FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[VOJ]

Whoa there, TC!  Lighten up on the condescension: "...28-24 win over UW - Cow College sucks." A comment like that could prompt a UWRFer to point out that 11 known pedophiles (at last count) lurk within the confines of St. John's Abbey.  Worse, we farmers might burn incense and chant abusively, "May all the dairy in your fridge come from China."

The class warrior comment calls your perception of finsleft's brilliance ("Fins tweets were pure gold...Beyond awesome") into question. A bit of research yielded these nuggets: "...have to stand in a line a block long to get in ('into', please) this dump...all the fat farm girls are here with their cowbells...(F-bomb)ing Wisconsin refs...did I mention this place is a dump..."  Ah, the irony. Good enough for the NFL for 20 years, but not SJU.

So, Johnny fans, if this is awesome, then Don Rickles is Catholic and diarrhea sets the gold standard.

Kestrel if you really knew Fins, you would find this funny...yes it touches a nerve if you are a UWRF fan, otherwise its the type of banter we expect...you of course had to go below the belt the with pedophile comments taking it to a lower level, well done.

[hazzben]

Who am I to dispute the wisdom of TC?  No one, that's who.  But I won't let something like experience and standing stop me...

My thought on USTD is something like this:  Caruso, looking suspiciously like Denny Green, standing before the assembled Tommie hordes and screaming about the Johnnies, "They were who we thought they were!"

Point is: all the talent in the world cannot overcome bad mojo.  And as for all that talent USTD has purchased over the last two years, I feel for the players.  Imagine throwing away the last few years of your football playing life on that bad mojo.  And for what?  A few suspect scholarship dollars and a bevy of light-in-cranium coeds?  It's not a smart trade.

A non-Johnnie would refer to this mysterious "bad mojo" as a very, very, very bad call that cost the Tommies the game last fall. The tapes, at numerous angles if I recall, show SJU being lucky to escape in 2008.

We'll see what the Tommies bring to Clemens in a few weeks, but a win would be far from a shocker.

Willy, as someone who was standing on the goal line, observed the play, talked to Johnnie players and refs after the game:  The ball did indeed cross the goal line.  After the Tommie player was whistled down.  The ball needs to cross the goal line while play is live if you want it to count.

The Tommies can whine all they want.  They choked.  It's what they do.

Oh, so wait, let me get this straight:

1.  You, a Johnnie fan, unbiased in your observation say he was down  ...
(Side Note: I also love how every fan at a controversial goal line game was "standing on the Goal line."  So either you had x-ray vision and could see through the official who should have been standing over the goal line during the play, OR the ref you sight for your evidence was out of position and you had a view right down the goal line OR you were "on the goal line" but evidently not right on top of it because the ref was actually in position)

2.  The Johnnie players after the game said he was down!      Oh, well in that case, there would be no need to ask any of the Tommie players what they thought happened on the play.  I mean, its not like any of those Johnnie players had a stake in the play!?!

3.  The refs, who made a call that favored your team, didn't tell you after the game "Yeah, actually we blew the call on the goal line.  The Tommie was in, they should have won, just don't tell anyone we made a mistake."  And yes, he may have even "crossed the goal line" after he was whistled down, but that doesn't answer the real question at hand.  WAS HE ACTUALLY DOWN??

All three lines of your evidence have gaping holes ROR.  Granted, the refs could really have felt they made the right call, but all the video and picture evidence I have seen seems to indicate either inconclusively or in favor of the Tommies.  I have yet to see any hard evidence in favor of the Johnnies.  Not to mention, every time I talk to an unbiased fan who has seen the film or the photos, they conclude USTD got screwed.

All that to say, I love the fact that SJU 'beat' USTD.  While I am no Johnnies fan, I can't stand the Tommies.  I love the fact that for the first time in a decade the Tommies actually beat the Johnnies on the field and they still can't claim a 'W' in the column. 

Here's to hoping their is another massively controversial call at the end of this years game, just to salt the wound and wind up the whiners!

[hazzben]

raiderguy - Do you have to pull out that trump Ace so darn quick?  You're like Neil Armstrong at a dinner party who sits back while everyone else tries to one-up the previous guy, waiting to throw out your "I walked on the moon." line. (Acknowledgement to Brian Regan for that one)

kestrel - If you want to take over my job as grammar policeman, go over to the WIAC board. It's always an abundant harvest over there on that front.

Yes, another Brian Regan fan!! 

For all the uninitiated, Regan is absolutely hilarious.  Just so underrated.  And "I walked on the Moon" is simply a classic.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVn22gBol_o

[johnnie_esq]

Who am I to dispute the wisdom of TC?  No one, that's who.  But I won't let something like experience and standing stop me...

My thought on USTD is something like this:  Caruso, looking suspiciously like Denny Green, standing before the assembled Tommie hordes and screaming about the Johnnies, "They were who we thought they were!"

Point is: all the talent in the world cannot overcome bad mojo.  And as for all that talent USTD has purchased over the last two years, I feel for the players.  Imagine throwing away the last few years of your football playing life on that bad mojo.  And for what?  A few suspect scholarship dollars and a bevy of light-in-cranium coeds?  It's not a smart trade.

A non-Johnnie would refer to this mysterious "bad mojo" as a very, very, very bad call that cost the Tommies the game last fall. The tapes, at numerous angles if I recall, show SJU being lucky to escape in 2008.

We'll see what the Tommies bring to Clemens in a few weeks, but a win would be far from a shocker.

Willy, as someone who was standing on the goal line, observed the play, talked to Johnnie players and refs after the game:  The ball did indeed cross the goal line.  After the Tommie player was whistled down.  The ball needs to cross the goal line while play is live if you want it to count.

The Tommies can whine all they want.  They choked.  It's what they do.

Oh, so wait, let me get this straight:

1.  You, a Johnnie fan, unbiased in your observation say he was down  ...
(Side Note: I also love how every fan at a controversial goal line game was "standing on the Goal line."  So either you had x-ray vision and could see through the official who should have been standing over the goal line during the play, OR the ref you sight for your evidence was out of position and you had a view right down the goal line OR you were "on the goal line" but evidently not right on top of it because the ref was actually in position)

2.  The Johnnie players after the game said he was down!      Oh, well in that case, there would be no need to ask any of the Tommie players what they thought happened on the play.  I mean, its not like any of those Johnnie players had a stake in the play!?!

3.  The refs, who made a call that favored your team, didn't tell you after the game "Yeah, actually we blew the call on the goal line.  The Tommie was in, they should have won, just don't tell anyone we made a mistake."  And yes, he may have even "crossed the goal line" after he was whistled down, but that doesn't answer the real question at hand.  WAS HE ACTUALLY DOWN??

All three lines of your evidence have gaping holes ROR.  Granted, the refs could really have felt they made the right call, but all the video and picture evidence I have seen seems to indicate either inconclusively or in favor of the Tommies.  I have yet to see any hard evidence in favor of the Johnnies.  Not to mention, every time I talk to an unbiased fan who has seen the film or the photos, they conclude USTD got screwed.

All that to say, I love the fact that SJU 'beat' USTD.  While I am no Johnnies fan, I can't stand the Tommies.  I love the fact that for the first time in a decade the Tommies actually beat the Johnnies on the field and they still can't claim a 'W' in the column. 

Here's to hoping their is another massively controversial call at the end of this years game, just to salt the wound and wind up the whiners!

I wasn't at the game.  So all I have to go on is the "conclusive evidence" of the film.

And I think the refs got it right, actually-- and I say that not as a Johnnie, but as a coach at the high school level.

Run it down:  It was first and goal from the SJU 1 with the clock running and not much time left on it.  UST runs the ball into the pile, and neither side judge (remember there is one on the goal line shielding the view of those fans on either side!) can see the ball cross the endzone line.  Because the clock is running, the refs will ALWAYS blow an early whistle to give them another try.  ALWAYS.  The last thing a referee wants is to see the ballcarrier get driven back and then a scrum ensue on top of the ballcarrier preventing another play getting off before time expires. This is pretty common refereeing strategy, and you'll see it at all levels, pro through midgets.  UST should have had three more tries to get into the endzone.  That they screwed it up on try #2 is testament to their own fault, not a referee's whistle.

We put a lot of judgment in a referee's whistle, and without the benefit of instant reply, the training of the officials that day took over.  Coaches know that, and players should learn that pretty quick.  As much as we can get on officials for blown calls, all we can ask is consistency, and it seemed to occur here.

[AO]

It's much simpler than that esq:  I believe the referee could see the ball cross the line.  They made the wrong call, life goes on.  This year's matchup should be a good one. 

[Redtooth]

It's much simpler than that esq:  I believe the referee could see the ball cross the line.  They made the wrong call, life goes on.  This year's matchup should be a good one. 

The continued need for football education by AO never ceases to amaze me....the perspective of the referee on the play in question is irrelevant as he is standing behind the offense, not on the goal line.  The only officials that have standing and are on position to make that call are the Side Judge and the Head Linesman.  Neither made the call....get over it.

With all due respect to the fresh love for UST.....this is not the first time the team has been blessed with some talent.  In the early part of this decade; they had a great QB, the fastest WR in the conference and the best RB (in terms of career yards at the time) all on the field at once and were unable to win the conference.  Let's play the season and see if being a target is as easy as sneaking up on everyone.

[retagent]

kestrel has just ridden the roller coaster of emotions emanating from my being.  For those who don't put much stock in his opinion (understandable in reading his posts) Dennis Miller, no less, thinks Brian Regan is the funniest comedian out there. And to make it even more stunning, you could watch one of his DVD's with your entire family without being embarrassed.

As to the Tommie/Johnnie conflict, it appears to me as a non lawyer, that those arguing in favor of the ball crossing the goal line, are arguing a point that doesn't seem to be in contention. Next, you may address the question in doubt, was the play still live when the ball seems to have crossed the goal line? Discuss!

[sju56321]

Good point. I was going to ask-did the photos come with sound??

[AO]

It's much simpler than that esq:  I believe the referee could see the ball cross the line.  They made the wrong call, life goes on.  This year's matchup should be a good one. 

The continued need for football education by AO never ceases to amaze me....the perspective of the referee on the play in question is irrelevant as he is standing behind the offense, not on the goal line.  The only officials that have standing and are on position to make that call are the Side Judge and the Head Linesman.  Neither made the call....get over it.

With all due respect to the fresh love for UST.....this is not the first time the team has been blessed with some talent.  In the early part of this decade; they had a great QB, the fastest WR in the conference and the best RB (in terms of career yards at the time) all on the field at once and were unable to win the conference.  Let's play the season and see if being a target is as easy as sneaking up on everyone.

ooooh you got me, nobody has ever called the head linesman a referee.    my bad.   as a more serious reply, doesn't the line judge also have the ability to make the call?

Are the johnnie faithful starting to worry about Eau Claire?  Clearly the blu-golds should be better than the falcons and they just did something the Johnnies haven't done for 3 years, beat a college called "bethel".

[Retired Old Rat]

AO, we worry about every team we play.  Except Northwestern.

[DuffMan]

Why the hell are we still dwelling on a game from last year?  And why are we hyping a game in mid-October?  For all we know, UST and SJU could both be 1-5 at that time 

[OzJohnnie]

Why the hell are we still dwelling on a game from last year?  And why are we hyping a game in mid-October?  For all we know, UST and SJU could both be 1-5 at that time 

Because I'm afraid you forgot the Tommie perspective, my friend.  The Johnnie season lasts all year while the Tommie season lasts only one game.

[OzJohnnie]

Oh, so wait, let me get this straight:

1.  You, a Johnnie fan, unbiased in your observation say he was down  ...
(Side Note: I also love how every fan at a controversial goal line game was "standing on the Goal line."  So either you had x-ray vision and could see through the official who should have been standing over the goal line during the play, OR the ref you sight for your evidence was out of position and you had a view right down the goal line OR you were "on the goal line" but evidently not right on top of it because the ref was actually in position)

2.  The Johnnie players after the game said he was down!      Oh, well in that case, there would be no need to ask any of the Tommie players what they thought happened on the play.  I mean, its not like any of those Johnnie players had a stake in the play!?!

3.  The refs, who made a call that favored your team, didn't tell you after the game "Yeah, actually we blew the call on the goal line.  The Tommie was in, they should have won, just don't tell anyone we made a mistake."  And yes, he may have even "crossed the goal line" after he was whistled down, but that doesn't answer the real question at hand.  WAS HE ACTUALLY DOWN??

All three lines of your evidence have gaping holes ROR.  Granted, the refs could really have felt they made the right call, but all the video and picture evidence I have seen seems to indicate either inconclusively or in favor of the Tommies.  I have yet to see any hard evidence in favor of the Johnnies.  Not to mention, every time I talk to an unbiased fan who has seen the film or the photos, they conclude USTD got screwed.

All that to say, I love the fact that SJU 'beat' USTD.  While I am no Johnnies fan, I can't stand the Tommies.  I love the fact that for the first time in a decade the Tommies actually beat the Johnnies on the field and they still can't claim a 'W' in the column. 

Here's to hoping their is another massively controversial call at the end of this years game, just to salt the wound and wind up the whiners!

You say all three lines have gaping holes, but it is the same hole you refer to every time: ROR is a liar because he supports the Johnnies.  In fact, your argument is, knowing nothing about ROR at all, that he must be a liar since it is, according to you, in his interest to lie.  Your assumption is that his support for St John's trumps his commitment to other principles such as honesty and integrity.  Of course, since you know little about him personally, you have nothing to base that judgment on other than your own character.

You may not have intended to call him a liar, but you did.  Should we all pack up and go home since no honest statement can be made on these boards unless it is not in our interest (according to you)?

Sigh.

[OleHog74]

The Tommy season only lasts ONE game?  Wow, talk about an unfulfilling existence.  No wonder they are always pissed off, they haven't won that game in a REALLY long time.  I have never been happier I am Lutheran and thus went to Olaf.

[finsleft]

I have never been happier I am Lutheran and thus went to Olaf.

Well yeah, plus you have your jello and your weak, church-basement coffee.