FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[USTBench]

I recall SJU being "punished" for having an extra spring practice or something a few years ago.

That was my freshman year.  1999.  We were punished for starting fall practice a day or two early.  Mind you, we didn't practice too many times, we just had too many "practice opportunities" (a Saturday counts as two opportunities, although we only practiced once).

The punishment, as I remember it, was that we were not allowed coaches at Monday video sessions and had to practice without pads and helmets on Fridays.

Absolute corruption corrupts absolutely. Frankly, I think the punishment should have been a loss of scholarships, no nationally televised regular season games, and no BCS bowl games.

[Retired Old Rat]

I recall SJU being "punished" for having an extra spring practice or something a few years ago.

That was my freshman year.  1999.  We were punished for starting fall practice a day or two early.  Mind you, we didn't practice too many times, we just had too many "practice opportunities" (a Saturday counts as two opportunities, although we only practiced once).

The punishment, as I remember it, was that we were not allowed coaches at Monday video sessions and had to practice without pads and helmets on Fridays.

Absolute corruption corrupts absolutely. Frankly, I think the punishment should have been a loss of scholarships, no nationally televised regular season games, and no BCS bowl games.

And the coach should have been required to donate his salary in excess of $1m to the St. Cloud United Way for 5 years.

[OzJohnnie]

Today, after almost 19 years in the country and 17 years on the nomination list, I have been accepted as a member of the Melbourne Cricket Club, one of the world's oldest sporting clubs which was established in 1838. It owns, and now I guess I own a piece of, the Melbourne Cricket Ground. So I go from Rapids boy to snob. See you all on the other side. I'm outta here.

[tmerton]

Today, after almost 19 years in the country and 17 years on the nomination list, I have been accepted as a member of the Melbourne Cricket Club, one of the world's oldest sporting clubs which was established in 1838. It owns, and now I guess I own a piece of, the Melbourne Cricket Ground. So I go from Rapids boy to snob. See you all on the other side. I'm outta here.

Standards are falling all over I see, even down under.  Wait 'til they make you 'Kiwi for a Day' at your new club, Oz.

I also see there's still argument over the 2008 Tommy game.  As another person in the end zone, I had a pretty good view as well, but what I remember clearly was the two refs on the goal line.  They were both focused on the play and both without hesitation signaled Wartman down short of the goal (it wasn't just one of them, and it wasn't one watching the other to see what he called).  So if it was a screw-up, the two guys calling it both missed it.  Of course, the controversial play was a first down play, so all the Tommies had to do was run another play.  Should have been easy. 

Had a lovely trip to hades (aka Oklahoma) a couple of weeks ago.  Didn't see '57 down there, but I was in the two big urban areas.  (If anyone had told me ten years ago that OKC would have a successful NBA franchise with sell-out attendance, I might have taken that bet for a lot.  Strange things happening there.)

Can't wait to see the '12 edition of the Johnnies.

[OzJohnnie]

Yes, yes, complete wanker, I know.  But I am pretty excited.  The Melbourne Cricket Ground is actually privately owned by the Melbourne Cricket Club.  It's quite a facility.

Watching the football from the members is quite good.  This is the view from the members dining room:



And the corridors and such in the members area are not your typical sports stadium:

[AO]

I also see there's still argument over the 2008 Tommy game.  As another person in the end zone, I had a pretty good view as well, but what I remember clearly was the two refs on the goal line.  They were both focused on the play and both without hesitation signaled Wartman down short of the goal (it wasn't just one of them, and it wasn't one watching the other to see what he called).  So if it was a screw-up, the two guys calling it both missed it.  Of course, the controversial play was a first down play, so all the Tommies had to do was run another play.  Should have been easy. 

Over the Line!  Mark it 6, dude.  This isn't Nam, there are rules.

I just looked at the photo sequence on d3football.com (amazing how Ryan gets two different perspectives on the same play ).  The only possible basis I can see for the refs calling the ball down short of the goal line is if they thought (for some reason not apparent in the pictures - and which seems to be disproved in the Aquin video) that the runner's knee was down before the ball crossed the goal.  As plainly visible as the ball seems to be in the pictures, while being held over the goal line, surely that was not missed?

News out of UST land...

It's official now that the Tommies got jobbed by horrible reffing against the Tommies last weekend. The MIAC president called coach Caruso to apologize for the brutal non-TD for Wartman at the 1-yard line, saying that it was in fact a score. Similar situations have happened on a larger scale this year in college football, but at this point, what good does an apology do?

I haven't seen the video so I'm talking in general about similar plays. Many times when it looks like the ball is spotted short of where it appears that it should be spotted, I've seen replays that show that the runner's knee is down while his upper body is still off the ground and moving forward, and when the ball actually stops it's forward momentum, it is about 1 to 1/2 yard farther than when the knee actually touched. I'll choose to believe that this was the case yesterday, until I am convinced otherwise

The video link I posted isn't definitive because of the angle, but it's fairly telling and it doesn't look like a knee down issue here because the back is vertical.

Beyond Carr, Kyle Schroeder who got the fumble on the next play also said he thought Wartman had scored.

[sjusection105]

I also see there's still argument over the 2008 Tommy game.  As another person in the end zone, I had a pretty good view as well, but what I remember clearly was the two refs on the goal line.  They were both focused on the play and both without hesitation signaled Wartman down short of the goal (it wasn't just one of them, and it wasn't one watching the other to see what he called).  So if it was a screw-up, the two guys calling it both missed it.  Of course, the controversial play was a first down play, so all the Tommies had to do was run another play.  Should have been easy. 

Over the Line!  Mark it 6, dude.  This isn't Nam, there are rules.

I just looked at the photo sequence on d3football.com (amazing how Ryan gets two different perspectives on the same play ).  The only possible basis I can see for the refs calling the ball down short of the goal line is if they thought (for some reason not apparent in the pictures - and which seems to be disproved in the Aquin video) that the runner's knee was down before the ball crossed the goal.  As plainly visible as the ball seems to be in the pictures, while being held over the goal line, surely that was not missed?

News out of UST land...

It's official now that the Tommies got jobbed by horrible reffing against the Tommies last weekend. The MIAC president called coach Caruso to apologize for the brutal non-TD for Wartman at the 1-yard line, saying that it was in fact a score. Similar situations have happened on a larger scale this year in college football, but at this point, what good does an apology do?

I haven't seen the video so I'm talking in general about similar plays. Many times when it looks like the ball is spotted short of where it appears that it should be spotted, I've seen replays that show that the runner's knee is down while his upper body is still off the ground and moving forward, and when the ball actually stops it's forward momentum, it is about 1 to 1/2 yard farther than when the knee actually touched. I'll choose to believe that this was the case yesterday, until I am convinced otherwise

The video link I posted isn't definitive because of the angle, but it's fairly telling and it doesn't look like a knee down issue here because the back is vertical.

Beyond Carr, Kyle Schroeder who got the fumble on the next play also said he thought Wartman had scored.

Let's not forget there is another key aspect of the play that can not be reproduced with a photo,the whistle. When the ref. blows the play dead,it is over no matter what the photo may or may not show 

[USTBench]

I guess UST should just win by 56 every year so we don't have to have these types of arguments.

[DuffMan]

Jeez, still bitching about a possible blown call in '08?  Get over it.  It happens.  In '02, we got hosed similarily in the National Semis at Trinity.  Would have been in the Stagg.  Instead, Trinity wins, their QB gets arrested and benched, and they get blown out of the water by MUC. 

[sjusection105]

Jeez, still bitching about a possible blown call in '08?  Get over it.  It happens. 

Yea, and Uncle Ricco's team could have won state if coach would have put him in at QB. You know,Ricco can throw a football over that mountain.....

[WashedUp]

Jeez, still bitching about a possible blown call in '08?  Get over it.  It happens. 

Yea, and Uncle Ricco's team could have won state if coach would have put him in at QB. You know,Ricco can throw a football over that mountain.....

UST also won a game that year over Carleton on a blown call when Waldvogel caught a ball out of bounds on 4th and 1 with :26 left and was ruled in bounds.

The refs make both those calls differently and Carleton wins the MIAC (or if we just learn to cover a wheel route).

[SUMMIT!!!!!]

I guess UST should just win by 56 every year so we don't have to have these types of arguments.

Sounds about right to me!

[tmerton]

I guess UST should just win by 56 every year so we don't have to have these types of arguments.

Sounds about right to me!

2011 - Tommies win by fifty whatever
2010 - Tommies win by one in OT
Before that?

Lotta catchin' up to do, boys. 

[tmerton]

Happy Birthday to ROR!

[faunch]

Johnnie soccer will play home games at Clemens Stadium.  5 out of 7 of the games will be played under the lights. 
I'm wondering what they'll do for soccer lines on the field?  Can they put temporary lines on the new turf?  I can't imagine them putting permanent soccer lines into the turf.

http://www.gojohnnies.com/news/2012/7/25/SOCCER_0725121323.aspx