FB: Middle Atlantic Conference

[bman]

1989 the defending national champs didnt go to the playoffs either.  And they didnt deserve to.

the 78 team probably was the best team in the nation that year....

[Jonny Utah]

Jonny

"Back then, playoff teams had to win big in big games to make the playoffs.  Widener lost to an average team and barely beat other teams on their schedule that werent even that good."

What year was that???

that year was 2002.  Ok, I wont call Kings College average, but they werent great.  Kings lost to Hartwick.  then widener didnt play any good nonconference games that might have helped them.  And they lost to Kings! that was their chance.  If you dont play a tough schedule, you need to go undefeated or have one loss to a good nonleague team to make it.

Hate to tell ya, but Widener didnt prove anything in 2001.

[Jonny Utah]

1978???

oh man, how did widener get shafted that year?  Did they beat wittenberg during the regular season and then not get invited because of a close loss to Bloomsberg at home or something?

Just win the game you are supposed to win and you go

[Jonny Utah]

1989 the defending national champs didnt go to the playoffs either.  And they didnt deserve to.

the 78 team probably was the best team in the nation that year....

If Mount Union didnt put in their third team in the fourth quarter in 2001, they PROBABLY could have won the game 110-30.

but the word probably is kinda lame and champions dont use that word

[bman]

Jonny

You are missing the point...they felt slighted by the NCAA(which is a joke), and chose not to participate in a seconday game that had no meaning.

I don't feel they should have to defend themselves for that decision....

PS how do YOU know they wouln't have beaten Witt?

[Jonny Utah]

No bman, you can feel slighted by the ncaa, but the ecac has nothing to do with the ncaa.  Do the ecac games ever have a meaning? 

ECAC is an orgainization that promotes eastern intercollegiate athletic sports and it gives out awards every year to the top players in the east.  Widener is a member of the ECAC. The ECAC invited Wideners football team to play in a postseason game, (a game I might add, is a traditional game that has been played for many years before.)

Widener basically told them they didnt want anything to do with them that year, because they thought they deserved to go to the ncaas.  I just dont think its right, and Widener should have played in the game.  Of course its a constalation game but its a tradition none the less.  Maybe widener people are above the ecac and tradition I dont know.

Im not saying they have to defend anything,

and you feel it was a joke (the ncaa snub)  It was a year that you could argue other teams should have gone.  Worcester State was 10-0 when we played them in 1996.  We were the better team at 7-3. 

Hartwick was 8-2 in 2002 after beating Kings yet Kings still went to the playoffs because they won the MAC and they beat Widener.  From the outside, it looked like a down year for the east.  The NCAA made thier decision.  Imagine the Hartwick people if Widener also made it over them.  You simply couldnt take widener and kings and not hartwick.

I dont know anything about 1978 except Ithaca lost to Wittenberg 6-3 in the playoffs.

[bman]

Jonny

We will agree to disagree then...and I don't think it has to do with anyone feeling it was "below" them to play in that game...as Chum stated. t was a team thing and they made that decision collectively....

[zoolander]

jonny we played mt union in 2000.  mot bad for aa young group of players that came into the 2000 season ranked at forty something.

2001 we were ranked #2 in the nation for most of the year, we also beat the #3 team in the nation by 16 in the second rd. we lost to #4 bw , which we should have played at home. "shafted" dont compare our 2001 team to mt unions 2001 bc we never played, if we did,  it would have never went down like it did in 2000. many will agree.

at the end of the day we didnt want to play in the ecac game bc we wouldnt have been ready for it,  we were focused on getting a bid and that didnt happen.  once again, what good would our starting team (mostly seniors) get out of playing moravian again.  nottadamthing...  thanks but no thanx!!!

if widener gets an ecac bid in 2005, they would be foolish not to take it.

[Jonny Utah]

Yea, but we can all agree that Widener was far from being the #4 team in the country in 2001, that ranking was based on how they fared against east teams in 2000, which they were clearly the best.

And like I said before, we didnt want to play the ecac game in 1996 either.  And as you say, there was no point to the game.  In 1987, Ithaca lost their last regualar season game to dayton and then played plymouth st in the ecac game, and I heard that a lot of players gave up and had a bad attitude in the game(please correct me if Im wrong, I wasnt there, just goin on what I heard)

Im assuming you like me went to a school to play for a national championship, and the end of that 2001 must have been disapointing, but again, you were invited by the ecac and you said no.

on your side though, I probably wouldnt want to play a team that we already played, I would agree that you should have played someone else like hartwick or ithaca.  In 1996 though, it wouldnt have been fair to worcester st if we had turned it down.

[zoolander]

that ranking 2001 wansnt based on the 2000 walk through the east.  it was based on how well we were in 2001 not 2000.  we beat the n #3 team in the nation at home, convincingly.  then lost to the #4 team away "shafted" .  ask pat, we deserved to be #2 untill we lost. by the way, bw lost to mt union 30-27 in the stagg bowl.

good luck to widener this week! 
im taking a trip to vegas and putting my quarterly savings on delval. bc if i lose i still win!!!!  can i get a go eagles!!!

[gordonmann]

Reminder...

If you don't want to make the four-hour drive from the Philadelphia (or other) area to Juniata and then the same back, let me do it for you.  All you have to do is listen to the game from the comforts of your own home or office.

Kickoff is at 1 PM with pregame coverage at 12:30 PM on www.sportsjuice.com.

Knoblauch goes for the 10,000-yard passing/1,000 yard-rushing record and the Aggies try to clinch the MAC.

[bman]

Jonny

I will cite another example...

The 1906 team was snubbed by the NCAA, when their uniforms did not meet "NCAA" standards...It seems that someone in the wool industry pulled in a favor and turned the "W" upside down...thus making them ineligble for the post season.  The team was devastated, as you can see from the "Glum" looks....

[Warren Thompson]

bman:

While I wasn't [quite] on the scene at that time, I do remember hearing about Widener's ...  er, PMC's 1906 "shafting." While the "wrong" uniforms were the announced reason for the snub, the truth was something altogether different -- and more serious.  In those days a football team consisted of 15 players, and the flying wedge was the offense of choice; PMC was then a military academy with a polo team, and they commonly employed a horse, disguised in a football uniform, as the point of the wedge.

The Cadets were able to use the horse with impunity for a number of seasons until an opposing coach noticed equine by-product on the field. The resulting scandal and investigation rocked the athletic world, and from henceforth on horses (and most other animals) were strictly banned from collegiate competition, though professional teams were allowed to continue their use until after-game cleanup costs went through the roof.

There, that's the true story of PMC's/Widener's first in a long history of snubs, shafts, and slaps in the face.

[bman]

Warren

That ban was also modified when the Gus the Kicking Mule scandal rocked the pro ranks...

The 1906 horse probably thought "this is a lot easier than dragging a howitzer"

[Warren Thompson]

bman:

And because of PMC's sin in 1906, we now have the all-too-common saying, "Widener [or whoever] has all the horses this season." Little do most fans realize the historical background herein.