FB: Liberty League

[maxpower]

Never mind that Union lost seven in a row to that point -- it was still the 800lb. gorilla their team was playing.  If Union had changed its name to Bob Smith University and played under identical circumstances, BSU would've likely won that game. That's what name recognition and historical success can do on the football field.

In the same light, Union plays ITHACA this weekend.  Yes, the same team that has come into the game with a certain swagger over the last couple years.  The team that used to refuse to even put its name into ECAC consideration -- maybe because the team was too good for that... Maybe because of budget... Who knows?

So the only reason Union lost is because they were in their own heads? You're calling Bombers out for being too smug about our upcoming game and then in the same breath stealing all credit from Utica for that win? Not to mention that you haven't a shred of evidence for this ridiculous argument about Union "changing their name" and playing better... ay ay ay.


As for the ECAC comment, AGAIN, let it go dude. What is your problem with Ithaca? You constantly milk this idea that Ithaca is "too good" for the ECACs, something that we have constantly rebutted. Let me ask you one question: what skin is it off your back that Ithaca doesn't play in the ECACs? Seriously, why does it tick you off so much? At least we're opening up a spot for Union every year. Here's a post where you deride Bombers for not taking Union seriously as a rivalry game, and then you throw in a little dig to try and legitimize your claim. When has one Ithaca fan on these boards ever said squat about Union in a negative way (until the last sentence; fine, you got to me). You're like a pathetic Mets fan that thinks they have a "rivalry" with the Yankees.  I'm not an LL expert, but don't other fans on this board find a Union fan yapping about another school being "too good" a little ironic?

Once again I must say I find your double life as someone who touts himself as a journalist while simultaneously trashing institutions that welcome you into their press box (which also isn't good enough for you apparently, I guess the U can't afford an ethernet cable for you) mystifying.

[drt]

Union/Ithaca will be a challenge for Union, although, I still believe it's a game that could go either way (no 10-point favorite, as we remember, is how I define this). 

This game against Ithaca is going to be very, very, interesting. The Bombers are dealing with a QB disaster unlike anything we've seen since Ryan Steenberg was thrown under the bus by his own teammate back in 2002 (In his defense, he was a good LB), but they are going up against a Union defense allowing 450 YPG. Union's offense is clicking, but IC has a better defense than Utica (and Salve, IMO).

A lot depends on if Will Carter returns in the middle for Ithaca, and if they are settled at QB. It seems like Hendel is the guy. He saw most of the action at QB last week, and has done less active sabotaging of the offense. If nothing else, his legs put him over the top, as he's run for 64 yards on 10 carries (removing sack yardage), Ultimately, however, the offense looks a lot worse than advertised--even accounting for Salisbury being really good on defense. Suffice to say, I expect a low scoring affair.

But let's be honest. Ithaca is, most likely, going to finish 5th or 6th in the E8. Union beating them at home in a semi-close game (or worse, losing to them in a close game) won't mean much if Alfred wins in a blowout (as I suspect they will) and Fisher beats Rochester--which may not happen.

To me, what the LL needs is this:

Union beats Ithaca handily, something like 27-10. St. Lawrence keeps it semi-respectable against Alfred, maybe 38-14, and Rochester beats Fisher.

Something that I think may hold the LL back is that so few of their teams play 10-game regular-season schedules. I'm not assigning blame, I know in some cases, it's no-one's fault. But the reality is, four of the seven teams only play nine games and this season, one plays eight. Last season, four of the seven teams played 9 games in the regular season. So over this year and last year, the LL has lost out on 10 OOC opportunities. That's a full season's worth of games.

That makes it tougher to prove yourself, because you're losing out on OOC opportunities that, if you win, can raise the profile of the league. And this is personal bias, but I've always had a little more trouble taking those teams at the same level. It's probably a residual effect from the 2001 RPI-IC playoff game (and yes, RPI beat IC two years later after playing a nine game regular season)

I wish the LL would get more of their teams on the 10-game schedule. I think it would help

Bombers, I actually like your rhetoric on the boards, so I'm not trying to sound like an a'hole here, even if it seems to come across that way.  That said...

Three weeks ago, you tried to tear me a new one concerning Union, Drew Connolly and the nature of this upcoming game.  Unfortunately, as someone who called the Union/Utica game last weekend, I have a perspective concerning "big names" in D3 football and the perception attached to them regardless of record.  Utica fans (who made the near side jam-packed in the stands) acted like they were playing for the Super Bowl Saturday night.  Never mind that Union lost seven in a row to that point -- it was still the 800lb. gorilla their team was playing.  If Union had changed its name to Bob Smith University and played under identical circumstances, BSU would've likely won that game.  That's what name recognition and historical success can do on the football field.

In the same light, Union plays ITHACA this weekend.  Yes, the same team that has come into the game with a certain swagger over the last couple years.  The team that used to refuse to even put its name into ECAC consideration -- maybe because the team was too good for that... Maybe because of budget... Who knows?  The same team that still yelps about the shootout in the 2005 playoffs and who trash talked their way through the week prior to the earlier Ithaca/Union ECAC matchup.

So, a one-point win would be meaningless for Union?  Give me a break.  It would carry a LOT of meaning heading into the crucial LL schedule.  It would mean a lot to a quarterback who you stated was a lesser player than two quarterbacks who never started a game prior to the season.  It would mean a lot to a conference which is perceived to be 15 slots below Ithaca's conference since the two teams are viewed by some as equal in pegging in their respective conferences.  This game is huge.  This game is a pick'em.  So was Notre Dame/Michigan to many people.  Nobody moved from the Big House Saturday night after the game was over.  Just because a game is equal on paper does not reduce the meaning of a game.

Distance yourself all you want from three weeks ago and the positions you held -- but it doesn't change the reality that, at least for Union, beating a historically strong team like Ithaca would be a huge lift emotionally and preparation-wise for the remainder of the season.  Just like Union had a bullseye on its back the other night at Utica based on name alone, so does Ithaca, regardless of record.  For some reason, I think that Ithaca views Union in the same light -- and that's what makes this game begin to smell like an unpredictable rivalry game.

I don't know what you are used to Frank, and I am new to E8/LL atmosphere,  but far from a "Super Bowl" atmosphere, I was surprised at how relatively dead the Utica crowd was until UC took the lead and the players exhorted them late in the 4th quarter.
800-pound gorilla?  Utica is still a young program and any win against a "name" program is a big step toward credibility, regardless of the "name" program's recent record.  Why diminish those young men's accomplishment , even when they were the consensus favorite for that game, at least on these boards?
BSU?  Sorry, Utica beat a football team that has historically been in the "next level."  But if you ask those Utica kids what Union's record or tradition has been for the last 30 years, they would likely respond with a blank stare.  The Utica players went out to win a football game, and they did.  Don't you give them any less. 

[Frank Rossi]

I'm splitting this into two messages since I'm on an iPhone and there are two completely separate points at issue.

This one is concerning Utica.  Sorry, folks, but you can make a point about one school without diminishing the success of the other.  The statement I made was that Utica viewed the Union game as a signature opportunity.  As such, the team and crowd were amped up and ready for a dogfight where the expectations for Utica were low but a win would be a good launch point.  That's a credit to the team, their crowd, their coaching and everyone else involved.  Ask any player about the adrenaline difference that exists when a team plays another team above them vs. a team below them, especially in non-league play.  Credit Utica for playing a strong game offensively and a pretty good game defensively, absolutely.  However, if BSU came in with a 7-game losing streak and no name respect, the adrenaline, crowd, attitudes and other things would have made it a much different overall scenario.  Maybe Utica still would win, but the fact that it was "Union" made the whole scenario even more special -- you'd be ignorant in my view if you didn't see that.  Drt, seeing that I had to turn down my crowd microphone numerous times Saturday and that we were wondering if the booing was going to stop when Acevado slid short of the goalline on the 2pt conversion -- I'm not sure how you thought the crowd was subdued.  Maybe it was a bit when Union responded twice in the second half -- but that was the exception.

To view my post as discrediting Utica is a complete mischaracterization of my statement since I reported on the atmosphere surrounding the game and suggested a reason for the atmosphere despite Union's recent woes.

[Bombers798891]

Frank, I gotta tell you something here, because it seems like, in some of your responses, mainly when I mention Union, that you're missing something. It's not personal. I don't have any feelings one way or the other for the Union program. Drew Connolly is, I'm quite sure, a really nice kid. I'm sure he busts his tail working at what he does. So if you interpreted my statements about his career as something about him as a person, well, that's just not true. Likewise my statements a few weeks ago about the Union "toss up" thing was again, not based in my feelings on the Union program as a whole.

As for Ithaca being an arrogant team that trash-talked and refused ECAC games because they were too good for them or whatever, I need to be honest, it doesn't really matter to me one way or the other. I'm not sure why it would, or frankly, why it should. If you think it means that the IC program looks down on the Union program, well, maybe that's the case. But for me, well, Union's just a program we never played, for whatever the reason. I vaguely remember the 1999 ECAC playoff game (Really, everything from 1996-2000 kind of blended together in a blur of 7-3 seasons), and obviously the last two, but that's it. I was probably at the 1991 game, but remember nothing (I was eight).

With the joking exception of Cortland during Cortaca week, the one Cortland kid who sparked a baseball brawl with IC, and the one time Bob Darnley taunted the IC crowd, really it's all the same to me. Unless kids are throwing out racial slurs, actively injuring opponents or on the take a la SMU, all the rest of that stuff doesn't matter to me.

[drt]

I'm splitting this into two messages since I'm on an iPhone and there are two completely separate points at issue.

This one is concerning Utica.  Sorry, folks, but you can make a point about one school without diminishing the success of the other.  The statement I made was that Utica viewed the Union game as a signature opportunity.  As such, the team and crowd were amped up and ready for a dogfight where the expectations for Utica were low but a win would be a good launch point.  That's a credit to the team, their crowd, their coaching and everyone else involved.  Ask any player about the adrenaline difference that exists when a team plays another team above them vs. a team below them, especially in non-league play.  Credit Utica for playing a strong game offensively and a pretty good game defensively, absolutely.  However, if BSU came in with a 7-game losing streak and no name respect, the adrenaline, crowd, attitudes and other things would have made it a much different overall scenario.  Maybe Utica still would win, but the fact that it was "Union" made the whole scenario even more special -- you'd be ignorant in my view if you didn't see that.  Drt, seeing that I had to turn down my crowd microphone numerous times Saturday and that we were wondering if the booing was going to stop when Acevado slid short of the goalline on the 2pt conversion -- I'm not sure how you thought the crowd was subdued.  Maybe it was a bit when Union responded twice in the second half -- but that was the exception.

To view my post as discrediting Utica is a complete mischaracterization of my statement since I reported on the atmosphere surrounding the game and suggested a reason for the atmosphere despite Union's recent woes.

So now I get you completely.
Things as I see them: 
You are an unabashed Union fan. 
You can't stand to be disagreed with, even though what we are talking about is more a matter of opinion than fact.
The expectations for Utica weren't low, they were favored by every poster on this board who posted an opinion.
You know more than I do about how players feel and think, as well as what motivates them.
The Union game WAS a signature opportunity for Utica.  We agree on this one.
Utica's defense was not pretty good, but they were adequate and they came through when it counted.
I didn't say you discredited Utica, I pointed out that you didn't give their performance due respect, and you think the only reason they won was because they were just more fired up because of their opponent.  Sorry, you can only extrapolate intangibles so far.
Geez, you had to turn your mike down in the fourth quarter.  There we agree that the crowd got into it at that point, finally.
You know more about D3 football than I do, and you think I'm ignorant. And you have how many Stagg Bowl rings?

[pg04]

Is it any coincidence that almost everyone that Frank responds to gets offended or ends up in an argument with him 

[Frank Rossi]

Bombers -- I'll respond to Max's ridiculousness in a bit.  However, with regard to that post you just made... I don't take it personally.  I'm just describing to you why the game has a lot of meaning from Union players' perspectives.  I actually saw Coach Audino today and mentioned to him your post -- and he laughed, saying this game should be meaningful to both teams because of the history between the schools, the current stakes and the fact that league play starts in earnest after that game.  Either team would relish a one-point game in their direction.  That's as close to a fact I can provide you in response to your post earlier today.

Drew takes your prior statements in stride -- he's the kind of guy that doesn't mind the spotlight and has very broad shoulders about these things.  He also likes to prove people wrong, especially as he tries to move past a disastrous '10 season and offseason (personally for him with his dad's death, immediate injury following his dad's passing and accident that forced him to be airlifted in the spring).  He doesn't want special treatment -- he just wants his gameplay to be what speaks for him.  I was damned proud of him Saturday as he played as good a game as I've seen him play in a long time.  He's susceptible to mistakes, but saying two unknown QBs were better than a guy with his level of experience and character was unfair -- and a guy like dlip can explain that a lot better than me.

I'll address the ECAC points, etc. later tonight, but rest assured that the only thing I have a real issue with is the mischaracterization that often occurs regarding my statements (i.e., that I detracted from Utica by pointing out that they were extremely excited by a win vs. a team that lost 7 straight potentially because that team's name is "Union" much like the team would've put a bullseye on the opponent if it were named "Ithaca").  It doesn't take a genius to draw the context surrounding my posts, but for some reason, I need to file disclaimers like it's my job.

I'll tell you one brief story concerning this season.  As Tom Santa Barbara and I left Salve Regina's field two weekend's ago, a Salve baseball player who was in the Press Box stopped us to say, "I know you guys are Union's broadcasters, but I really enjoyed listening to you guys.  You're really professional and excellent."  Since I view my job as a commentator, I viewed that as a high compliment as it means we called it with reality in mind as opposed to the treatment I generally receive in here.  So, I take some of the interesting comments around here with a grain of salt since that point.

[Frank Rossi]

Apparently, yes, drt, on all counts.  Maybe listen to our show sometime since some of your points have been developed from our interviews and discussions.  Have a nice night.

[pg04]

What did we call you last year? An arrogant SOB?  something like that! 

(P.S. I know Frank is not offended by my jabs --- I think--- and thus I will continue because I find that his comments always start people up)

[drt]

And your show is found where?

[Frank Rossi]

And your show is found where?

Http://inthehuddlle.com -- should be four seasons' worth there.  Thanks for your interest!

[Frank Rossi]

What did we call you last year? An arrogant SOB?  something like that! 

(P.S. I know Frank is not offended by my jabs --- I think--- and thus I will continue because I find that his comments always start people up)

pg, you know as well as I do that I don't take myself nearly as seriously as some of you guys do on these boards.  It's just an issue of mischaracterizations that really irks me.  When someone says that beating a team on a 7-game losing streak is indeed a signature win, though, without taking a step back and realizing they validated my overarching point, all I can do is sit back and laugh to myself.

I'll find the old name Max coined last year and get back to you.  Pompous ass maybe?

[pg04]

Yeah, I think Pompous ass is right.  Arrogant SOB may fit too.  I don't really take you seriously mainly because Union football usually has nothing to do with me and I could care less about it to be perfectly honest (well, that sounded harsh, but yeah).  And badmouthing Ithaca will always get me in your good graces (I kid, I kid). 

[Bombers798891]

Bombers -- I'll respond to Max's ridiculousness in a bit.  However, with regard to that post you just made... I don't take it personally.  I'm just describing to you why the game has a lot of meaning from Union players' perspectives.  I actually saw Coach Audino today and mentioned to him your post -- and he laughed, saying this game should be meaningful to both teams because of the history between the schools, the current stakes and the fact that league play starts in earnest after that game.  Either team would relish a one-point game in their direction.  That's as close to a fact I can provide you in response to your post earlier today.

Drew takes your prior statements in stride -- he's the kind of guy that doesn't mind the spotlight and has very broad shoulders about these things.  He also likes to prove people wrong, especially as he tries to move past a disastrous '10 season and offseason (personally for him with his dad's death, immediate injury following his dad's passing and accident that forced him to be airlifted in the spring).  He doesn't want special treatment -- he just wants his gameplay to be what speaks for him.  I was damned proud of him Saturday as he played as good a game as I've seen him play in a long time.  He's susceptible to mistakes, but saying two unknown QBs were better than a guy with his level of experience and character was unfair -- and a guy like dlip can explain that a lot better than me.

I'll address the ECAC points, etc. later tonight, but rest assured that the only thing I have a real issue with is the mischaracterization that often occurs regarding my statements (i.e., that I detracted from Utica by pointing out that they were extremely excited by a win vs. a team that lost 7 straight potentially because that team's name is "Union" much like the team would've put a bullseye on the opponent if it were named "Ithaca").  It doesn't take a genius to draw the context surrounding my posts, but for some reason, I need to file disclaimers like it's my job.

I'll tell you one brief story concerning this season.  As Tom Santa Barbara and I left Salve Regina's field two weekend's ago, a Salve baseball player who was in the Press Box stopped us to say, "I know you guys are Union's broadcasters, but I really enjoyed listening to you guys.  You're really professional and excellent."  Since I view my job as a commentator, I viewed that as a high compliment as it means we called it with reality in mind as opposed to the treatment I generally receive in here.  So, I take some of the interesting comments around here with a grain of salt since that point.

Frank--

1. Once again, my original post wasn't so much about how the teams view each other's history, it's about whether beating an Ithaca team that could easily go 5-5 this season signifies something about the Union on the field, and the LL as a whole. This is shaping up to be the worst Ithaca team in 40 years.

2. How were my comments about Connolly unfair? They're an opinion, Frank. An opinion that may prove incorrect, yes, and one that you disagree with, but an opinion nonetheless. I mean, I could have said something like "I think the Ithaca QB will be better than Connolly, but it's a toss up and there's a spread of 10 interceptions in either direction" and then I'd pretty much be "right" no matter what happens. I decided not to. If I'm proven wrong, hey, good for Connolly.

3. Thank you for telling me that people think you're a good broadcaster Frank. As I think I posted somewhere else, I think you call a good game too. I'm not sure how it relates to what's going on in here, or if I'm supposed to drop in something about compliments I've received as a writer or anything like that, but...um...congratulations on being good at what you do?

[Frank Rossi]

Frank--

1. Once again, my original post wasn't so much about how the teams view each other's history, it's about whether beating an Ithaca team that could easily go 5-5 this season signifies something about the Union on the field, and the LL as a whole. This is shaping up to be the worst Ithaca team in 40 years.

2. How were my comments about Connolly unfair? They're an opinion, Frank. An opinion that may prove incorrect, yes, and one that you disagree with, but an opinion nonetheless. I mean, I could have said something like "I think the Ithaca QB will be better than Connolly, but it's a toss up and there's a spread of 10 interceptions in either direction" and then I'd pretty much be "right" no matter what happens. I decided not to. If I'm proven wrong, hey, good for Connolly.

3. Thank you for telling me that people think you're a good broadcaster Frank. As I think I posted somewhere else, I think you call a good game too. I'm not sure how it relates to what's going on in here, or if I'm supposed to drop in something about compliments I've received as a writer or anything like that, but...um...congratulations on being good at what you do?

1.  And this is currently the worst Union team in 30 years -- except, your conference is 15 places ahead of Union's conference.  So, all else being equal, Ithaca should beat Union by 30, no?

2.  Me stating that the comments you had made were unfair is... AN OPINION AS WELL.  Everything before that was some level of statements backing up my assessment.  I stated to you something he said in an interview I did with him a few weeks back, and he and I had discussed your original posts prior to the start of the interview.  I'm simply laying out everything concerning his own attitude about the burden(s) he's carrying this season after a disastrous 2010.  I'm aware that you're stating opinions in that respect.  So am I.  All I ask is for in any discussion like this is evidence that backs up the assessment (which you do normally provide, albeit sometimes refutable).  That's what creates discussion and debate.  Stop taking it so personally.

3.  That wasn't meant for a pat on the back, and it was actually pointed more toward Max's "journalist" comment than anything.  However, it also was a statement toward your "don't take it personally" approach -- I'm basically saying to you that when I get a compliment like that from an opposing team's student, it gives me actually better perspective than the back and forth around here (and not for ego purposes, but because I get thrashed so badly around here that I begin to question my own perspective in the first place).  I did appreciate your compliment after the Salve game and didn't forget that or take it for granted.  Things like that actually make me appreciate your point of view a lot more.