Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

Subject: Mythical playoff bids Author: Ivy Inquisitor (Champion tie breakers) [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 01:43:02 12/27/24 Fri I’m thought if will be fun to explore which of the shared league champion should have received a playoff spot starting in 1982 when the Ivy joined the Division 1-AA Next winter as The Ivy steps onto the national stage, I’m quite sure the league is considering the “better or more deserving” debate. 1982: Dartmouth/Harvard/Penn. Dartmouth was 5-5 thus the first to be eliminated. Penn (7-3) defeated Harvard (7-3). That’s gives the bid to Penn. 1983: Harvard/Penn. Harvard (6-2–2) gets the invite over Penn(6-3-1) because they won the head to head, beat D-1A Army and tied #2 Holy Cross. 1988: Cornell/ Penn. Cornell (7-2-1) won the head to head. Being the better team Penn (9-1) should get the invite. 1990: Cornell/Dartmouth. Dartmouth (7-2-1) gets the bid by beating Cornell (7-3) , beating #20 Leigh and tied #3 UNH. 1992: Dartmouth/Princeton Dartmouth’s(8-2) 34-20 win at Princeton (8-2) gives Them the nod. 1999: Brown/Yale. Brown’s(9-1)25-24 win at Yale(9-1) gives them the edge. You can get any closer to this one- including over time! This senecio is the perfect example of the sometimes harsh nature of The Ivy as a-winner-take-all Conference. 2006: Princeton/Yale. Princeton(9-1) beat Yale (8-2) on the road. No question Princeton gets the invite. 2008:Brown/Harvard. Despite #19 Harvard (9-1) losing to Brown(7-3). Should get the bid. This will spark the “best team or more deserving” debate. 2013:Harvard/ Princeton. Princeton(8-2) gets the nod over Harvard(9-1) because they beat them on the road. Moreover, Princeton’s two losses were to #22 Lehigh and Dartmouth by a combined 5 points. *2008 and 2013 shows it’s not necessary to stick with one format concerning the better team or more deserving.* 2015:Dartmouth/Penn/Harvard. Penn(7-3) is instantly eliminated. Harvard (9-1) beat Dartmouth (9-1) at home. It’s Harvard’s 10 home loss to Penn gives Dartmouth the bid. 2016: Penn/Princeton. Princeton’s(8-2) 28-0 win over Penn(7-3) shows why they’re the best team to represent The Ivy League on the national stage. 2019:Dartmouth/Yale. Dartmouth’s (9-1) 27-10 win over Princeton(9-1) shows why there’re the right choice for the coveted post season spot. 2021:Dartmouth/Princeton. Dartmouth’s (9-1) 31-7 win over Princeton(9-1) is convincing enough to send them post season as The Ivy’s best face. 2023:Dartmouth/Harvard/Yale. Dartmouth (6-4) is the first one eliminated. Thought the season Harvard(8-2) was the best team. I’ll have to give the bid to Yale(7-3) not for beating Harvard but I’m extremely interested to see if Yale could dominate in the same fashion in December as they have in November. 2024:Columbia/Dartmouth/Harvard. Harvard beat both Dartmouth(8-2) and Columbia(7-3). So they’re clearly the better team. However, This is Columbia’s first championship since 1961. Should the decades long suffering Lions get this one? I’m not sure, maybe , I’ll leave it up to you to ponder over it. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Subject: Re: Mythical playoff bids Author: An Observer [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 11:18:58 12/27/24 Fri PQ: Fine work. Thank you for going back over the records to compile your thoughts. Regarding the debate between "better or more deserving," my bias is always to go with more deserving. That's why we have a regular season. That's why we play the games. Is there any question that Alabama is a better football team than Vanderbilt or Oklahoma? Well, there's a bit of a question, but not much. If Alabama, Vanderbilt and Oklahoma each had a two-game round robin regular season, Alabama finished 0-2. The Crimson Tide are the best team according to the eye test, but they lost both games. That's why we play the games. The results of the games must matter. The CFP Committee of course is charged with selecting previously the four "best" teams and now the twelve (including the AQ's). That's a mistake, but I'm not in charge, as much as I should be. Similarly, the Ivy League should never use a subjective committee to send our "best" representative to the FCS playoffs. It will rarely be a problem. The overwhelming majority of shared championships are shared by only two teams. No problem there. A three-team tri-championship is an anomaly, recency bias excepted. We'll have some logical tie-breakers to deal with this unusual outcome. Go Green of course is rooting for a four-team quad-championship, as long as Dartmouth is included. I hope that, when the League comes up with its long list of tie-breaking criteria, it will follow the example of the NCAA in one small respect. As you may recall, when there are insufficient bowl-eligible teams to fill all the Duke's Mayo or Poulon Weedeater Bowl slots, the NCAA makes eligible the 5-7 team(s) which have the highest Academic Progress Rating. I hope that, at the very bottom of the list of Ivy League football tie-breakers, will appear some academic criterion, such as APR or US News ranking. Let's give a nod to the fact that, unlike the rest of big-time football, we are still first and foremost, academic institutions. [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: Mythical playoff bids Author: M3 [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 12:53:22 12/27/24 Fri Outstanding job Thanks [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: Mythical playoff bids Author: Old Lion (dispaity) [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 22:04:27 12/28/24 Sat Re Columbia:prior to this season has there ever been a league champion or co-champion with the with the lowest points allowed on defense and the lowest points scored on offense? [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: Mythical playoff bids Author: Son of Eli [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 18:01:45 12/30/24 Mon You forgot 1989 where both Yale and Princeton finished 6-1. Yale beat Princeton so they would get the AQ. [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Dumb question, but... Author: Go Green [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 10:26:35 12/31/24 Tue Why are we eliminating teams based on nonconference record? Wouldn't that just encourage teams to do the Tim Murphy thing and schedule cupcakes for nonconference opponents? I mean, you could use a common nonconference opponent to break a tie between co-champions. But other than that... [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> Subject: Re: Dumb question, but... Author: Son of Eli [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 13:39:53 12/31/24 Tue I agree [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> Subject: Re: Dumb question, but... Author: An Observer [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 14:42:19 12/31/24 Tue GG, I agree with your logic, but you are objecting to a process which exists solely in PQ's head. When you say "we," you're not just repeating the Lone Ranger's mistake when he told Tonto, "Looks like we're finished, old friend," you're ascribing to PQ the imprimatur of an official Ivy League tiebreaker. He's having fun and doing some work on behalf of us. Don't object just because, on a couple of occasions, when he used OOC results, Dartmouth came out on the short end of it. [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> Subject: He did begin by letting you know it's a stupid question. Author: Valmas (Stoic) [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 20:07:51 12/31/24 Tue So stupid, that not even PQ would date disrupt his New Year's Eve agenda to weight in on such a non-matter! [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> Subject: Deviating somewhat from original topic Author: Ivy Inquisitor [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 20:52:54 01/01/25 Wed First of all I hope the Ivy Voy friends are doing well on this international hangover day, well at least according to Pope Gregory XIII. I’m glad you’ve enjoyed this subjective thoughts. When the league decides on the tiebreaker measures I’d assume the head to head will take priority. If there’s three teams that split the head to head will get quite difficult. I don’t expect the league to shift back and forth between most “deserving” and “best”. What makes the Ivy stand apart is unlike major college football they stick to the principles and pathway. Most of college football is trying to have it both ways. Look at today’s games. These games want to be both playoffs and bowl games. Moreover, the players, coaches are on the move to their next more lucrative endeavor. The institutions proclaim their commitment to academics but their transcontinental conferences prove otherwise. Since rosters are changing from September to October and certainly by December, it could be more difficult to determine which opponent will be a “tomato can” game. Next December I’m most excited to see (whomever it is) if they can pull off some big upsets like HYP has done in recent years in the NCAA MBB tournament. [ Post a Reply to This Message ]