FB: Ohio Athletic Conference

[USee]

I noticed in the UMU game notes they list Mt Union's place in the AFCA coaches poll with no mention of the D3.com poll. I take it this is in line with the long string of non support for D3.com? Is there another backstory there?

I think you have the "non support" backwards

I'm sure it runs both ways but if Mt Union is quoting the laughable AFCA poll in the game notes, that's either incompetence or a direct slap in the face.

[Kira & Jaxon's Dad]

The D3 Braintrust are all picking NCC:

Keith:   42-20
Ryan:   31-24
Pat:      41-27
Adam:  31-27
Frank:  37-24
Greg:   38-20

https://d3football.com/notables/2021/12/quick-hits-playoffs-week15

2 to 3 score difference is what I'm expecting too.  Not saying Mount can't win, but it would be a shock.

Maybe NC will read all the press on their 2-3 score win with over an under matched Mount Union, that is mistake prone.
IMHO, the game could be closer than most expect. Weather could be a factor, but I think the Raiders playing at home
bring their pride to the game. Other than Wheaton, just who has NC played that is much better than, B-W, JCU, Hopkins,
Muhlenburg?

UW-LAX

[archgemini24]

I wonder if this is the first "quick hits" article where mount was unanimously picked to lose?

I believe QH unanimously picked UMHB to win the 2016 semifinal.

So it was, and only 1 of them even had it as a close game. From the 09Dec2016 blog post:
Keith:   35-17
Ryan:   44-33
Pat:      35-20
Adam:  38-20
Frank:  52-37
Josh:    31-28

With the Raiders down to their 3rd QB that year, this one should have come to me sooner.

If the game we get tomorrow is anything like the game we got in 2016 against these predictions, we are in for a fight.

[Captainred81]

Who cares if the entire team from NCC is back?  Mount is a different team this year, right?  2 years ago Wheaton smoked NCC, and this year with virtually the same players NCC won.  My point different year, different coaches, Semis not not 2nd round, there is soooo much different this time around.  Players in their first year (as starters) Lehnen and Plunk, players in their last year (petro and kamienski)... This game could go a million different ways.  Last game they was almost 700 yards of offense by each team.  Clearly both sides have a game plan that can work against the other. 

I'm sticking with Mount Union at home vying to play in Canton next week.  I think the D comes up big with some key interceptions and they slow down the run game just enough to win. 

[Pat Coleman]

UWL lost their games against the two teams who met in the last Stagg Bowl and a D2 powerhouse.

This. You have to maybe look at UW-L before judging. Nobody else in D-III played anyone like Grand Valley State.

[Pat Coleman]

I noticed in the UMU game notes they list Mt Union's place in the AFCA coaches poll with no mention of the D3.com poll. I take it this is in line with the long string of non support for D3.com? Is there another backstory there?

I think you have the "non support" backwards

I'm sure it runs both ways but if Mt Union is quoting the laughable AFCA poll in the game notes, that's either incompetence or a direct slap in the face.

Not sure what you mean by us "not supporting" Mount Union. Meanwhile, we continue to request access to talk to Mount Union football personnel to write features and articles and such and Mount Union has declined, going on several years.

We're not losing any sleep over it anymore, though.

[USee]

To be clear, I was saying "opinions" run both ways. I have no doubt D3.com has supported Mt Union consistently over the years and they are just bitter about what they perceived as negative coverage related to one incident and decided to "blackball" the D3.com staff.

They are the only team in the country with that approach. I think it's terribly short-sighted and only hurts their program longer term.

[D3fanboy]

To be clear, I was saying "opinions" run both ways. I have no doubt D3.com has supported Mt Union consistently over the years and they are just bitter about what they perceived as negative coverage related to one incident and decided to "blackball" the D3.com staff.

They are the only team in the country with that approach. I think it's terribly short-sighted and only hurts their program longer term.

How does Mount not talking to d3football hurt the program?

as always, d3football.com needs Mount Union a lot more than Mount Union needs d3football.com

[02 Warhawk]

What do they need Mount for?

[Pat Coleman]

Not really sure what to make of that last question from the artist formerly known as Purple Suit, but it seems he is the one who can't do without us.

[USee]

To be clear, I was saying "opinions" run both ways. I have no doubt D3.com has supported Mt Union consistently over the years and they are just bitter about what they perceived as negative coverage related to one incident and decided to "blackball" the D3.com staff.

They are the only team in the country with that approach. I think it's terribly short-sighted and only hurts their program longer term.

How does Mount not talking to d3football hurt the program?

as always, d3football.com needs Mount Union a lot more than Mount Union needs d3football.com

The Raiders do have the Alliance Review and the AFCA Coaches poll in their back pocket so there's that. Recruits will love that.

[MUC57]

Raiderpa

Rey's?

[archgemini24]

To be clear, I was saying "opinions" run both ways. I have no doubt D3.com has supported Mt Union consistently over the years and they are just bitter about what they perceived as negative coverage related to one incident and decided to "blackball" the D3.com staff.

They are the only team in the country with that approach. I think it's terribly short-sighted and only hurts their program longer term.

Support? Really? My observation has been that they talk about Mount only when necessary and only seem to put any energy into it when the Raiders lose, come close to it, or want to press to get information on negative stories. Anything positive is spoken in a sense of, "Death, Taxes, Mount Union winning, and a bunch of other things we don't like to talk about but have to acknowledge." It is how D3.com wants (and is entitled) to handle its business, and as long as they not obnoxiously obvious with it, I am actually a fan; it means the expectation is for Mount Union to be successful, and failures to meet that standard are more noteworthy. To be honest, they are really just giving the majority of followers what they want (Who outside of Alliance or not directly benefitting from Mount Union's success wants to see the Raiders do anything positive, damn near ever? Don't worry, I'll wait.). The rest of us can either choose to deal with it or kick rocks. Mount Union simply choose the latter.

I do not think D3.com or Mount Union is hurting for missing the other, though. D3 does not need Mount Union directly: just their fans. If Mount Union needs or has anything to gain through publicity with d3, at all, then they are in much bigger trouble than any of us thinks. I am not sure how the two groups not playing nice would hurt the program in the longer term. If you would share it, I am interested in how you think that is.

[D3fanboy]

What do they need Mount for?

Website clicks? 

[edward de vere]

Is there another backstory there?

Le contretemps le rossi.