mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
10-22-19 05:26 PM - Post#288937
In response to palestra38
I disagree on the difficulty of winning 13-14 games. 2 years ago, Penn was a terrible ref call from going 13-1
That was the worst league year since 2010 by a mile. Very similar to 2000s quality when a team around No. 100 could indeed churn through the league at 13-1/14-0.
the year before that, Princeton was 14-0
Princeton was No. 58 in Pomeroy and that league, at No. 18, was third-worst since 2010.
the year before that Yale was 13-1
Yale was No. 47 in Pomeroy and won a tournament game. That league was fourth-worst of the decade.
If you have the best team, you have to win the games that allow you to call yourself the best team.
This is a meaningless quasi-tautology. The quality of the league matters when it comes to the aggregate wins expectation for the winning team. That's a mathematical fact.
You should still have to win the league to say you're the best, which Harvard has done as many times during this five-year failure state as Yale (3) and more than any other team.
If this league is the toughest of the AI era - as is being projected - it will be much, much tougher to go 13-1 or 14-0 than in years where the league is significantly weaker (even including 2016, 2017). Not sure that should be such a tough concept to understand.
|
