include in my Top 10 were:

- New Jersey:  4-1 in the NJAC whose only loss was by one point to my #1 Kean
- Widener:  5-1 in the MAC with a win over Lycoming



Now honestly...of these 12 teams total (my top 10 and New Jersey & Widener)...who should I have left out for Endicott or WNEC?  Let's take a good, honest look:


- WNEC:  4-1 overall, but hasn't ventured outside the NEFC or the ECFC, has one loss to Mass-Maritime that got lit up to the tune of 61-30 by a terrible 1-4 Coast Guard team, and to date hasn't beaten a single team with a record over .500.  Never been to the NCAA playoffs, and from what I can tell the last time they played a team outside of the NEFC or the ECFC was in 2008, when they got tub thumped by Hartwick (E8) 63-37. 

- Endicott:  6-0, and off to a good start, like WNEC hasn't ventured outside the NEFC, and has yet to really play anyone of any substance.  Only win over a "good" team this year is the win over Framingham State (4-2, and had their first winning season last year for the first time since at least 1998), while none of the other wins  are against teams with a record over .500.  Trying to make the NCAA's for the second straight year and second time ever based on the NEFC Pool A bid after getting beat pretty handily by Cortland in the playoffs last year (remember...42-14 with under 9 minutes to go in the game), and since 2006 has a combined record of 0-7 against teams not in the NEFC or the ECFC (0-5 against the LL, 0-1 against the E8, and 0-1 against the NJAC).


Now after all that...seriously...tell me again why Endicott and WNEC are super "competitive" and should be part of "any top 10 discussion until proven otherwise"?  How much more proof do you need?

[Bombers798891]

Part of the thing that bugs me with the Kean thing is the idea of unimpressive wins. I mean, I get that 30/40 point wins can tell you a lot about a team's strength, but I think it's erroneous to assume that the lack of wins in the manner is somehow in and of itself an indication of not being as good.

The worst Bomber team in Mike Welch's career in terms of point differential? The 1994 team, at +4.3. They won five games by four points or less. They also made the National Semifinals, and were one play away from the Stagg Bowl, the furthest the team has ever gone under Welch. Food for thought

[lewdogg11]

Uh....Frank said 'poll respect'....

[lewdogg11]

I might check out the Endicott/Plymouth St. game this weekend.  After seeing them, I may have them in the top 3 next week.  Probably not.

[Bombers798891]

This Cortland/Kean thing is bordering on absurd.

Nationally, the Hobart/Cortland issue is just as perplexing.  Just sayin'...

Maybe. I can at least see the "Conference/schedule strength" argument you could make for Cortland over Hobart. I don't necessarily agree that it trumps the differences in results right now, but there's a chance that Hobart only plays one team that finishes the season with a winning record. I know they stomped said team, but again, I can at least sort of get where it comes from.

I just can't wrap my head around the Kean/Cortland argument. The only argument for putting Cortland ahead of Kean is what? That they killed Morrisville? I mean, if we're saying that Kean hasn't looked impressive in their five wins, then don't we have to do the same for Cortland? They trailed Buffalo State in the second half too. And they had to come back against Rowan too.

The only thing I can see that Cortland's done that Kean hasn't is stomp someone. It just makes no sense.

[Frank Rossi]

When you reach a two-loss differential this early in the season, I think you're playing with fire, especially when the two-loss team's only real resume booster is a narrow win vs. Rowan this year.  Hobart thrashed SJF, which seems to be rebounding since that game.  It's not like they are restricted to all NEFC/ECFC games -- Hobart whacked Dickinson, whacked SJF, defensively beat down SLU and won at an arch-rival in Union in a game that went pretty much as expected.  I'd have trouble keeping Mount Union at 4-2 in my Top 25 ballot, let alone Cortland.  I'm not saying to place Hobart over Kean, Montclair or Salisbury.  I'm saying to look in the loss column and then consider if anything in the win column provides forgiveness for the differential.  I don't see it here.

[lewdogg11]

This Cortland/Kean thing is bordering on absurd.

Nationally, the Hobart/Cortland issue is just as perplexing.  Just sayin'...

Maybe. I can at least see the "Conference/schedule strength" argument you could make for Cortland over Hobart. I don't necessarily agree that it trumps the differences in results right now, but there's a chance that Hobart only plays one team that finishes the season with a winning record. I know they stomped said team, but again, I can at least sort of get where it comes from.

I just can't wrap my head around the Kean/Cortland argument. The only argument for putting Cortland ahead of Kean is what? That they killed Morrisville? I mean, if we're saying that Kean hasn't looked impressive in their five wins, then don't we have to do the same for Cortland? They trailed Buffalo State in the second half too. And they had to come back against Rowan too.

The only thing I can see that Cortland's done that Kean hasn't is stomp someone. It just makes no sense.

This is just so aggravating to me.  Like why is this person even part of the polling process?  It's like ranking the Eagles at 1 in the NFL rankings because they are SUPPOSED to be good, but just haven't caught any breaks this year.  And at the same time, the Packers only beat Carolina by 7, so they get knocked down a few spots.  Just out of control. 

I hate to harp on it, but for some reason it just aggravates the piss out of me.

[Bombers798891]

When you reach a two-loss differential this early in the season, I think you're playing with fire, especially when the two-loss team's only real resume booster is a narrow win vs. Rowan this year.  Hobart thrashed SJF, which seems to be rebounding since that game.  It's not like they are restricted to all NEFC/ECFC games -- Hobart whacked Dickinson, whacked SJF, defensively beat down SLU and won at an arch-rival in Union in a game that went pretty much as expected.  I'd have trouble keeping Mount Union at 4-2 in my Top 25 ballot, let alone Cortland.  I'm not saying to place Hobart over Kean, Montclair or Salisbury.  I'm saying to look in the loss column and then consider if anything in the win column provides forgiveness for the differential.  I don't see it here.

That all makes sense. As I said, I'm not personally of the opinion that Cortland's better than Hobart. I do think Cortland would be 4-0 against Hobart's schedule, but I think Hobart might be better than 3-2 had they played Cortland's.

I do wish however, that we could see--without names--who voted who where. I understand this would be a lot of work, but I'd like to know, for example, where the pt. differential comes from. Two/three voters with Cortland ranked a lot higher? A bunch of voters who ranked Cortland one or two slots ahead of Hobart?

[lewdogg11]

When you reach a two-loss differential this early in the season, I think you're playing with fire, especially when the two-loss team's only real resume booster is a narrow win vs. Rowan this year.  Hobart thrashed SJF, which seems to be rebounding since that game.  It's not like they are restricted to all NEFC/ECFC games -- Hobart whacked Dickinson, whacked SJF, defensively beat down SLU and won at an arch-rival in Union in a game that went pretty much as expected.  I'd have trouble keeping Mount Union at 4-2 in my Top 25 ballot, let alone Cortland.  I'm not saying to place Hobart over Kean, Montclair or Salisbury.  I'm saying to look in the loss column and then consider if anything in the win column provides forgiveness for the differential.  I don't see it here.

That all makes sense. As I said, I'm not personally of the opinion that Cortland's better than Hobart. I do think Cortland would be 4-0 against Hobart's schedule, but I think Hobart might be better than 3-2 had they played Cortland's.

I do wish however, that we could see--without names--who voted who where. I understand this would be a lot of work, but I'd like to know, for example, where the pt. differential comes from. Two/three voters with Cortland ranked a lot higher? A bunch of voters who ranked Cortland one or two slots ahead of Hobart?

A lot of people have said which voter they are.  I'm 2 and I believe a Hobart guy and a Fisher guy are 3 and 4.  No idea on 1 though. 

[Yanks 99]

When you reach a two-loss differential this early in the season, I think you're playing with fire, especially when the two-loss team's only real resume booster is a narrow win vs. Rowan this year.  Hobart thrashed SJF, which seems to be rebounding since that game.  It's not like they are restricted to all NEFC/ECFC games -- Hobart whacked Dickinson, whacked SJF, defensively beat down SLU and won at an arch-rival in Union in a game that went pretty much as expected.  I'd have trouble keeping Mount Union at 4-2 in my Top 25 ballot, let alone Cortland.  I'm not saying to place Hobart over Kean, Montclair or Salisbury.  I'm saying to look in the loss column and then consider if anything in the win column provides forgiveness for the differential.  I don't see it here.

That all makes sense. As I said, I'm not personally of the opinion that Cortland's better than Hobart. I do think Cortland would be 4-0 against Hobart's schedule, but I think Hobart might be better than 3-2 had they played Cortland's.

I do wish however, that we could see--without names--who voted who where. I understand this would be a lot of work, but I'd like to know, for example, where the pt. differential comes from. Two/three voters with Cortland ranked a lot higher? A bunch of voters who ranked Cortland one or two slots ahead of Hobart?

A lot of people have said which voter they are.  I'm 2 and I believe a Hobart guy and a Fisher guy are 3 and 4.  No idea on 1 though.

I am presuming we are talking about the ERFP here and not the National Top 25 poll...if that is the case, I am Voter #4...and here is who I voted for this past week:

1) Kean 
2) Montclair
3) Delaware Valley
4) Salisbury
5) Hobart
6) St. John Fisher
7) Alfred
8) Lycoming
9) Lebanon Valley
10) Cortland

[dlippiel]

dlip just looked at this quickly, (he is at work and has his poll at home) but he believes he is voter #9, if he is reading the order correctly. Like dlip said before, he has been suspect of Kean being the clear "best team" in the East as a result of two unimpressive wins but at this point, there is no debate about their place in the top three and obviously well ahead of Cortland. dlip looks very highly on ANYONE defeating Wesley, so he has to put a ton of stock in that victory.

[Jonny Utah]

This Cortland/Kean thing is bordering on absurd.

Nationally, the Hobart/Cortland issue is just as perplexing.  Just sayin'...

Maybe. I can at least see the "Conference/schedule strength" argument you could make for Cortland over Hobart. I don't necessarily agree that it trumps the differences in results right now, but there's a chance that Hobart only plays one team that finishes the season with a winning record. I know they stomped said team, but again, I can at least sort of get where it comes from.

I just can't wrap my head around the Kean/Cortland argument. The only argument for putting Cortland ahead of Kean is what? That they killed Morrisville? I mean, if we're saying that Kean hasn't looked impressive in their five wins, then don't we have to do the same for Cortland? They trailed Buffalo State in the second half too. And they had to come back against Rowan too.

The only thing I can see that Cortland's done that Kean hasn't is stomp someone. It just makes no sense.

This is just so aggravating to me.  Like why is this person even part of the polling process?  It's like ranking the Eagles at 1 in the NFL rankings because they are SUPPOSED to be good, but just haven't caught any breaks this year.  And at the same time, the Packers only beat Carolina by 7, so they get knocked down a few spots.  Just out of control. 

I hate to harp on it, but for some reason it just aggravates the piss out of me.

Well its kind of like the NFL power rankings.  Most have the Patriots ranked over the Bills, even though the Bills beat the Patriots.  If there was a "poll" would it be justified to rank the Pats over the Bills?