The highlight of NFL Opening night, Thursday September 9, 2021 -

QuoteAl Michaels: Let's meet the Tampa Bay offense.

* * *

Ali Marpet: Ali Marpet, THE Hobart College.

Quote from: BomberJeff on November 11, 2018, 05:51:54 PM

Quote from: UfanBill on November 11, 2018, 05:49:49 PM
I tried to watch the selection show but it would not load. Anyone else have that problem? Yearn for the days when it was covered by the ESPN family.

I have... a lot of thoughts about how the NCAA handles the selection show.  It's not even live, its a pre-taped video, how do you not have a link for it?

I had same impossibility to load selection show.  Continually got "video not available" message, then DIII Women's Volleball would attempt to load - same message; then DIII Softball - same message; then ...

D1 Cross Country loaded at one point, though.

Quote from: wesleydad on September 26, 2012, 10:31:16 PM
redswarm, where does it say the w conn cant play a close game against someone?  werent they due to play one sooner or later?

Where does it say?  I would start by looking at the 2010 and 2011 season records.  In those two seasons, WestConn won no games, and lost by an average of 31 and 38 points, respectively.  Their first two games this season were even worse.  The trend for over two seasons has been getting worse.  Sure, theoretically there's always the possibility of a breakout, but there's no evidence in the record that said or even hinted that it was going to occur last weekend against Rowan, or anytime this season against any good team.

Like I said, I don't know exactly what it means.  But I do know that "usual" and "ordinary" are adjectives that simply don't apply to the Western Connecticut Colonials right now.  With their 24 game losing streak and the huge scoring margins in those losses, WestConn has a good case to make that it's the weakest team in Division III right now, especially if you exclude Misericordia from the comparison.

I don't dispute your methodology, but I don't think it can be credibly applied to WestConn right now.

Quote from: wesleydad on September 26, 2012, 06:49:02 PM

Quote from: Bombers798891 on September 26, 2012, 12:28:46 PM

Quote from: redswarm81 on September 26, 2012, 11:41:27 AM

Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 26, 2012, 08:34:50 AM

Quote from: redswarm81 on September 25, 2012, 11:46:54 PM

Quote from: wesleydad on September 24, 2012, 06:55:41 PM
what caught my eye was that someone did not rank Rowan.  not sure how that could be.  guess they get a chance to change someones perspective this weekend.

Were I voting, I'd think long and hard about voting for a Rowan team that had to come back in the 2d half to beat Western CT by 6.  WestConn has lost 24 straight:

2010 average margin of loss = 31 points;
2011 average margin of loss = 36 points;
2012 1st 2 games, average margin of loss = 52 points.

I guess it really depends how much value you place on any one apparent "outlier" as part of a team's body of work. For example, UWW is still ranked 4th nationally (!) even with the loss to Buff State. Personally, I think Rowan is still getting credit for the season opening win over Del Val. I'm willing to excuse the occasional closer-than-it-should-have-been victory if there's at least one real quality WIN on the schedule. Leaving the East Region for a moment, last year Wabash barely survived a depleted Oberlin team with only 30-some players dressed for the game, then made a run to the quarterfinals.

In any case, this will all sort itself out in the end.

Agreed.  All would be included in my long and hard thinking, were I voting.  In poll voting, one difficulty I would have is how to reconcile single data points--the "outliers" as you describe them.  Polling is a way inexact science.  There are multiple (but limited) data points to consider, each of which is nearly useless by itself, such as margin of victory and record v. common opponents.

That said, I think WCSU in an in-conference game is a more weighty outlier than Buff State in an out-of-conference game.

The problem with all polls (especially early season ones) is there isn't a lot of data to determine if things are outliers or not. Cortland's 2-1, but since they've played the two worst teams in the NJAC, what do we really know? Buffalo State's win over Whitewater's going to look a lot different if the Bengals fall to 2-3 this weekend.

But this can go on all year. Heck, how many weeks did we debate Fisher in (I think) 2008? Brutal OOC, monkeystomp over a great IC team, lackluster wins over dreck like Rochester and Utica. Did we ever decide how good that team really was? I mean, I still maintain that the 2004 Bombers were the best team Mike Welch ever had, and they didn't even make the playoffs. But I firmly believe that squad would have taken the 2003 Ithaca team that nearly won the East region to the cleaners.

redswarm, i get your point, but the win [Rowan] had over del val far outweighs the close win against w conn.  [Rowan] still won [v. WestConn] and as usual most teams end up playing a closer game than was expected.  to keep them out of the top 10 for that reason just doesnt make sense to me.  out of the 7 teams i have seen play this year, rowan is the 4th best i have seen.  the 3 better than them are UMHB, Wesley, and Salisbury.

I don't know Dad, it's tough to agree with you on the "as usual" point.  For the past 24 games, WestConn has proved that "as usual" means losing by at least 30 points to a good team.  Rowan having a tough time with WestConn probably means something--I'm not sure what, but something -- it's not usual.

Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 26, 2012, 08:34:50 AM

Quote from: redswarm81 on September 25, 2012, 11:46:54 PM

Quote from: wesleydad on September 24, 2012, 06:55:41 PM
what caught my eye was that someone did not rank Rowan.  not sure how that could be.  guess they get a chance to change someones perspective this weekend.

Were I voting, I'd think long and hard about voting for a Rowan team that had to come back in the 2d half to beat Western CT by 6.  WestConn has lost 24 straight:

2010 average margin of loss = 31 points;
2011 average margin of loss = 36 points;
2012 1st 2 games, average margin of loss = 52 points.

I guess it really depends how much value you place on any one apparent "outlier" as part of a team's body of work. For example, UWW is still ranked 4th nationally (!) even with the loss to Buff State. Personally, I think Rowan is still getting credit for the season opening win over Del Val. I'm willing to excuse the occasional closer-than-it-should-have-been victory if there's at least one real quality WIN on the schedule. Leaving the East Region for a moment, last year Wabash barely survived a depleted Oberlin team with only 30-some players dressed for the game, then made a run to the quarterfinals.

In any case, this will all sort itself out in the end.

Agreed.  All would be included in my long and hard thinking, were I voting.  In poll voting, one difficulty I would have is how to reconcile single data points--the "outliers" as you describe them.  Polling is a way inexact science.  There are multiple (but limited) data points to consider, each of which is nearly useless by itself, such as margin of victory and record v. common opponents.

That said, I think WCSU in an in-conference game is a more weighty outlier than Buff State in an out-of-conference game.

Quote from: Frank Rossi on September 25, 2012, 08:41:53 AM
Last night's MNF finish . . .

Listen, mistakes happen.  However, this is the third week for replacement officials after a month of preseason.  I can't figure out how they're still missing blatant situations and messing up baseline mechanics (like discussing differences of opinion before dueling signals).  I know the replay rule prevents an overturn of the call since the call on the field was simultaneous possession (that semantics problem needs to be changed by the NFL immediately), meaning the initial call is magnified and more problematic than normal.  The NFL needs to make some concessions -- and get the standard refs back on the field.  If a flag football ref can interpret the rule correctly, the NFL needs to think about who they have on the field right now.

The mistakes have been so egregious and so elementary that I am forced to conclude the replacements are colluding with the locked-out referees.  It makes sense: public outcry, the fans demand that NFL ownership do whatever they must to return "real" officials to the field.  So the locked-out referees get their contract demands. . . .

. . . which they split with the replacements, without whom the referees would have been locked out AND out of luck.

Quote from: wesleydad on September 24, 2012, 06:55:41 PM
what caught my eye was that someone did not rank Rowan.  not sure how that could be.  guess they get a chance to change someones perspective this weekend.

Were I voting, I'd think long and hard about voting for a Rowan team that had to come back in the 2d half to beat Western CT by 6.  WestConn has lost 24 straight:

2010 average margin of loss = 31 points;
2011 average margin of loss = 36 points;
2012 1st 2 games, average margin of loss = 52 points.

Quote from: ITH radio on September 15, 2012, 02:55:07 PM

RPI up 35-21 3rd qtr

RPI stretches it out to 56-28 with 4 minutes remaining @ Castleton St.

Nice video stream from NESN, the announcers are closet Engineers, I'd swear--very complimentary of RPI.  Cameraman doesn't follow long passes well, though.

Quote from: ITH radio on September 09, 2012, 02:42:46 PM
Tonight on ITH we will be joined by . . . RPI senior quarterback and NFL prospect Mike Hermann. 

Nice.

Perhaps RPI Alumnus and Defensive Coordinator for the NFL's own New England Patriots--Matt Patricia, can discuss Hermann's prospects with ITH sometime soon.

Is there any way to let WRPI know that they're streaming the game and other audio?

Update: http://radio.securenetsystems.net/v4/index.cfm?stationCallSign=WTLBAM ESPN Radio Utica-Rome guys are suberb.

Halftime:

Utica 17
RPI    14

Final:

Utica 38
RPI    28

Quote from: Manuel Willocq on December 04, 2010, 10:15:00 AM

Quote from: redswarm81 on December 04, 2010, 09:40:15 AM

Quote from: roocru on December 03, 2010, 09:48:56 PM

Quote from: redswarm81 on December 03, 2010, 09:04:22 PM


NESCAC isn't "my" conference.  It is however, the most intellectually consistent football conference when it comes to the Division III philosophy of placing academics ahead of athletics.  In football.

Redswarm81,

You have made your point!  We think it is inconsistent and disagree!!  None of us are changing our minds!!! Please let it go!!!!

Who is "we?"  Ralph agreed with me regarding the intellectual consistency of NESCAC football, so he must not be part of your "we."

What is "it" that your "we" think is inconsistent?

Thanks for contributing.

Uh, how did Ralph agree with you???

Here's how:

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 01, 2010, 11:59:57 AM

Quote from: redswarm81 on December 01, 2010, 11:38:54 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 29, 2010, 10:41:33 AM

Thanks for the response.  

I just seek intellectual consistency.

Isn't NESCAC's position on football intellectually consistent?  (Is there anyone in this discussion who has tried to limit the discussion to NESCAC's position on football?)

I concede on the point of intellectual consistency by the NESCAC on the subject of football.

Quote from: roocru on December 03, 2010, 09:48:56 PM

Quote from: redswarm81 on December 03, 2010, 09:04:22 PM


NESCAC isn't "my" conference.  It is however, the most intellectually consistent football conference when it comes to the Division III philosophy of placing academics ahead of athletics.  In football.

Redswarm81,

You have made your point!  We think it is inconsistent and disagree!!  None of us are changing our minds!!! Please let it go!!!!

Who is "we?"  Ralph agreed with me regarding the intellectual consistency of NESCAC football, so he must not be part of your "we."

What is "it" that your "we" think is inconsistent?

Thanks for contributing.

Quote from: hazzben on December 03, 2010, 12:03:20 PM

Quote from: redswarm81 on December 01, 2010, 04:33:51 PM

I wonder on how many Division III campuses the profile of football is higher on game day than it is on the Williams campus when Williams is playing Amherst.  Or on the Colby campus when Colby is hosting Bates.

You'll just have to keep wondering...because no team in your conference has ever experienced the profile of football at a non-NESCAC school!

Go check out Wabash - Wittenberg; North Central - Wheaton; Carleton - St. Olaf; St. Johns - St. Thomas...the list goes on and on.

And what about the rest of your games? Or is it only 1 Saturday a year that the school gets really interested and involved.

7 Conferences had better attendance than the NESCAC last year. 16 teams had better attendance than Trinity, 18 had better than Amherst. How many of Amherst's 13,000 total fans for the year came from one game against Williams??

NESCAC isn't "my" conference.  It is however, the most intellectually consistent football conference when it comes to the Division III philosophy of placing academics ahead of athletics.  In football.

Where are you getting attendance statistics?  They sound interesting.  Does your source provide per-game attendance figures?  Given that NESCAC football teams play an 8 game schedule, those attendance figures might be more impressive on a per-game basis.  13,000 total attendance at four home games = 3,250/game, which I figure is pretty good, don't you?  Other Division III teams host 5 or even 6 regular season games, plus as many as four postseason games.

I'm not sure I understand your answer though.  On how many Division III campuses do you suppose the profile of football is higher on game day than it is on the Williams campus when Williams is playing Amherst?  Or on the Colby campus when Colby is hosting Bates?  I don't know the answer, but I know that football is pretty high profile on those campuses, especially on those game days.  I hear tell that Coast Guard football is pretty high profile on campus on game days.  I frankly don't remember if that was the case when I played against Coast Guard (back in the days of leather helmets ).

Quote from: Manuel Willocq on December 01, 2010, 07:28:50 PM

Quote from: redswarm81 on December 01, 2010, 05:42:27 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 29, 2010, 09:19:41 PM

Quote from: frank uible on November 29, 2010, 08:00:57 PM
In my view (which is not that of an insider) NESCAC's posture on football is not about academics but is about football. Since its posture on other sports is not about football but is about the other sport, then its football and non-football postures are not inconsistent. All this does not mean I necessarily agree with NESCAC's posture on football - which, if one cares, I don't.

I have no insider info on NESCAC's reasoning, either.  But redswarm claims it is for academic reasons, and is therefore a virtue.  As Ralph rather pointedly observed, this is blatant nonsense since they participate in all other post-season tourneys, which also occur during final exam times.

This has gotten rather silly.  It all began when I said that IMO, NESCAC football was not a part of d3 (since they NEVER play anyone outside of NESCAC, they are NESCAC football, not d3 football).  I seriously doubt that ADs at Williams, Amherst, etc., care about my opinion, and d3 has not expelled them, so why the kerfluffle?

IMO, NESCAC is a valued member of d3 in all other sports, but does not exist in d3 football.

I don't remember claiming to have insider knowledge--or outsider knowledge, for that matter--of NESCAC's reasoning.  However, I am pretty sure I mentioned that NESCAC's unwillingness to participate in a 5 week national tournament (after an 8 week regular season) is consistent with a philosophy that assigns a higher priority to academics than to athletics.

Again, then why don't they apply that same philosophy to the other NCAA sports they sponsor?  I just find that discussion confusing and certainly not-consistent.

Especially when football games are only played on Saturdays, and have the least amount of conflict with academics (as compared to baseball, soccer or basketball that regularly have competitions during the week and play MANY more games that would conflict with academic endeavors).

Has anyone, at anytime during this (football) discussion

• tried to keep the discussion focused on NESCAC football;
• suggested that NESCAC policy re national tournaments is intellectually consistent for football, but not for other sports; or
• conceded that NESCAC policy re national tournaments is intellectually consistent only for football?

So NESCAC is hypocritical in other sports besides football.  So what?  I'm sticking to football in this forum about football.  Why do people keep responding to my posts about NESCAC football with "but what about NESCAC triscuitball and NESCAC schnozzball and all those other balls?"  I would rather someone address the "high profile of football" issue from an earlier post, than discuss NESCAC hockeyball teams.

For some reason--which someone in this (football) forum doesn't care to analyze--NESCAC prefers intellectual inconsistency in all sports but football.  Some posters in this (football) forum seek intellectual consistency, have found intellectual consistency in NESCAC football, and don't particularly care to go looking for intellectual inconsistency.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 29, 2010, 09:19:41 PM

Quote from: frank uible on November 29, 2010, 08:00:57 PM
In my view (which is not that of an insider) NESCAC's posture on football is not about academics but is about football. Since its posture on other sports is not about football but is about the other sport, then its football and non-football postures are not inconsistent. All this does not mean I necessarily agree with NESCAC's posture on football - which, if one cares, I don't.

I have no insider info on NESCAC's reasoning, either.  But redswarm claims it is for academic reasons, and is therefore a virtue.  As Ralph rather pointedly observed, this is blatant nonsense since they participate in all other post-season tourneys, which also occur during final exam times.

This has gotten rather silly.  It all began when I said that IMO, NESCAC football was not a part of d3 (since they NEVER play anyone outside of NESCAC, they are NESCAC football, not d3 football).  I seriously doubt that ADs at Williams, Amherst, etc., care about my opinion, and d3 has not expelled them, so why the kerfluffle?

IMO, NESCAC is a valued member of d3 in all other sports, but does not exist in d3 football.

I don't remember claiming to have insider knowledge--or outsider knowledge, for that matter--of NESCAC's reasoning.  However, I am pretty sure I mentioned that NESCAC's unwillingness to participate in a 5 week national tournament (after an 8 week regular season) is consistent with a philosophy that assigns a higher priority to academics than to athletics.