"Quality of Loss"

[Hansel]

Most teams have played 10+ games at this point, yet many posters talk about how "their team's losses were only to really good teams", which I guess is OK, but at what point do we start talking about who you have beat, rather than who have you lost to

[SoCon48]

Most teams have played 10+ games at this point, yet many posters talk about how "their team's losses were only to really good teams", which I guess is OK, but at what point do we start talking about who you have beat, rather than who have you lost to

EXACTLY. Good point.
Only problem is some fans count some patsies/near patsies as "good" teams.

[ISUMatt]

ILS has beaten 3 probable I-AA playoff teams (EIU, UNI, and SIU). Actually we outscored the 3: 126-41

[SoCon48]

ILS has beaten 3 probable I-AA playoff teams (EIU, UNI, and SIU). Actually we outscored the 3: 126-41

Not too shabby. :cool:

[JALMOND]

Most teams have played 10+ games at this point, yet many posters talk about how "their team's losses were only to really good teams", which I guess is OK, but at what point do we start talking about who you have beat, rather than who have you lost to

My definition of a "quality loss" is a loss to a playoff bound team. If you lose to a team that gets in, whether by an autobid or a strong at large, that loss should not hurt you as much as a loss to a non-playoff team, regardless of how that non-playoff team played.

Case in point, Montana State---quality loss to E Washington (maybe) and Cal Poly (maybe). Not a quality loss to Portland State (not in playoffs). If the Cats beat Montana, that could be construed to be a quality win (assuming Montana makes the playoff field which is probably a safe assumption).

[Ronbo]

You can't judge a quality team by those that make the playoffs only. EWU, MSU, and PSU are better than half the teams that will make the playoffs. Weber State and ISU aren't far behind.