East Region Fan Poll

[boobyhasgameyo]

Dear LD,



Sincerely,

Frank

Oh Frank...even I casually observed that LD was saying Union should handle St. Lawrence.  So there is no crow for him to eat when what he was expecting to happen came to fruition.  But I'll let him respond 

[pumkinattack]

I think there's some fair answers here.  I don't mind paying and have paid for most road games as well, but I have a massive problem with the quality of the video, having spent easily more than 500 bucks over the years on FB and Lax games while missing full quarters and halves due to technical issues.  This is an even bigger deal in lax competing with Cuse, ACC schools, etc. to offer so little value and put out a garbage produce (the video not the teams). 

I do agree that the OOC isn't great.  Dickinson will always be there.  Like complaining if IC or Cortland sucked for years, they'd still play.  CMU being replaced with Geneva is weird, since they're both in the Pittsburg area and clearly the SJF was a one and one, then picked up another upstate program (though I'd rather they bring Alfred back). 

I guess my gripe, so to speak, is that they've consistently put a good product out there (playoffs every year since 2000 except 01, 03, 09 & 2010 - all above .500) and when they played top teams last year, they won big over SJF (don't want to rehash why or how, it wasn't fluky just like SJF pounded us out the prior year on our homecoming - the night I flew home from a trip to Ireland all excited to listen in somewhere in the 2nd quarter only to be disappointed by my boys) and a result against a final four team that no other playoff team replicated against another final four team except each other without multiple key starters playing.  I realize history doesn't matter, but it's clear that on the overall D3 site and regionally, seasons from 3-8 years ago clearly influence thinking (see Wash & Jeff or Trinity, TX consistently overrated).  Beyond that, last year should influence and they're bringing back two guys who should be 1st all americans on D (Coleman & Worthington), almost all of the rest of the D, a good chunk of the O incl QB, RB's, most of the WR's, etc.  Other than the stupid RPI game, they won the rest of their games by double digits, are winning by 20pts a game to start the season this year and it seems like they still get dismissed. 

And to finish the rant.  I think Hobart's played like crap to date.  The O has been bad in 3 of 4 games (except UC, but even there they fumbled the ball 3x in a quarter, twice on the end of first down gaining plays where you fumble while being tackled from behind by the ankles).  If they continue this way, and have (unfortunately) little motivation on their schedule other than winning the league and returning the favor to RPI, I think they'll trip up to some team that will be around .500 or worse (that would include Union - who's already locked in no better than 7-3 and I suspect they won't win out). 

Rant over. 

[wesleydad]

pumkin, fwiw, i have a ton of respect for bart after seeing them last year in the playoffs.  expect them to be there again.

[boobyhasgameyo]

I think there's some fair answers here.  I don't mind paying and have paid for most road games as well, but I have a massive problem with the quality of the video, having spent easily more than 500 bucks over the years on FB and Lax games while missing full quarters and halves due to technical issues.  This is an even bigger deal in lax competing with Cuse, ACC schools, etc. to offer so little value and put out a garbage produce (the video not the teams). 

I do agree that the OOC isn't great.  Dickinson will always be there.  Like complaining if IC or Cortland sucked for years, they'd still play.  CMU being replaced with Geneva is weird, since they're both in the Pittsburg area and clearly the SJF was a one and one, then picked up another upstate program (though I'd rather they bring Alfred back). 

I guess my gripe, so to speak, is that they've consistently put a good product out there (playoffs every year since 2000 except 01, 03, 09 & 2010 - all above .500) and when they played top teams last year, they won big over SJF (don't want to rehash why or how, it wasn't fluky just like SJF pounded us out the prior year on our homecoming - the night I flew home from a trip to Ireland all excited to listen in somewhere in the 2nd quarter only to be disappointed by my boys) and a result against a final four team that no other playoff team replicated against another final four team except each other without multiple key starters playing.  I realize history doesn't matter, but it's clear that on the overall D3 site and regionally, seasons from 3-8 years ago clearly influence thinking (see Wash & Jeff or Trinity, TX consistently overrated).  Beyond that, last year should influence and they're bringing back two guys who should be 1st all americans on D (Coleman & Worthington), almost all of the rest of the D, a good chunk of the O incl QB, RB's, most of the WR's, etc.  Other than the stupid RPI game, they won the rest of their games by double digits, are winning by 20pts a game to start the season this year and it seems like they still get dismissed. 

And to finish the rant.  I think Hobart's played like crap to date.  The O has been bad in 3 of 4 games (except UC, but even there they fumbled the ball 3x in a quarter, twice on the end of first down gaining plays where you fumble while being tackled from behind by the ankles).  If they continue this way, and have (unfortunately) little motivation on their schedule other than winning the league and returning the favor to RPI, I think they'll trip up to some team that will be around .500 or worse (that would include Union - who's already locked in no better than 7-3 and I suspect they won't win out). 

Rant over.

Pumkin in regards to Fisher last year I really don't think you are on the same page as a lot of the Fisher posters.  We weren't saying the game on that day was a fluke.  On that day Hobart thoroughly beat Fisher down.  What we have maintained is that Fisher was a different team in the second half of the season than they were in the first.  Had Hobart played them again at the end of the season or in the playoffs it wouldn't be the same product they saw the first time around.  That's all.   

[pg04]

I'd certainly enjoy Hobart vs. Fisher as a regional final for the right to go to the final 4. So that means both teams better keep winning!

[Upstate]

I think there's some fair answers here.  I don't mind paying and have paid for most road games as well, but I have a massive problem with the quality of the video, having spent easily more than 500 bucks over the years on FB and Lax games while missing full quarters and halves due to technical issues.  This is an even bigger deal in lax competing with Cuse, ACC schools, etc. to offer so little value and put out a garbage produce (the video not the teams). 

I do agree that the OOC isn't great.  Dickinson will always be there.  Like complaining if IC or Cortland sucked for years, they'd still play.  CMU being replaced with Geneva is weird, since they're both in the Pittsburg area and clearly the SJF was a one and one, then picked up another upstate program (though I'd rather they bring Alfred back). 

I guess my gripe, so to speak, is that they've consistently put a good product out there (playoffs every year since 2000 except 01, 03, 09 & 2010 - all above .500) and when they played top teams last year, they won big over SJF (don't want to rehash why or how, it wasn't fluky just like SJF pounded us out the prior year on our homecoming - the night I flew home from a trip to Ireland all excited to listen in somewhere in the 2nd quarter only to be disappointed by my boys) and a result against a final four team that no other playoff team replicated against another final four team except each other without multiple key starters playing.  I realize history doesn't matter, but it's clear that on the overall D3 site and regionally, seasons from 3-8 years ago clearly influence thinking (see Wash & Jeff or Trinity, TX consistently overrated).  Beyond that, last year should influence and they're bringing back two guys who should be 1st all americans on D (Coleman & Worthington), almost all of the rest of the D, a good chunk of the O incl QB, RB's, most of the WR's, etc.  Other than the stupid RPI game, they won the rest of their games by double digits, are winning by 20pts a game to start the season this year and it seems like they still get dismissed. 

And to finish the rant.  I think Hobart's played like crap to date.  The O has been bad in 3 of 4 games (except UC, but even there they fumbled the ball 3x in a quarter, twice on the end of first down gaining plays where you fumble while being tackled from behind by the ankles).  If they continue this way, and have (unfortunately) little motivation on their schedule other than winning the league and returning the favor to RPI, I think they'll trip up to some team that will be around .500 or worse (that would include Union - who's already locked in no better than 7-3 and I suspect they won't win out). 

Rant over.

I didn't take it as a rant at all, there are some legitimate concerns you brought up when talking about the East's perception of Hobart.  They are one of the most consistent programs in the East, sure they have had a down year here or there (down as in 6-7 wins).

I don't have an issue with Hobart's OOC, they schedule some traditionally strong opponents and took on a developing program in Utica.  The teams that have been strong in the past have their own ups and downs, so that's not really an issue.

The one thing I look at when trying to assess Hobart is their results vs the LL's other top teams, they haven't played them yet so it's hard for me to put them in a spot.  I still think they're a top 5 team in the East with that Defense, they just have to get some more consistency on offense.  If they do they should roll the rest of the way.

[pumkinattack]

I called it a rant because I realize any time someone cries for respect for their team (which is what I did), it's not a rational or reasonable expression (generally). 

I'm probably more frustrated that A.  The LL hasn't been as good for five years (2007 is probably the last season there was real strength and depth, though the 2008 Bart team had an excellent defense) and B.  Hobart never seems to get a mid level matchup.  What I mean be that is mosts playoffs they lose to a final four or better team in the 2nd round.  That's all luck, draws, etc, but perception comes from winning mulitple playoff games.  I'm pretty sure there was no difference between Cortland and Bart in 2008, but we got MUC in round 2 after sodomizing Lyco in Round 1 and Cortland plays two NEFC teams (I know one beat IC, but still) before basically playing a similary quality game vs. MUC in Round 3 and yet the gap in perception is masssive for that year.  It's all luck of the draw often in what round teams get beat, but I think it affects perception, which can matter.  Some of it is that Bart blows a stupid game almost every year that screws up their seeding, but isn't really reflective of the quality of the team, still their own fault. 

I also realize that there's no Bart posters left (unless you count ITH Radio, Rev on Asia time and myself, and I come and go).  And I don't expect fans of other teams to really give much of a sh*t about Hobart until we coalesce around the East vs. out of region programs at playoff time (or in the occasional OOC matchup that is relevant).  However, all you Buffalo Bills fans should be rooting for Hobart in 2013 and 2014.  Our backup QB is Shane Conlon's kid (a soph - Patrick).

[Pat Coleman]

For what it's worth, I believe Hobart's current D3football.com Top 25 ranking is the highest it has ever been. And I agree with the previous sentiment that Hobart isn't getting a whole lot of buzz because it hasn't played its most interesting opponents yet.

[Frank Rossi]

For what it's worth, I believe Hobart's current D3football.com Top 25 ranking is the highest it has ever been. And I agree with the previous sentiment that Hobart isn't getting a whole lot of buzz because it hasn't played its most interesting opponents yet.

I think the ranking alone doesn't do justice to the respect factor.  There are few conferences in which, when multiple teams are undefeated at this point, the undefeated teams are distanced by such a large margin -- which is what I call "independent differentiation" from the conference's own overall reputation.  For instance, Mount Union is #1, while Baldwin Wallace is #15 and Heidelberg is #26 (14/25 spread).  UW-W is #4 while UW-Pl is #13 and UW-O is #21 (9/17 spread).  On the other hand, SJF is #7 and Ithaca is at #42 showing, in my estimation, SJF in the Empire 8 has independent differentiation from their conference, even with a lot of E8 faith (and one-loss teams like Buff St. and Salisbury ahead of Ithaca... Meaning an anomaly could be present).  Similarly, Hobart at #12 is 20 spots higher than RPI (3-0).  Hobart has not played anyone major except for Utica, so pollsters are independently differentiating Hobart from the rest of their conference and despite any real marquis victories.

I don't know how much more respect Hobart fans can expect -- as Coach Yoder admitted tonight on ITH, the thought in the team is that they themselves haven't put in a full, 100% effort yet.  Moreover, the distance between SJF and Hobart HAS shrunken over the last two weeks from 177 points to 73 points -- meaning that another poor SJF performance next to a decent Hobart performance would allow Hobart to pass SJF most likely.

Pollsters are warned against taking knee-jerk reactions in the early weeks (although, I feel that Buff St. and Brockport were major overlays in the knee-jerk category last week, but the upset of the decade might excuse that sort of activity).  The trend, though, is pointing to a decent level of respect for Hobart, even without a really eye-opening tour-de-force effort.

[pumkinattack]

I can appreciate responses.  In reality what I was talking about was the commentary within the East that seems to ignore Hobart.  Forget the BuffSt win over UWW, that should be talked about all year.  I'm talking about the idea that no one can predict anything because of a couple of upsets based on preseason perception in the MAC, NJAC and some of SJFS underwhelming performances to date sans the Hartwick beatdown.  I stated they're roughly where they probably deserve to be in the d3 poll in my first sentence (I actually think they should be lower based on performance to dae) and have stated multiple times that they've not played to their level yet - so Frank, you're completely misinteroreting pretty explicit things in my posts. 

I agree w Rev, in prior years I cared about D3 rankings, now I care about geting out of the second round - and part of that is getting a good seed/draw.  What I was talking about is in yhe East, it seems because the league is weaker the past few years Hobart gets dismissed a bit within the East.  The only points only a national level where I reflct that same thought is in pointing out the relative positions between Bart and Cort St and SJF in 08 and last year respectively. 

[Bombers798891]

I'm fine with Buff State and Salisbury being ahead of Ithaca. What have the Bombers done this season to change the current state of affairs? Two of the wins they have this year were wins they had last year, and the third is over a Moravian team that looks mediocre at best. And one of those wins was practically handed to them.

Why would anyone in their right mind look at Salisbury and Ithaca and put the Bombers ahead? Beat Utica, and we can talk

[lewdogg11]

Anyone getting the feeling that Widener is trying to get noticed???

[Frank Rossi]

so Frank, you're completely misinteroreting pretty explicit things in my posts.

Ummm... REALLY?  I think I discussed the dis-attachment that's being witnessed concerning Hobart and the rest of the LL, addressing the point you made concerning the lack of LL success the past five years.  The other part concerning mid-level matchups essentially is addressed in the remainder -- there is sufficient national respect to ensure Hobart gets a better draw this year, especially assuming they go undefeated.  Even if the First Round is an easy game, the Second Round would represent a more mid-level opponent.  The point we're all making is that you're getting your wishes, so the complaints seem unfounded going forward as long as they continue winning.  Mount Union didn't wake up one day and become the 800-pound gorilla they are, and neither did Whitewater.  It takes time and proof of consistent strength before you just get the matchups you think you deserve in the playoffs, especially if your league is a little bit off.  The dis-attachment we're witnessing is a big signal that can't be ignored.

[Bombers798891]

Anyone getting the feeling that Widener is trying to get noticed???

Iffy. Beating W. Conn by 46 points isn't exactly a new trick (ask Cortland). King's has gone 1-9 each of the last two years (and really, a 35-point win is pretty common at the D-III level) And Misericordia might be the worst team in D-III (Consider that 1-3 Kings beat them 55-17). If you're a good team, and Widener probably is, a 46-, 35-, and even 67-point win isn't out of the question if the opponents are bad enough. The 2001 Bombers won four games by 49, 49, 52, and 66 points respectively.

The Wilkes score stunned me, and I already mentioned that I thought they left their staring QB in too long, but I will say this: I've seen games with similar/worse yardage discrepencies than 681-276 end much closer than that.

I think it's a perfect storm of a very good team playing horrible opponents back-to-back-to-back-to-back, leaving guys in a bit too long, and having one game where it was a perfect storm. Three of the games were conference games too, so a lot of that is out of their control. If these games were scattered throughout the year, I think we'd only notice the Wilkes game.

[Bombers798891]

so Frank, you're completely misinteroreting pretty explicit things in my posts.

Ummm... REALLY?  I think I discussed the dis-attachment that's being witnessed concerning Hobart and the rest of the LL, addressing the point you made concerning the lack of LL success the past five years.  The other part concerning mid-level matchups essentially is addressed in the remainder -- there is sufficient national respect to ensure Hobart gets a better draw this year, especially assuming they go undefeated.  Even if the First Round is an easy game, the Second Round would represent a more mid-level opponent.  The point we're all making is that you're getting your wishes, so the complaints seem unfounded going forward as long as they continue winning.  Mount Union didn't wake up one day and become the 800-pound gorilla they are, and neither did Whitewater.  It takes time and proof of consistent strength before you just get the matchups you think you deserve in the playoffs, especially if your league is a little bit off.  The dis-attachment we're witnessing is a big signal that can't be ignored.

How much do the 9-game schedules play into that I wonder?