FB: Liberty League

[dlippiel]

The mouth-breathing, knuckle-draggers should be a force for years to come.

That there comment will get you some karma. +K

ate

Taking into account famous alum The Red Dragons can't miss  .

I'm actually growing more fond of the big oaf every time I see that pig snooki. Maybe we should let him loose on the assorted "Housewives of" casts, that I would watch.

dlip would probably throw this dude a 20$ spot for the punch if he bumped into him today. That ****in chick is nothing short of pathetic...not saying she deserved it, but I am saying she deserved it 

[Doid23]

...not saying she deserved it, but I am saying she deserved it 

Great line, sums it up perfectly.

[Frank Rossi]

http://www.d3football.com/notables/2011/08/preseason-top-25


-Union, dlip's true love, will struggle in 2011 but should eclipse their two win season in 2010.

Well, it's officially one hundred and wtf down here in Dallas, so I'm a little cranky. But if they don't win 4 games this year, I'm pulling my donation to Union Athletics.  All $250 of it. I aint kidding, I'll do it.

And yes, the level of expectations for the Dutchmen has fallen to a sad level. Talk about lowering the bar...

Being the optimist of the family, I'd ask you to consider increasing that donation by at least $100 per additional win.  You know, be a complete George Steinbrenner about it and add a bonus for a playoff entrance...

[SaintsFAN]

The mouth-breathing, knuckle-draggers should be a force for years to come.

That there comment will get you some karma. +K

ate

Taking into account famous alum The Red Dragons can't miss  .

I'm actually growing more fond of the big oaf every time I see that pig snooki. Maybe we should let him loose on the assorted "Housewives of" casts, that I would watch.

he's busy for the next 3-5 years, at least.. joined the military so he won't be doing any TV unless they do a show on the Scouts. 

[Frank Rossi]

Didn't have enough mojo to respond to the crux of some of dlip's points this past weekend (33-year-old carpets and the mold they likely contain was a great poisoner to yours truly, derailing my health for a few days).  However, I'm going to disagree with the premise that Hobart is a clear-cut favorite in the Liberty League this year.  I think there's a sufficient amount of internal turmoil from the offseason to create some real focus issues this year.

The biggest problem for Hobart would be what I call "Union 2010 Syndrome" -- specifically, a schedule from hell.  Union started with Ithaca on the road and waited two weeks before facing another team (LL foe Rochester).  There was no ability for Union to gain an in-game rhythm compared to other teams down the middle part of the season, making the injuries magnify themselves.  I think we learned the value of important tests mixed with some softer teams early on to help teams learn to click as a team.  Union lacked it all season last year.

For Hobart, there are no softballs and a weird gap.  On 9/3, they visit Dickinson.  On 9/24, they play at SJF.  There's a weird three-week gap between games that we've chronicled here before.  In addition to the schedule, Doug Vella is reportedly sitting out the season to focus on academics, meaning that Nick Strang (who played great against Union last season when Union prepared for a much different quarterback in Vella) will have to get experience quickly and against some real potent teams (yes, I foresee improvement in Dickinson this year).  Remember that Strang's ONLY start was against Union prior to having mono -- benching him for the remainder of 2010.

The lucky piece is that on 10/1, the game vs. SLU is at home for Hobart.  However, the next week is a road game at their arch-rival's house in Schenectady.  Every game this season from 10/1 forward could very well be an elimination game for Hobart -- that's a lot of pressure to face so early for a team with giant expectations.  I just don't have the confidence in Hobart this year that many have based on everything that has been happening in Geneva and the schedule they face.  I DO believe that it bodes well for the team in 2012, though, assuming they are able to solidify a better schedule for that season.

[dlippiel]

Fair points Frank but dlip's pick of Bart as the front-runner in the LL is based as much on the other teams' "lack of" strength and/or certainty this season. Granted Bart seems to fit into both holds but with the talent they have dlip thinks they will be the LL winner when it is said and done in 2011. *Of course he hopes this is not the case.

[pumkinattack]

Didn't have enough mojo to respond to the crux of some of dlip's points this past weekend (33-year-old carpets and the mold they likely contain was a great poisoner to yours truly, derailing my health for a few days).  However, I'm going to disagree with the premise that Hobart is a clear-cut favorite in the Liberty League this year.  I think there's a sufficient amount of internal turmoil from the offseason to create some real focus issues this year.

The biggest problem for Hobart would be what I call "Union 2010 Syndrome" -- specifically, a schedule from hell.  Union started with Ithaca on the road and waited two weeks before facing another team (LL foe Rochester).  There was no ability for Union to gain an in-game rhythm compared to other teams down the middle part of the season, making the injuries magnify themselves.  I think we learned the value of important tests mixed with some softer teams early on to help teams learn to click as a team.  Union lacked it all season last year.

For Hobart, there are no softballs and a weird gap.  On 9/3, they visit Dickinson.  On 9/24, they play at SJF.  There's a weird three-week gap between games that we've chronicled here before.  In addition to the schedule, Doug Vella is reportedly sitting out the season to focus on academics, meaning that Nick Strang (who played great against Union last season when Union prepared for a much different quarterback in Vella) will have to get experience quickly and against some real potent teams (yes, I foresee improvement in Dickinson this year).  Remember that Strang's ONLY start was against Union prior to having mono -- benching him for the remainder of 2010.

The lucky piece is that on 10/1, the game vs. SLU is at home for Hobart.  However, the next week is a road game at their arch-rival's house in Schenectady.  Every game this season from 10/1 forward could very well be an elimination game for Hobart -- that's a lot of pressure to face so early for a team with giant expectations.  I just don't have the confidence in Hobart this year that many have based on everything that has been happening in Geneva and the schedule they face.  I DO believe that it bodes well for the team in 2012, though, assuming they are able to solidify a better schedule for that season.

Strang wasn't benched, Vella hurt his knee Strang was backing him up.  After that game he got mono and was shut down for the rest of the year.  And the whole "we were prepared for Vella sounds like an excuse".  We played the backup, who's supposed to be inferior to the guy who was scheduled to play.  IMO, I was ready to dump Vella before that game anyway and don't see him leaving as a problem.  Maybe he's a good kid, but 99% of 4 of Bart's losses can be put on his shoulders. 

[Frank Rossi]

I said mono benched Strang.

[EDIT: Also, in speaking with the Union coaches after the loss, they were definitely surprised at Vella not starting.  That changed the entire defensive strategy since Vella was a known quantity that didn't throw with much efficiency.  Obviously, Strang was a much different animal.  I used it in an evaluation of Strang and the fact that when teams begin to prep for his type of offense, it won't be AS easy to score as it seemed to be for him that day.  Once Union adjusted, he also started throwing interceptions in the second half.  This wasn't an evaluation of Union/Hobart '10, but an attempt to figure out Strang's potential in '11 across the board.  Thanks for playing, though.]

[pumkinattack]

I missed the mono part, that's fine. 

What if Strang's that good?  I played with a QB in the late 90's turn of the decade (@ Bart) who the staff rode and I disagreed with (along w/many others).  Everyone likes to question Cragg's decisions all the time, so why would it be inconsistent to think that in this case perhaps the best player at the position wasn't out on the field for the early part of last year?  The guy's been in the system for two years, clearly wasn't going to start as a FY w/Vella, Rose and IL St transfer Earl on the roster, but when asked to play he came out and dropped it like it's hot all over the field.   

It's still an excuse, by the way, whether it came from you or the staff.  And also the Union 2010 syndrome is an excuse.  We can all play heuristics here, attempt to downplay everyone else, but that doesn't mean the analysis is either rigorous or enlightened. 

Frankly, I think you're analysis is weak.  There are lots of reasons to question Bart's season.  Good teams win with tough schedules.  Why don't you start with the deterioration in the DL the last couple of years.  Losing Aruck and, frankly Luber and Rayhll not quite being up to the standards set by DE's from 2005-2008, in conjunction with Vella's horrific decision making are the reason that I question whether Hobart can succeed in a season with little margin for error.  The downside with Strang vs. the upside of both (I hope we know the downside of Vella, if not good god) makes this is easy trade from Vella.  Guys like Guidetti, Eicheldinger, etc. were just tougher on the edge than Luber and Rayhill were and Aruck was the best DT I've seen at Bart.  Those guys we're better suited strictly as pass rushers.  There's some big FR's who look like they can contribute right away on the DL (Aruck was excellent as a FR, so the precedent's there), but that's going to be the biggest area of concern (along with Safety and CB behind Woodard). 

I can agree that there's nothing clear cut with Bart, but the things you point out are just opinion - pure speculation, not deeply rooted intellectual analysis.

[Doid23]

The biggest problem for Hobart would be what I call "Union 2010 Syndrome" -- specifically, a schedule from hell.  Union started with Ithaca on the road and waited two weeks before facing another team (LL foe Rochester).  There was no ability for Union to gain an in-game rhythm compared to other teams down the middle part of the season, making the injuries magnify themselves.  I think we learned the value of important tests mixed with some softer teams early on to help teams learn to click as a team.  Union lacked it all season last year.

I'm sorry, I have to agree with pumkinattack and call you on this on. "schedule from hell"? Because they had a bye in week 2? Please. Saying that it affected their ability to gain an "in-game rhythm" in the middle of the season? Ridiculous. I've been around football a long time, and I've never heard such a thing.

Here's the thing. Union WON their two games after the bye. But somehow, that week 2 bye caught up with them in the middle of the season? And somehow caused the injuries to "magnify themselves"? C'mon.

Union sucked last year, and it had NOTHING to do with the schedule. They lost to Merchant Marine, a team who lost to Springfield 64-0. They were a bad team. I hope that they are much better this year. But no excuses.

[Frank Rossi]

Actually, Doid, They had no game Week 1 and no game Week 3.  They had one game in the books when most teams had three and a scrimmage that was meaningless when some teams had real ones.  They struggled in the WPI game, having to withstand a last chance at the end by the Bizarros in Week 5 and beat Rochester at home 16-14 in Week 4.  So yes, I would say the team was always playing behind the eight ball and it caught up with them by the middle of the season in terms of actual wins and losses.  Add to that the injury factory they became, and you have a pretty ugly season from top to bottom.

And actually, PA, it's not just mere "speculation."  It's as much "speculation" as when I laid out pretty much a roadmap concerning RPI's hiring process and some stories here about the Division I situation.  During the offseason, I get out there and talk to plenty of people about what happened and what the mindset is heading in for some of the LL teams.  Things are uncomfortable right now for the Statesmen following the constant dings they had this year.  On top of those issues, they're playing EIGHT games.  Not since Montclair in 1998 has any full Division III member SCHEDULED just eight games (some teams played eight in 2001 due to 9/11 -- I'm talking about scheduling).  The comments concerning Strang basically pointed out that while we were ready to crown him king of the world after Union/Hobart, we neglect that it was just ONE game, he loses some receiving talent, his efficiency did go down once adjustments could be made wholesale by Union and you can't base things on one game for a QB.  Didn't you Hobart fans do that when Vella came in for an injured QB and help win the RPI game a couple seasons prior?  Maybe you just have a short memory?

Listen, you two can sit there and pontificate all you want about scheduling being an "excuse," but maybe you should both face some facts.  There's a reason a lot of schools are now taking the NCAA up on the Canada/Europe spring scrimmage rule since it gives those teams an extra week+ of practice in full pads since the NCAA and individual schools have restricted practice times immensely.  The best practice these days for many teams has become ACTUAL GAMES since practices have become so watered down.  That's why an out-of-conference schedule is so important in the Pool A world we live in.  If you think I'm wrong, then please go call the coaches in the league and ask them specifically what scheduling really means to them today and how practices have changed since you guys were in school.  Also, go ask Mike Cragg how he feels about eight games and what it could mean to his team's prep this year.  Otherwise, I'll assume you're just being putzes and throwing out negatives as a hobby here.

[Doid23]

Otherwise, I'll assume you're just being putzes and throwing out negatives as a hobby here.

And I'll just assume that you're being, well, you...

[dlippiel]

"Blessed is the peacemaker..."

PA/Doid and The Counselor make some valid points here but here is dlip's take on the debate.

Strangs can be that he good, but has a lot to prove. Obviously his success in question was solid and impressive. Yet take into account a ****ing donkey (not trying to be negative but humorous Frank) could have thrown all ova the U secondary last season. So some success in the air against the Dutch D in 10' is not a great barometer for a QB's possible success in the future. With that said Strang put up Bart records that game. Any QB who does that at a school like Bart against their biggest rival has a clear shot at being legit. This year will be tell-tale for  Strang.

Last year there were many issues that played a role in Union's atrocious season. 1.) Injuries (to dlip) are first and foremost. Regarding Frank's mention of rhythm, key injuries are what dlip feels hurt Union's players in regards to finding a rhythm together on the field. You had many key players in and out, banged up, etc throughout the year. dlip did feel this group of kids never got to really feel out each others tendencies and it ****in showed on the field. 2.) Offensive identity: do we run the ball? Do we pass the ball? What the **** do we do? To dlip it was never clear. Regardless of accolades dlip feels Chris Coney was not himself for much of the year. dlip knows he battled injuries but with some of the changes on the line last year Chris just didn't lead the Dutch the way they needed to be lead on the ground. The kid was an AMAZING back, but unfortunately, to dlip, last year just was not that impressive. You also cannot take out the FACT that Andrew Connelly went through a very difficult year in regards to his father's passing and injuries. That kid is a warrior and the heart of this Union team to dlip. He did everything and more that could have been expected of him it just wasn't meant to be on the field last year on O. 3.) To dlip the Union D was very poorous and inconsistent. The secondary was very poor and unable to make key stops in the air time and again last year. If dlip was an opposing coach he would throw almost every down until Union forced him to put the ball on the ground. If teams did this more last year the score differential may have been even worse.

With all that said dlip believes Union did not get into a clear offensive/defensive rhythm last year. Not because of scheduling per say but mostly because of injury and some play calling. Yet one also has to take into account that Union just flat out did not play up to Dutchman expectations and that, for the many loyal fans, alumni, and Dutchman lovers, is  unacceptable. Unacceptable in a way that does not hammer the players, the coaches, or any one area of the team but unacceptable in regards to the programs history, tradition, and expectations.

[Frank Rossi]

And I'll just assume that you're being, well, you...

Dude, I'm not the one holding his donation out publicly as some sort of inducement for a college football team.  You and I have had our disagreements before, but that one really surprised me coming from you.  Complain about the team, fine, but seriously, use some iota of taste when doing it.  

Remember, I also was the guy who sat here last year questioning the Union schedule before it was even played.  And I'm also the guy who has gone head to head against Coach King concerning his scheduling techniques -- it was uncomfortable since I'm friends with his family, but it was an issue for many people here and off the message boards.  I always say that if you need evidence of how strong and consistent scheduling can help a program get off the ground, look no further than Fisher -- it's one of the reasons we spoke with Coach Vos on the show last year.  Scheduling can be your best friend or worst enemy, even moreso today.  It would be one thing if I was sitting here just bringing up the subject out of thin air.  I call out several teams each year, including Union, based on how their scheduling looks.  

I think this year's schedule is actually the best I've ever seen in the 17 seasons I've covered Union.  Hopefully, it will create a team cohesiveness and rhythm that the team really lacked last year -- that could help make what would normally be close games win scenarios for Union.  I think Hobart's schedule is about as ugly as I've seen, right up there with Union's last year.  The saving grace, as I pointed out, is that there are two OOC games at the start and the first conference game is at home.  However, Hobart will have THREE bye weeks this year.  That's where things get questionable for a team that needs to get back on top defensively while the offense tries to find a rhythm with some new talent in specialist positions.

Address those points and I'd take back the putz sentence.  However, you seem more at home attacking the team and anything you perceive as an excuse when that wasn't the question in the first place.  I've never said that I accept a 2-7 team.  It's one of the reasons I said I'd be back in the booth this year without hesitation.  I'm not ending my run in that kind of year because that would leave a bitter taste in my mouth, knowing what this team is normally capable of.  I also refuse to be fair-weathered about it.  2005 was as good as it gets -- we should've beaten Rowan in the snow, but they still found a way.  Yet, that run was awesome.  I want another one of those runs as much as anyone, even if Pat has to assign playoff games to someone else while I cover the team.  Don't sit there and think that I like a 2-7 season.  Yet, when I call the coach to speak about things, my first question is, "What can we do to help get things moving in the right direction?"  Not, "Take my donation and shove it if you don't improve things."   

[Doid23]

And I'll just assume that you're being, well, you...

Dude, I'm not the one holding his donation out publicly as some sort of inducement for a college football team.  You and I have had our disagreements before, but that one really surprised me coming from you.  Complain about the team, fine, but seriously, use some iota of taste when doing it.  

Umm, it was a joke, Frank. Stop taking yourself so seriously.