FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[retagent]

Yes! Thanks to both Oz and fury for their perspective.

[hazzben]

A few things:

* I can't speak for Frank, but like all reporters, I'm sure he appreciates hearing what his job as a reporter is.

* Is SJU supposed to be covered like the Yankees and Jets? Should Billy Bob from Avon be calling into PA's show each day demanding that Gagliardi be let go? Is Frank an apologist because he hasn't written a column demanding that Gagliardi retire? Where's the evidence he's an apologist?

* How is a head coach supposed to prove to people how involved he is with the team? Honest question, I don't know. I hear from insiders -- love that phrase -- that John watches as much film now as ever and still dissects the smallest details. But does that prove anything? I don't know. Mike Grant doesn't wear headsets on the sidelines for Eden Prairie. Seems he's out of touch with what's going on; this is the guy we want leading SJU? Gagliardi, like Grant, should have headsets on at all times and should be screaming after every play -- right up in their faces, so we can see it on the webcast hear Mark talk about it on the broadcast and know that, yes, he's as involved as he was when he chewed out Lehman's old man.

* The Sweet Season anecdote. It involves the infamous and flagrant SJU violation from 1999 that put them on MIAC probation. It was the violation that was widely regarded as an utter joke. Two months after SJU had its punishment, The Times got the news and was going to print it the day before the Johnnies' game against Gustavus. SJU asked them to hold the story till Monday. The Times didn't. Which is fine and the right thing to do. But they also blew it up and made it sound like something that was not quite as bad as Ganglehoff. In the book, Gagliardi says if the Times runs the story on that Friday, he was done talking to the paper.

The paper ran the story before the game. Gagliardi -- or someone impersonating him -- has been quoted many, many, many, many times in the Times since 1999, so I'm guessing we can say it was a heat of the moment statement that he didn't actually follow through on and not something that's some type of indictment about the atmosphere in the SJU athletic department.

* Ah, yes, reporters, the guys with all the ink constantly telling other people how to do their jobs. Sometimes I forget how thin skinned y'all are!  I acknowledged I didn't know if it was accurate, just responding to a poster who insinuated that to be the case. And for the record, I also think reporters calling for guys to get canned is garbage. These are real people with real lives and families. That goes for people on the boards as well. Some of the stuff said about Jimmy is low. You realize when his family, kids and grandkids google his name in the future, all the crap that gets slung is still gonna be hanging in the air right. 

* I hope not. But there's a chasm between the NY media's treatment of its sports teams and legit objectivity. Again, not necessarily arguing Frank doesn't have that, but it's certainly not too much to expect.

* Good to know the background info. And the Times did the right thing publishing, but if they blew it out of proportion that's too bad. And just wrong. Love the line about someone impersonating him. Did they borrow his big red parka 

That said, the subsequent interviews don't diminish the fact he issued a threat to attempt to influence the Times. It's definitely good to know he didn't follow through on it. Still not great he issued the threat and threw his weight around to begin with.

[SagatagSam]

* I can't speak for Frank, but like all reporters, I'm sure he appreciates hearing what his job as a reporter is.

My comments about Frank are rather benign--nothing more than a discussion of a guy that reports on a team and the biases and influences that shape the way he conducts his business. Frank is a great guy. He isn't covering up any major scandal, but I think it pays to offer a perspective of what animates his actions.

All I'm saying is that if anybody is looking for a writer that is going to thrust a stick into the hornet's nest--and believe me, I believe there are a number of hornets in the SJU nest at the moment--Frank won't be that guy. I don't blame him for it, and can't say I would act much differently if I were put in the same position.

[corn horn]

Wow! I thought I was having a deja vu experience with all the banter about who shalt be heir to the throne in Johnnie football, and when? Just to make sure I wasn't any more whacked than usual, I looked back at posts from about this time last year and, well, I'm not completely devoid of my sensorium.

Good to see the board light up a bit...it's been a little slow this season.

I've always had an issue with polls (especially preseason). While I'm glad to see the Cobbers get their notice in the AFCA poll this week (#24), they show up with 10 points / votes in the D3 poll--essentially ranked 39th. Any rationale for the discrepancy? Does anyone think any of these polls have any credibility beyond say, the top 5?

[OzJohnnie]

+k for sensorium.  I could guess the meaning but had to look it up.  Must be all that vitamin C and manganese you consumed at the Korn Krib what has made your brain hold them big words.

[Pat Coleman]

Wow! I thought I was having a deja vu experience with all the banter about who shalt be heir to the throne in Johnnie football, and when? Just to make sure I wasn't any more whacked than usual, I looked back at posts from about this time last year and, well, I'm not completely devoid of my sensorium.

Good to see the board light up a bit...it's been a little slow this season.

I've always had an issue with polls (especially preseason). While I'm glad to see the Cobbers get their notice in the AFCA poll this week (#24), they show up with 10 points / votes in the D3 poll--essentially ranked 39th. Any rationale for the discrepancy? Does anyone think any of these polls have any credibility beyond say, the top 5?

Our voters really like strength of schedule. The AFCA poll voters really like win-loss record. Often there's a discrepancy and usually their overranked teams lose earlier than ours does.

Our voters also know that Bethel is coming up next, and they know when the St. Thomas game is, etc. We tend to wait.

[retagent]

If Concordia is truly 24th best team in the nation, and St Thomas and Bethel are equally correctly ranked, shouldn't the Cobbers lose to both, and does that mean that they are incorrectly ranked? To put it another way, if the #2 team plays the #1 team, and loses by a small margin, does that automatically mean they are not the second best team in the nation?

[USTBench]

Wow! I thought I was having a deja vu experience with all the banter about who shalt be heir to the throne in Johnnie football, and when? Just to make sure I wasn't any more whacked than usual, I looked back at posts from about this time last year and, well, I'm not completely devoid of my sensorium.

Good to see the board light up a bit...it's been a little slow this season.

I've always had an issue with polls (especially preseason). While I'm glad to see the Cobbers get their notice in the AFCA poll this week (#24), they show up with 10 points / votes in the D3 poll--essentially ranked 39th. Any rationale for the discrepancy? Does anyone think any of these polls have any credibility beyond say, the top 5?

Not if St. John Fisher is in the top 10.

[hazzben]

Not if St. John Fisher is in the top 10.

Amen. I realize it's last year, but the team I saw against UST was not top 10 talent. And I have to think they are ranked their right now in part because of how they finished last year.

[GoldandBlueBU]

Not if St. John Fisher is in the top 10.

Amen. I realize it's last year, but the team I saw against UST was not top 10 talent. And I have to think they are ranked their right now in part because of how they finished last year.

Right, and I think that while any polling is subject to previous year bias, division 3 polls are even more succeptible because of the nature of the league as compared to higher divisions, where there is much more coverage and understanding of what a team will bring into the new season.

CORD and BU probably aren't as far apart as the poll suggests currently, but because CORD was 6-4 last year and BU was 8-2, CORD didn't get any pre-season love and will require more time to get to where they should be in the polls.

[USTBench]

Not if St. John Fisher is in the top 10.

Amen. I realize it's last year, but the team I saw against UST was not top 10 talent. And I have to think they are ranked their right now in part because of how they finished last year.

Right, and I think that while any polling is subject to previous year bias, division 3 polls are even more succeptible because of the nature of the league as compared to higher divisions, where there is much more coverage and understanding of what a team will bring into the new season.

CORD and BU probably aren't as far apart as the poll suggests currently, but because CORD was 6-4 last year and BU was 8-2, CORD didn't get any pre-season love and will require more time to get to where they should be in the polls.

We'll see how close they really are this weekend. Playing at Bethel, I'm not so sure Concordia has the horses to compete. Beating Buena Vista and Jamestown college convincingly does nothing for me. SJU is down, and STO is perrenially overrated (BEST WR CORPS IN THE MIAC!!!!!!...yeah...no) I say Bethel delivers a low scoring win. 19 to 10, somewhere in that range.

[Pat Coleman]

Not if St. John Fisher is in the top 10.

Amen. I realize it's last year, but the team I saw against UST was not top 10 talent. And I have to think they are ranked their right now in part because of how they finished last year.

Who's better? You have to remember there's typically a pretty big drop-off after the first half-dozen teams or so. SOMEONE has to be No. 10.

[USTBench]

Not if St. John Fisher is in the top 10.

Amen. I realize it's last year, but the team I saw against UST was not top 10 talent. And I have to think they are ranked their right now in part because of how they finished last year.

Who's better? You have to remember there's typically a pretty big drop-off after the first half-dozen teams or so. SOMEONE has to be No. 10.

Bethel, UW-Oshkosh, UW-Platteville, Baldwin-Wallace, Concordia-Moorhead, Williamette, Whitworth, Lewis and Clark, anybody else in the WIAC, several HS teams in Texas and California, my old law school flag football team, 11 octogenarians with Parkinson's.

Okay, maybe not the last few squads, but definitely half the WIAC, the top 1/3 of the MIAC, most of the NWC, the top 1/3 of the OAC, and many other schools.

[Pat Coleman]

No, honestly, I think you're overreaching there. Bethel, yes, and I will vote that way as they continue to win. Baldwin Wallace barely beat Muskingum on Saturday. Waiting to see what Platteville does this week and to see how the WIAC settles out, but I don't think three MIAC teams are better than St. John Fisher and certainly nobody in the NWC other than Linfield.

Hey, remember I picked these guys to get that far last season, so I knew the teams in front of them in the bracket were overrated by the NCAA. But that's still a tough league that they play in, and they did have to hop in a plane to get to MSP last year. That tends to take a little out of a team.

I agree they were not a Top 10 team the first three weeks of the season and that's why they slipped a little bit, but when Wabash lost (and BW barely won) it was difficult to keep sliding St. John Fisher too.

[Boys of Fall]

Right or wrong, the SJU fans are worked up, six decades of success set a pretty high bar.  In looking at a bigger window, it will be interesting to see how things will shake out a few years down the road when Gagliardi and Caruso are gone.