FB: Ohio Athletic Conference

[bceagle80]

Mounts JV schedule says they played JCU on the 13th. Any score? Also, if the Mount SID reads here (and he should!) post the scores of the games! Some of us are very interested in both Varsity and JV football. Thanks all-

JV won 41 - 19. All points scored by Mount Union in the first half. John Carroll's scored in the second half. John Carroll kept 1st team in most of the game.

[Desertraider]

Mounts JV schedule says they played JCU on the 13th. Any score? Also, if the Mount SID reads here (and he should!) post the scores of the games! Some of us are very interested in both Varsity and JV football. Thanks all-

JV won 41 - 19. All points scored by Mount Union in the first half. John Carroll's scored in the second half. John Carroll kept 1st team in most of the game.

Super! Thanks for the info and +K for you. I still don't understand why the JV schedule is listed but never has scores. That is one thing I miss about Ric's site...that and the great story write-ups. Does anyone know if their is an archive of Dick's (god it's been so long I hope that was his name) stories? Loved reading them.

[Desertraider]

BTW I see that the Brownies signed Blanchard from UWW into their QB ranks. Just wondering - why no love for Kevin Burke?

[bceagle80]

BTW I see that the Brownies signed Blanchard from UWW into their QB ranks. Just wondering - why no love for Kevin Burke?

I have a unique perspective on this. Having attended Boston College before Flutie, I remember his college career. There are a lot of similarities between KB and Flutie. Smaller, active QB with a knack for finding the open man. KB could try to go pro as a QB but I think, if he wants a long term career, he should consider at WR. He has the speed and I am sure he could be a receiver like Golden Tate.

[thewaterboy]

BTW I see that the Brownies signed Blanchard from UWW into their QB ranks. Just wondering - why no love for Kevin Burke?

Unfortunately, I think some take a look at his size and write him off, or (I argue) because of the fact that he used his legs more than Blanchard and Tanney used theirs. IMHO, I don't think scouts see those attributes translating to the NFL from D3, so they write them off completely.

The only quarterbacks that have gotten looks that are known for also using their legs are from the big schools with big offenses (RGIII, Manziel etc.) and even some of those guys are proving that it is better to have a more "conventional" QB.

[HScoach]

BTW I see that the Brownies signed Blanchard from UWW into their QB ranks. Just wondering - why no love for Kevin Burke?

Because he's short, isn't a world class athlete like Mike Vick, has a funky delivery and has only good arm strength at the D3 level.   

Besides those minor items he's a NFL hall of fame lock.

[Desertraider]

I guess I see it more as when you are the Browns and have been accepting your participant ribbon since returning to the league - looking at everybody with a heart beat should be your goal. Let's face it - teams get more from their undrafted free agents than the Browns seems to get from their first rounders.

[SaintsFAN]

BTW I see that the Brownies signed Blanchard from UWW into their QB ranks. Just wondering - why no love for Kevin Burke?

Because he's short, isn't a world class athlete like Mike Vick, has a funky delivery and has only good arm strength at the D3 level.   

Besides those minor items he's a NFL hall of fame lock.

Touché

[Toph]

BTW I see that the Brownies signed Blanchard from UWW into their QB ranks. Just wondering - why no love for Kevin Burke?

He's listed at 5'11", 190.  So he's probably more like 5'9" or 5'10", 175.  JJ Watt would turn him into a puddle.

For comparison's sake, Johnny Manziel is listed at 6', 210 and you see how small he looks out there. 

[bceagle80]

BTW I see that the Brownies signed Blanchard from UWW into their QB ranks. Just wondering - why no love for Kevin Burke?

He's listed at 5'11", 190.  So he's probably more like 5'9" or 5'10", 175.  JJ Watt would turn him into a puddle.

For comparison's sake, Johnny Manziel is listed at 6', 210 and you see how small he looks out there.

If you look at Flutie, a long professional career can happen. He started in the USFL, went the CFL & then NFL. He played roughly 15 or 16 years as a pro. I think the main reason NFL teams look for bigger QBs is they don't want to redesign their team for one QB no matter how good he is. This is why I suggest Kevin Burke might be better served to look to be a wide receiver.

[Pat Coleman]

BTW I see that the Brownies signed Blanchard from UWW into their QB ranks. Just wondering - why no love for Kevin Burke?

He's listed at 5'11", 190.  So he's probably more like 5'9" or 5'10", 175.  JJ Watt would turn him into a puddle.

For comparison's sake, Johnny Manziel is listed at 6', 210 and you see how small he looks out there.

If you look at Flutie, a long professional career can happen. He started in the USFL, went the CFL & then NFL. He played roughly 15 or 16 years as a pro. I think the main reason NFL teams look for bigger QBs is they don't want to redesign their team for one QB no matter how good he is. This is why I suggest Kevin Burke might be better served to look to be a wide receiver.

The game of professional football has changed in the 30 years since Doug Flutie came out -- as much as I'd love to see Burke get a shot, he wasn't Doug Flutie, and Doug Flutie today might not even get the change he got in the mid-80s.

[ExTartanPlayer]

BTW I see that the Brownies signed Blanchard from UWW into their QB ranks. Just wondering - why no love for Kevin Burke?

I have a unique perspective on this. Having attended Boston College before Flutie, I remember his college career. There are a lot of similarities between KB and Flutie. Smaller, active QB with a knack for finding the open man. KB could try to go pro as a QB but I think, if he wants a long term career, he should consider at WR. He has the speed and I am sure he could be a receiver like Golden Tate.

bceagle, you're clearly a very nice guy, but these comparisons deserve a serious come on, man.  Kevin Burke was a phenomenal Division III player at QB, but we're playing in an era in which acceptance of smaller, quicker QB's in spread offenses is probably greater than ever (at least on the collegiate level), certainly much moreso than it was in the mid-1980's, and he did not get any D1 offers (I assume?) while Doug Flutie won the Heisman Trophy and Golden Tate won the Biletnikoff Award.

Golden Tate weighed 199 pounds at the combine while running a 4.42 in the 40 and bench-pressing 225 for 17 reps.  My guess is that Burke cannot duplicate any of those numbers, although I may be wrong about this.  Tate is bigger, faster, quicker, and spent his college career putting up 100-yard games against the likes of USC and Pitt.  Burke would need some serious time to make that kind of adjustment - making a position switch while going from D3 to the NFL...Julian Edelman is a much more realistic comp for Burke, being a small white guy who started at QB for Kent State and made a successful transition, but I mean, Eric Crouch won the Heisman at QB and never could hack it as an NFL wide receiver.  Terrelle Pryor just got cut from the Browns. 

Burke and Flutie may be similar in the sense that both are shortish guys who can run and play the QB position with guile, but you can't possibly think Burke and Flutie are in the same stratosphere, and the same goes for Tate.  This is almost as bad as the UWW guys dreaming about Blanchard making the Packers over Brett Hundley and Scott Tolzien.

[Spurrier]

Look out Ada...mr and mrs Spurrier are on the way...where my polar bears at?

[bceagle80]

BTW I see that the Brownies signed Blanchard from UWW into their QB ranks. Just wondering - why no love for Kevin Burke?

I have a unique perspective on this. Having attended Boston College before Flutie, I remember his college career. There are a lot of similarities between KB and Flutie. Smaller, active QB with a knack for finding the open man. KB could try to go pro as a QB but I think, if he wants a long term career, he should consider at WR. He has the speed and I am sure he could be a receiver like Golden Tate.

bceagle, you're clearly a very nice guy, but these comparisons deserve a serious come on, man.  Kevin Burke was a phenomenal Division III player at QB, but we're playing in an era in which acceptance of smaller, quicker QB's in spread offenses is probably greater than ever (at least on the collegiate level), certainly much moreso than it was in the mid-1980's, and he did not get any D1 offers (I assume?) while Doug Flutie won the Heisman Trophy and Golden Tate won the Biletnikoff Award.

Golden Tate weighed 199 pounds at the combine while running a 4.42 in the 40 and bench-pressing 225 for 17 reps.  My guess is that Burke cannot duplicate any of those numbers, although I may be wrong about this.  Tate is bigger, faster, quicker, and spent his college career putting up 100-yard games against the likes of USC and Pitt.  Burke would need some serious time to make that kind of adjustment - making a position switch while going from D3 to the NFL...Julian Edelman is a much more realistic comp for Burke, being a small white guy who started at QB for Kent State and made a successful transition, but I mean, Eric Crouch won the Heisman at QB and never could hack it as an NFL wide receiver.  Terrelle Pryor just got cut from the Browns. 

Burke and Flutie may be similar in the sense that both are shortish guys who can run and play the QB position with guile, but you can't possibly think Burke and Flutie are in the same stratosphere, and the same goes for Tate.  This is almost as bad as the UWW guys dreaming about Blanchard making the Packers over Brett Hundley and Scott Tolzien.

I respectively disagree with you. The reasons Flutie was as good as he was were not his physical attributes. Flutie had (& still does have) the heart of a champion, incredible intuition and an innate ability to find the open receiver and get the ball to him. I think Kevin Burke posesses his own great attributes. I think his abilities can translate to career in pro football if he wanted to pursue it. There are a number of receivers in the NFL today of small stature.

So the question is where do I pull the knowledge from that backs up my conclusions? I have said on this board that I went to Boston College. I also played football there. I personally knew a number of guys who went on to play in the NFL. They played both skilled positions and in the line. Some had long careers. Let me tell you in college football talented players are a dime a dozen. Every kid who even gets a look by NFL scouts has loads of talent. The question is what do they do with the talent. I knew a guy in college that was a QB and could through the ball 90 yards in the air. Yet the last I heard of him he was a three time loser doing time Louisiana. Yes, JJ Watts could probably make him go splat, no argument, but JJ Watts makss a lot of people go splat.

I believe Kevin Burke has the heart, the intelligence, the focus and the will to be successful at whatever he wants to do whether it includes football or not. That is what makes a winner. This is where he directly compares very well with Flutie. Incredible athleticism is only one charactetstic of great football players. Bottom line: if you work your butt off and are prepared when the opportunity presents itself for success in life as well as football, you must have the focus, will, heart and intelligence to make your dream a reality. I am getting off my soapbox now.

[ExTartanPlayer]

I appreciate the good-natured discussion, bceagle, and will express a somewhat dissenting opinion, but before I do, I would like to post something that ScreamingEagles posted in the WIAC thread after a (much more contentious) discussion about UWW quarterback Matt Blanchard:

"It's also a shame that anyone who cast doubt on Blanchard got immediately attacked by some of the Warhawk faithful.  How dare they underestimate the potential of a three time National Champion.  Regardless of the fact that he was cut two times before the Packers signed him and he's competing against the incumbent backup and a draft pick for a roster spot.

Everyone who objectively looked at the situation for Matt knew that it was going to be an uphill battle to make the squad, particularly after they drafted Hundley.  Nobody said he shouldn't have tried, or that they were rooting against him.  I wish him nothing but the best and hope that he gets a shot in Cleveland to show how good he is in a regular season game, but don't be bitter that others held a differing opinion that wasn't all sunshine and roses."

Much to your credit, you have kept the tone respectful, and I do not expect any trouble on that score.  I still felt that this was worth mentioning before we proceed; please note that casting of doubt on the validity of your comparisons between Burke and Flutie/Tate does not mean I am rooting against Burke, although some may unfortunately perceive it that way.  With that said, let us press on:

Let me tell you in college football talented players are a dime a dozen. Every kid who even gets a look by NFL scouts has loads of talent. The question is what do they do with the talent.

Doesn't this argument cut both ways though?  If talented players are a "dime a dozen" - that means that the intangible stuff only matters if you actually possess sufficient talent to merit that look, right?  Intangibles might be the difference between Tom Brady and, say, Ryan Tannehill, but both guys meet that certain baseline level of talent neccessary to compete in the NFL.  If you don't have sufficient talent, none of the intangible stuff is going to erase that fact.

I believe Kevin Burke has the heart, the intelligence, the focus and the will to be successful at whatever he wants to do whether it includes football or not. That is what makes a winner. This is where he directly compares very well with Flutie.

This is a great soapbox-y point that the NCAA loves to trot out about its model athletes.  And it's not wrong - I also embody the successful NCAA student-athlete in the "being successful whether it includes football or not" (hint: mine does not include football anymore).  It also doesn't matter that much in terms of making the NFL.  Have you noticed the guys on NFL rosters lately?  Including such winners as Aldon Smith, Greg Hardy, and so on?  How's their heart, intelligence, focus, and will to be successful?

Talent > Intangibles when it comes to getting a shot in the NFL (or multiple shots, in the case of some of these guys). 

Actually succeeding in the NFL, of course, also depends on the intangibles (Brady, Manning, Brees, etc...the great QB's are all certainly renowned for the "extras" as much as their physical talent).  But intangibles do not matter a lick (in terms of making the NFL, of course, not in "life") if you don't have the talent to get there in the first place.  Speaking of which...

Incredible athleticism is only one charactetstic of great football players. Bottom line: if you work your butt off and are prepared when the opportunity presents itself for success in life as well as football, you must have the focus, will, heart and intelligence to make your dream a reality.

Before addressing this point, I do want to note that what you've said here is exactly what I would want you to say...if you were coaching my son's junior-high or high-school football team. 

However, we are not talking to a bunch of 15-year-olds dreaming of NFL glory, we are on a message board discussing the relative likelihood of a Division III football player making it to the NFL.  And the thing is, cliches like this sound fabulous on paper but ignore the aforementioned reality (which you brought up!) that talented players are a "dime a dozen" - so while the focus, will, heart, and intelligence all certainly factor into the equation, that also presumes that the player in question is of equivalent (or nearly equivalent) talent to the "dime a dozen" talented players, some of whom are also presumably also in possession of some degree of focus, will, heart, and intelligence. 

Taking this argument to its logical conclusion, you would be suggesting that focus, will, heart, and intelligence are more important than talent.  Again, that sounds great on paper but it's only true if the guys are all close enough in talent for it to matter!  If we ran a bottom-rung SEC team out there this week - say, Kentucky - against Mount Union, what's the final score going to be?  Will all of the focus, will, heart, and intelligence make up for the fact that Kentucky has 85 dudes who merited FBS scholarship offers while Mount has maybe a handful that transferred or got small-school offers?

As I noted previously, the comparisons to Flutie and Tate are hopelessly optimistic.  They won the Heisman (the best player in college football) and Biletnikoff (the best WR in college football) and both have an argument as all-time greats at tradition-laden Division I programs.  Even if he does possess equivalent "focus, will, heart, and intelligence" to those two players, which he might well possess, the hard truth is he probably doesn't have nearly the talent either of them did.  If he did have that talent, he would have been competing for the Heisman or Biletnikoff, not for the Gagliardi.  Players like Julian Edelman, Danny Amendola, Wes Welker, even Cecil Shorts and Pierre Garcon...those guys are much more relevant examples when it comes to Kevin Burke.  And they do illustrate that it is possible to make the League with small stature and/or Division III pedigree.

For another pertinent example, Jake Kumerow is 6'5" and 205 pounds, probably faster than Burke, actually spent his collegiate career playing wide receiver and obliterating Division III defenses, and he did not make the Bengals 53-man roster to start this season.  All of this "focus, will, heart, and intelligence" stuff is great if you also have the insane talent level to get into a camp and make some plays.