FB: Liberty League

[lewdogg11]

Dude, RPI is not good enough to 'phone it in'!!! Only good teams like Ithaca and Cortland can do that.

[labart96]

When RT was a junior at RPI in 1992, Rochester voted not to go to the ECACs. UR was gunning for an NCAA slot but were upset by Union and didn't make the dance. UR beat RPI that year and RPI had beaten Union. That paved the way for RPI to make its first-ever postseason appearance which turned out to be a thrilling come-from-behind win against Bridgewater St. (MA). At the time, the ECAC game was viewed by the RPI community as a major accomplishment because of the lack of any kind of post-season presence in the school's history. While an ECAC game these days in  Troy could be considered a "letdown" to some, it still gives the kids a chance to play another game. That's the purest perspective RT thinks that we need to take on this arguement. These guys aren't on scholarship to play yet put in a full year of work and preparation to play football. If someone has a chance to step on the field and compete one more time in a season, especially seniors, then the opportunity should be embraced because we only have so many snaps in our lifetime. Perhaps RT's stance as softened in his "old age"....hey, RT just likes to strap on the helmet and play football. Call him crazy.....

TGP agrees.  Hobart's first ever post-season appearance should have been in 93 when Bart upset #2 Buff State.  Of course, RT's darn Engineers then beat the Statesmen the following week killing our first shot at a NCAA berth.

The school - supposedly given the trimester calendar and finals, etc - said Hobart couldn't do an ECAC game, but all the players and coaches sure as hell wanted an extra game.

So it goes.  A real shame for gamers like Bill Palmer, Bobby Wynn, Rich Memenger and co to have an extra game killed by the Dick (HWS Pres) and the AD.

[Garnet]

TGP, that is a BS reason. Union is also on the trimester calendar and has had plenty of post season games during finals without hurting her academic reputation

[Senor RedTackle]

Dude, RPI is not good enough to 'phone it in'!!! Only good teams like Ithaca and Cortland can do that.

why do you always find a reason to badmouth your own school?? If it isn't the scheduling, now they're not in the same league as Cortland or IC? RPI has done as much as either of those 2 teams on a national level in the last 10 years....man, RT doesn't know about you LD....

[Jonny Utah]

So FR did some non-legal research today and has a question for U89, since something was bothering him after the ECAC discussion last night:

U89, what season was your story regarding ECAC internal controversy from?  I'm guessing that your last year of playing was 1989, but maybe I'm mistaken?

1986:  NCAA Appearance
1987:  At-or-near .500 record (wouldn't be sufficient in the old format to get an ECAC invite)
1988:  At-or-near .500 record (wouldn't be sufficient in the old format to get an ECAC invite)
1989:  NCAA Appearance (Stagg Bowl Year)

You said late 1980s, right?

I'm still trying to figure out this one, let alone Ithaca's supposed "mailing it in" policy in the ECACs.

I'm still trying to figure out where there's a shred of evidence that any ECAC playoff/championship team "phones it in."  The closest that we have is U89's testimony about his tailback teammate.  I sure don't see any teams saying that they're not interested before they accept the invitation or before they play the game.

Every firsthand account has been consistent--players want to play.

The Pat Coleman "phone it in" theory might be correct, there's just no evidence to support it, and plenty of evidence to contradict it.  Maybe Dan Rather can get the documents to prove it.

Hasn't Ithaca stated on a few occasions that they were not interested in playing in an ECAC game....I may be incorrect here, but I think they had a team vote on the matter.

JU, any info on this??

I think they didn't file a few years but Im not sure.  I would be suprised if they had a team vote though.

Regarding Redswarms comments, weve all played the sport.  Surely we all know what a good and bad week of practice feels like, especially at the end of the season.  Its a very long haul for all players and coaches involved and sometimes your heart really has to be in it when youve played so hard for 3+ months.  I always had a feeling that as the season rolls along, you are building and building and building.  For us the last final two games where Cortland and then Buff St.  And even the Buff St. game (which was usually more important), had a different feeling because the Cortland game was such a huge emotional swing for everyone.  

I remember my last football game ever against Buff St in 1997.  We had just lost to Cortland at home for the first time since 1967 in one of the flukiest crap ways to lose as you would ever see.  I believe we were also ranked in the top 10/20 in the country in the time and didn't have a close game the whole year (besides losing to d2 mercyherst) We didn't deserve to win the game but it was such an emotional letdown, I dont think our hearts were even in it for the Buff St. game.  And they were more fired up than us and beat us up physically and mentally.   I make no excuses.  But after that game I felt the season was over.  I don't know if I had enough inside of me mentally to play another ECAC game against some other team.  Sometimes the end is simply the end for football players.  Not too sure if anyone knows where Im comming from, but its the same reason why I never played semi-pro for any of the local leagues that are around Boston.  Its a sport to me where the games need meaning, and sometimes the "meaning" of ECAC games get lost in the grand scheme of things, and players and teams simply can't bring themselves up to do it.  Maybe its bull****, but those were my feelings as a senior.  I probably could have gotten up for one last game to go out a winner like the seniors did in 1996 but it would have been tough.  Maybe the fact that we didnt have that chance is why that feeling is still with me?

[union89]

So FR did some non-legal research today and has a question for U89, since something was bothering him after the ECAC discussion last night:

U89, what season was your story regarding ECAC internal controversy from?  I'm guessing that your last year of playing was 1989, but maybe I'm mistaken?

1986:  NCAA Appearance
1987:  At-or-near .500 record (wouldn't be sufficient in the old format to get an ECAC invite)
1988:  At-or-near .500 record (wouldn't be sufficient in the old format to get an ECAC invite)
1989:  NCAA Appearance (Stagg Bowl Year)

You said late 1980s, right?

I'm still trying to figure out this one, let alone Ithaca's supposed "mailing it in" policy in the ECACs.

I'm still trying to figure out where there's a shred of evidence that any ECAC playoff/championship team "phones it in."  The closest that we have is U89's testimony about his tailback teammate.  I sure don't see any teams saying that they're not interested before they accept the invitation or before they play the game.

Every firsthand account has been consistent--players want to play.

The Pat Coleman "phone it in" theory might be correct, there's just no evidence to support it, and plenty of evidence to contradict it.  Maybe Dan Rather can get the documents to prove it.

Well, I'm trying to get to the bottom of that, too.  Like I said, I'd like to know what Union team(s) in the past had this philosophy to try to understand why it existed in the first place.  In 1996, Coast Guard was selected over Union -- and on that selection Sunday, there was that mentality of "This sucks" -- I remember seeing one player in tears at the College Center (basically how I figured out the news after a huge comeback against Carnegie Mellon the prior day).  Yet, as the week progressed, there was more of an angry intensity that was showing through for the team -- they wanted to tear apart the final team they'd play and did so.  So my only evidence is a short-lived knee-jerk reaction which explains why the filing date is ten days before the selection date (Monday, November 17). 

At the risk of putting words inot U89's mouth, perhaps I can shed some light on this.

1983 reg. season 1 loss and a loss in the Stagg Bowl
1984 reg. season 1 loss and a loss in NCAA semi-final
1985 reg. season 0 losses and NCAA 1st round last second loss to Ithaca
1986 reg. season 0 losses and NCAA 1st round OT loss to Ithaca

1987 5-5 record

It is clear that there was a change of direction in  1987.  My recollection is as follows:

The team vote was held way before the deadline of ten days.  The team voted yes to participate but it was a very close vote.  I think many players were disgusted with their performance and did not feel worthy of post season action based on the previous four seasons.  

Union then lost 2 of the last 3 games to make it a moot point anyway. NO invite to anything for  500 team.

Compare that to today's team and I see a team on the rise looking to prove something.

One more thing: This was over 20 years ago and I am sure things are different now.  It is very toough to cpmare the two different  teams. 

Thanks Garnet, I didn't want to call you out if you did not want to be involved in this....exactly the way I remember the situation.

Maybe now Clark Kent with his microphone can get to the bottom of his witch hunt....

[Senor RedTackle]

When RT was a junior at RPI in 1992, Rochester voted not to go to the ECACs. UR was gunning for an NCAA slot but were upset by Union and didn't make the dance. UR beat RPI that year and RPI had beaten Union. That paved the way for RPI to make its first-ever postseason appearance which turned out to be a thrilling come-from-behind win against Bridgewater St. (MA). At the time, the ECAC game was viewed by the RPI community as a major accomplishment because of the lack of any kind of post-season presence in the school's history. While an ECAC game these days in  Troy could be considered a "letdown" to some, it still gives the kids a chance to play another game. That's the purest perspective RT thinks that we need to take on this arguement. These guys aren't on scholarship to play yet put in a full year of work and preparation to play football. If someone has a chance to step on the field and compete one more time in a season, especially seniors, then the opportunity should be embraced because we only have so many snaps in our lifetime. Perhaps RT's stance as softened in his "old age"....hey, RT just likes to strap on the helmet and play football. Call him crazy.....

TGP agrees.  Hobart's first ever post-season appearance should have been in 93 when Bart upset #2 Buff State.  Of course, RT's darn Engineers then beat the Statesmen the following week killing our first shot at a NCAA berth.

The school - supposedly given the trimester calendar and finals, etc - said Hobart couldn't do an ECAC game, but all the players and coaches sure as hell wanted an extra game.

So it goes.  A real shame for gamers like Bill Palmer, Bobby Wynn, Rich Memenger and co to have an extra game killed by the Dick (HWS Pres) and the AD.

RT remembers that '93 Hobart squad...tough bunch. RT had to play against Memenger most of the game. He was tough. In fact, in RT's 3 years as a starter, every game against Hobart was a damn dogfight......damn pumpkin heads. Going out to that frozen tundra in Geneva for the last game of the year was like going to the middle of nowhere...

[Knightstalker]

When RT was a junior at RPI in 1992, Rochester voted not to go to the ECACs. UR was gunning for an NCAA slot but were upset by Union and didn't make the dance. UR beat RPI that year and RPI had beaten Union. That paved the way for RPI to make its first-ever postseason appearance which turned out to be a thrilling come-from-behind win against Bridgewater St. (MA). At the time, the ECAC game was viewed by the RPI community as a major accomplishment because of the lack of any kind of post-season presence in the school's history. While an ECAC game these days in  Troy could be considered a "letdown" to some, it still gives the kids a chance to play another game. That's the purest perspective RT thinks that we need to take on this arguement. These guys aren't on scholarship to play yet put in a full year of work and preparation to play football. If someone has a chance to step on the field and compete one more time in a season, especially seniors, then the opportunity should be embraced because we only have so many snaps in our lifetime. Perhaps RT's stance as softened in his "old age"....hey, RT just likes to strap on the helmet and play football. Call him crazy.....

KS knows that the mens basketball coach, Coach Brown made the post season either NCAA or ECAC his entire career and his teams usually played well in the ECAC's.  One motivation was just telling the guys it was one last chance to play together as a team.  He would sometimes put a chip on their shoulders by telling them they got screwed by the NCAA committee and they should go out and prove they made a mistake.  He also used the, you are young and inexperienced but this will get you ready to take the next step ploy.  He was a master motivator, KS thinks most good coaches are.

[Frank Rossi]

At the risk of putting words inot U89's mouth, perhaps I can shed some light on this.

He might accuse you of twisting words around, so be vewy, vewy carefwul.

1983 reg. season 1 loss and a loss in the Stagg Bowl
1984 reg. season 1 loss and a loss in NCAA semi-final
1985 reg. season 0 losses and NCAA 1st round last second loss to Ithaca
1986 reg. season 0 losses and NCAA 1st round OT loss to Ithaca

1987 5-5 record

It is clear that there was a change of direction in  1987.  My recollection is as follows:

The team vote was held way before the deadline of ten days.  The team voted yes to participate but it was a very close vote.  I think many players were disgusted with their performance and did not feel worthy of post season action based on the previous four seasons.  

Union then lost 2 of the last 3 games to make it a moot point anyway. NO invite to anything for  500 team.

Now, that's great information and sheds a little more light on things.  The only question here is why that vote would be held so early when the team was obviously, from your description, so upset with the way things were going.  

I can't blame teams for not applying yet this year (although, like I said, subtle reminders to the schools never hurt when you're down to 8 days before a deadline) -- isn't that when such a player decision under those circumstances should've been made?

Compare that to today's team and I see a team on the rise looking to prove something.

One more thing: This was over 20 years ago and I am sure things are different now.  It is very toough to cpmare the two different  teams.  

Correct about this year's team -- and we already know that it would be a heroic effort on the part of this year's group to get from 1-3 to ECAC consideration.  It is pretty obvious that they are hoping to get into that game in the hopes of proving something, even more than just the comeback they might end up having this season, depending on the last three games.

Also, as was discussed earlier, the nature of the ECAC games has changed over 20 years as the NCAA Playoffs have increased from 8 (I believe we were at 8 at that point -- Pat, correct me if I'm wrong) to 32 teams.  There was invariably a letdown for an ECAC participant because they probably had 0 or 1 loss when considered under those circumstances.  Even if it were 16 at that time, that would've meant 0, 1 or 2 losses when no automatic bids existed.  Today, ECAC teams, except for those in New England, are generally 2-, 3- and 4-loss teams that know their efforts were good but not great enough for NCAA consideration that year.  A lot more is decided on the field instead of in the Committee room since there isn't a group of near-perfect records about which they would have to make tough subjective decisions.  

The ECACs may not showcase as strong of teams as they did in the 1980s and first part of the 1990s, but the meaning behind playing in them has evolved -- and it's generally a positive scenario for those involved as it gives them an extra week of practice, an extra game against a team they likely haven't faced and might not otherwise face, some recruiting mileage and a chance to win a championship.  That is well worth the price of admission for a school to play in such a game, if you ask me.

[union89]

Dude, RPI is not good enough to 'phone it in'!!! Only good teams like Ithaca and Cortland can do that.

why do you always find a reason to badmouth your own school?? If it isn't the scheduling, now they're not in the same league as Cortland or IC? RPI has done as much as either of those 2 teams on a national level in the last 10 years....man, RT doesn't know about you LD....

I'm thinking that was tongue in cheek......

[labart96]

C'mon RT -

Middle of no-where?

Hmm.

TGP would take this:



over



and don't even get TGP started on WS vs. RPI-Friendosaurus co-ed comparison.....

[Frank Rossi]

Maybe now Clark Kent with his microphone can get to the bottom of his witch hunt....

No, that's for next week, after Union beats RPI.

[dlippiel]

Dude, RPI is not good enough to 'phone it in'!!! Only good teams like Ithaca and Cortland can do that.

why do you always find a reason to badmouth your own school?? If it isn't the scheduling, now they're not in the same league as Cortland or IC? RPI has done as much as either of those 2 teams on a national level in the last 10 years....man, RT doesn't know about you LD....

Simple....because RPI sucks! Well not really but it felt good to say it the week of the shoes game!

[Frank Rossi]

We didn't deserve to win the game but it was such an emotional letdown, I dont think our hearts were even in it for the Buff St. game.  And they were more fired up than us and beat us up physically and mentally.   I make no excuses.  But after that game I felt the season was over...

That was in a year when there were still 16 teams -- see my post to Garnet about the changes since then and how I feel they've affected the ECAC landscape for more as to why I can understand where you're coming from but think it's a little different with better NCAA Playoffs access now.  There isn't as much of this "falling off a cliff" mentality at the end of seasons since 0-, 1- and excellent 2-loss teams generally are included in the playoffs now.

[Frank Rossi]

EAST REGION NCAA Rankings
1. Cortland State 7-0 7-0
2. RPI 5-0 6-0
3. Ithaca 5-1 6-1
4. Montclair State 6-1 6-1
5. Rowan 6-1 6-1
6. Hartwick 5-1 5-1
7. Worcester Polytech 6-1 6-1
8. Hobart 5-1 5-1
9. Plymouth State 5-1 7-1
10. Husson 6-0 6-2

Very surprised SJFC is not on this list

TGP gets credit -- posting it in E8 (but not here?!)  -- My darkhorse candidate of Husson is making the East's Pool C scenarios a nightmare right now.