FB: Liberty League

[BartHead12]

Big Hobart fan here, this is my first post although I am an avid reader. To go back to what wesleydad said, I think Hobart is going to struggle mightily running the ball and even worse throwing the ball. They simple just do not have the athletes on either side of the ball compared to Wesley, and let's be real, JHU really won that game twice before losing it. If Hobart stays within 30-35 I think that's a big win for the program, I am sure the team is just happy to be there.

Ha, so are you really a Hobart fan or are you trying to incite something?  I agree that my head tells me Hobart will have a tough time keeping this one within 4 scores, but even I, fan of a completely different team, would disagree the team is just "happy to be there."

I don't think I really said anything that would "incite" something. I've read and heard plenty of people say this game will not be close and the obvious reasons are there. Maybe I took it a little far by saying the team is just happy to be there, because of course they want to win but I just cannot see Hobart with 3 or 4 starters out (Berkowitz, Jackson, O'Connell, possible Cragg), all All League players, competing really with a Wesley team so much faster and more experienced. The likes of Reggie Robinson Devin Worthington and Steve Webb won't be showing up Saturday so to say this HOB can compete as the 2011 did is a little wishful thinking.

[Bartman]

Big Hobart fan here, this is my first post although I am an avid reader. To go back to what wesleydad said, I think Hobart is going to struggle mightily running the ball and even worse throwing the ball. They simple just do not have the athletes on either side of the ball compared to Wesley, and let's be real, JHU really won that game twice before losing it. If Hobart stays within 30-35 I think that's a big win for the program, I am sure the team is just happy to be there.

Ha, so are you really a Hobart fan or are you trying to incite something?  I agree that my head tells me Hobart will have a tough time keeping this one within 4 scores, but even I, fan of a completely different team, would disagree the team is just "happy to be there."

I don't think I really said anything that would "incite" something. I've read and heard plenty of people say this game will not be close and the obvious reasons are there. Maybe I took it a little far by saying the team is just happy to be there, because of course they want to win but I just cannot see Hobart with 3 or 4 starters out (Berkowitz, Jackson, O'Connell, possible Cragg), all All League players, competing really with a Wesley team so much faster and more experienced. The likes of Reggie Robinson Devin Worthington and Steve Webb won't be showing up Saturday so to say this HOB can compete as the 2011 did is a little wishful thinking.

Barthead12,
    You might be right, but I hope you are not giving the pre-game speech on Saturday (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKZSQDHLtrY)

[BartHead12]

Ha. Thank god. I'll leave that to Coach Cragg.

[wesleydad]

always find it interesting that when someone says they think team A, the underdog, is going to get crushed and uses solid thoughts to back up claim gets questioned, but the people who pick team A, the underdog, to win or have a chance to win the game they have little chance of winning and use so-so points to back it up is ok.  I am ok with both stating what they believe, just not sure why person one is usually challenged much more than person two.

[rlk]

always find it interesting that when someone says they think team A, the underdog, is going to get crushed and uses solid thoughts to back up claim gets questioned, but the people who pick team A, the underdog, to win or have a chance to win the game they have little chance of winning and use so-so points to back it up is ok.  I am ok with both stating what they believe, just not sure why person one is usually challenged much more than person two.

I've said it before and will say it once more: the game is played for 60 minutes on the field by the players.  It is not played by the pundits on the blogs and the fans on the boards.  If we (MIT) were playing you again this week I'd say exactly the same thing.  If team A simply acquiesced, why even bother playing the game?

I don't really have a dog in this fight (arguably I do: if Hobart loses just as badly as Hampden-Sydney and we did, it suggests that our team is just possibly a little better than everyone gave us credit for, and that your team is simply head, shoulders, and torso above everyone else).  However, I'm rooting for Hobart in this game because Coach Martinovich graduated from and played for Hobart 20 some odd years ago.  If the current Hobart team is anything like Chad Martinovich, they're a proud and driven bunch who are not going to give up and will no more admit defeat beforehand than we did.  And certainly if Mount Union wins its game, I will be rooting for whoever wins this game to break their hammerlock on this side of the bracket.

I think in general people respect an underdog who gives it their all.  You know that.  You played a D1 team, which normally is an all but automatic win for that team, and came very close to beating them.  If you had, you'd have felt really, really good about it.  Well, the same thing applies here.  It isn't disrespectful to have confidence in your team.

[wesleydad]

always find it interesting that when someone says they think team A, the underdog, is going to get crushed and uses solid thoughts to back up claim gets questioned, but the people who pick team A, the underdog, to win or have a chance to win the game they have little chance of winning and use so-so points to back it up is ok.  I am ok with both stating what they believe, just not sure why person one is usually challenged much more than person two.

I've said it before and will say it once more: the game is played for 60 minutes on the field by the players.  It is not played by the pundits on the blogs and the fans on the boards.  If we (MIT) were playing you again this week I'd say exactly the same thing.  If team A simply acquiesced, why even bother playing the game?

I don't really have a dog in this fight (arguably I do: if Hobart loses just as badly as Hampden-Sydney and we did, it suggests that our team is just possibly a little better than everyone gave us credit for, and that your team is simply head, shoulders, and torso above everyone else).  However, I'm rooting for Hobart in this game because Coach Martinovich graduated from and played for Hobart 20 some odd years ago.  If the current Hobart team is anything like Chad Martinovich, they're a proud and driven bunch who are not going to give up and will no more admit defeat beforehand than we did.  And certainly if Mount Union wins its game, I will be rooting for whoever wins this game to break their hammerlock on this side of the bracket.

I think in general people respect an underdog who gives it their all.  You know that.  You played a D1 team, which normally is an all but automatic win for that team, and came very close to beating them.  If you had, you'd have felt really, really good about it.  Well, the same thing applies here.  It isn't disrespectful to have confidence in your team.

rik, I think you missed my point.  I have no issue with anyone thinking there team can win a game.  I have just seen many times over the years that when someone says a team has little to no chance to win they get challenged much more often then the other scenario.  I like when fans want to see there team win and even come up with far fetched ways for them to do it.  I had no issues with anything that was written by you when it came to the MIT game.  You should think your team will win and that is why the game is played.  I just find it interesting how posters react to predictions about games.

[rlk]

always find it interesting that when someone says they think team A, the underdog, is going to get crushed and uses solid thoughts to back up claim gets questioned, but the people who pick team A, the underdog, to win or have a chance to win the game they have little chance of winning and use so-so points to back it up is ok.  I am ok with both stating what they believe, just not sure why person one is usually challenged much more than person two.

I've said it before and will say it once more: the game is played for 60 minutes on the field by the players.  It is not played by the pundits on the blogs and the fans on the boards.  If we (MIT) were playing you again this week I'd say exactly the same thing.  If team A simply acquiesced, why even bother playing the game?

I don't really have a dog in this fight (arguably I do: if Hobart loses just as badly as Hampden-Sydney and we did, it suggests that our team is just possibly a little better than everyone gave us credit for, and that your team is simply head, shoulders, and torso above everyone else).  However, I'm rooting for Hobart in this game because Coach Martinovich graduated from and played for Hobart 20 some odd years ago.  If the current Hobart team is anything like Chad Martinovich, they're a proud and driven bunch who are not going to give up and will no more admit defeat beforehand than we did.  And certainly if Mount Union wins its game, I will be rooting for whoever wins this game to break their hammerlock on this side of the bracket.

I think in general people respect an underdog who gives it their all.  You know that.  You played a D1 team, which normally is an all but automatic win for that team, and came very close to beating them.  If you had, you'd have felt really, really good about it.  Well, the same thing applies here.  It isn't disrespectful to have confidence in your team.

rik, I think you missed my point.  I have no issue with anyone thinking there team can win a game.  I have just seen many times over the years that when someone says a team has little to no chance to win they get challenged much more often then the other scenario.  I like when fans want to see there team win and even come up with far fetched ways for them to do it.  I had no issues with anything that was written by you when it came to the MIT game.  You should think your team will win and that is why the game is played.  I just find it interesting how posters react to predictions about games.

I think it comes right back to people wanting to see an underdog win.  It isn't a matter of logic (I of all people am saying that?!).  It's respecting the underdog's do or die, never give up attitude vs. wanting to see the arrogant guy on top knocked off.  The Patriots were on the other end of that the year they went 16-0 in the regular season.  Everyone wanted to see the Patriots taken down, and were much more willing to listen to people who thought the Giants would win than the Patriots 

[boobyhasgameyo]

always find it interesting that when someone says they think team A, the underdog, is going to get crushed and uses solid thoughts to back up claim gets questioned, but the people who pick team A, the underdog, to win or have a chance to win the game they have little chance of winning and use so-so points to back it up is ok.  I am ok with both stating what they believe, just not sure why person one is usually challenged much more than person two.

Wasn't questioning his belief that Hobart will lose in convincing fashion.  It was the end of the post, which had nothing to do with final scores or execution, which I personally questioned.  If I were a betting man, and somebody were to ask the Hobart players if they were simply happy just to be there, I predict they would disagree with the sentiment.  But BartHead admitted that part was taking it a little far, and nobody else has questioned the legitimacy of his other statements, so it's all good in the hood. 

[wesleydad]

always find it interesting that when someone says they think team A, the underdog, is going to get crushed and uses solid thoughts to back up claim gets questioned, but the people who pick team A, the underdog, to win or have a chance to win the game they have little chance of winning and use so-so points to back it up is ok.  I am ok with both stating what they believe, just not sure why person one is usually challenged much more than person two.

Wasn't questioning his belief that Hobart will lose in convincing fashion.  It was the end of the post, which had nothing to do with final scores or execution, which I personally questioned.  If I were a betting man, and somebody were to ask the Hobart players if they were simply happy just to be there, I predict they would disagree with the sentiment.  But BartHead admitted that part was taking it a little far, and nobody else has questioned the legitimacy of his other statements, so it's all good in the hood.

Booby, yea I get that.  I was just talking in generalities since I have seen it on other boards.  I agree with the underdog mentality.  Will likely move to that side if the expected results hold out this week and Wesley goes to play Mount again.

[Pat Coleman]

if Hobart loses just as badly as Hampden-Sydney and we did, it suggests that our team is just possibly a little better than everyone gave us credit for, and that your team is simply head, shoulders, and torso above everyone else

Honestly, you can't make that comparison. Wesley took its foot off the gas and the final margin isn't a valid point of comparison.

[rlk]

if Hobart loses just as badly as Hampden-Sydney and we did, it suggests that our team is just possibly a little better than everyone gave us credit for, and that your team is simply head, shoulders, and torso above everyone else

Honestly, you can't make that comparison. Wesley took its foot off the gas and the final margin isn't a valid point of comparison.

We'll be in a better position -- whatever it looks like -- to make a comparison after the game.

[D3MAFAN]

Hobart this how you beat Wesley,  I got to watch them a few times  throughout this year, even though they blew all the teams out.  As many already know Wesley seems to come out flying on all cylinders, I believe they scored on all their first possessions in the games I saw. Although it was against teams that defenses that are not as good as Hobart as a whole. I think this is the best team that I've seen due to its lack of injuries to star players, however they still have to work on special teams (they handled their Fg kicking with the new guy) and penalties. Nevertheless, Hobart has to win the special teams game, maybe block a punt or return a punt (easier said than done).  I did not see the full game against Charlotte, but they were in a dog fight, from the highlights, Hobart running backs have to run hard each play regardless of the previous downs and the quarterback has to make the good throws, not the explosive ones, but the passes that keep them from becoming one-sided, hopefully being able to wear down the starters. Wesley defense looks tough (as always) and the front 7 is probably the best I seen aside from UWW, but it appeared that a few teams I saw were able to hit big plays in the air against, them, they play soft coverage and man up when blitzing and allow the athletic secondary to try to make plays, but they do tackle well.  They have probably have one of the top 3 receivers in all of D III aside from Kumerow and Davis, when given open field, most likely will take it to the house or just blow right pass you on a go or post. So Hobart has to make solid tackles, do not take any tackle for granted, no lofting, and have to make those key one on one tackles, because those usually lead to touchdowns as aforementioned. Hobart has to protect the ball, the defense has been very opportunistic and when they make that key turnover, it usually starts the rout.  Wesley running game is ok, probably due to them being able to pass on everyone, but from my perspective not Top 10.  Callahan is great, Hobart will need to get pressure with is Defensive front, which I think Coleman will have to make some dynamic plays.  Callahan will make some really good throws, but will rely on the scheme of the play at times and force it.  I think they played some okay Division III teams, such as Rowan, Thomas More, and Salisbury, but I think that Rowan was not as good as year's past and slip into the playoffs, Thomas More proved that it could not beat a W&J team that got recently triple monkey stomp against Mount Union and probably the worst defensive (mainly secondary)Salisbury team I have seen in recent years, everyone threw on them. Not saying that they didn't play good teams, they did, but the teams weren't in my opinion all world, the only game that they were really challenged was the Charlotte game. Thomas More was an above average team as far as comparing to the rest of Division III and played admirable against them for 3 quarters (although it was the 1st game) Wesley like Mount Union may be worried about not playing their starters for a whole game, if it makes it that far.  As far as I know that may come back to bite them in the butt, but I doubt it.  I think Wesley wins this game in the second half after taking on the initial onslaught. Nevertheless, hope both teams play well and injury free. Hopefully there will be video, it was good to watch the 1st quarter against MIT last week, hopefully I can watch a full game of Wesley and be very interested.

[ITH radio]

I know Frank and Dave are talking with Wesley's SID about a potential broadcast of the game. Hope so b/c I'd love to see some video as unfortunately I can't travel up for the game due to a full dance card of kid and other activities this weekend.

Update - Frank as color man and Gordon Mann as PBP has been greenlit for Saturday's game. Wesley is providing camera operators (aka students most likely). Some final arrangements being made to accomodate / factor in likely rainy day and keeping folks dry / safe.

[wesleydad]

I know Frank and Dave are talking with Wesley's SID about a potential broadcast of the game. Hope so b/c I'd love to see some video as unfortunately I can't travel up for the game due to a full dance card of kid and other activities this weekend.

Update - Frank as color man and Gordon Mann as PBP has been greenlit for Saturday's game. Wesley is providing camera operators (aka students most likely). Some final arrangements being made to accomodate / factor in likely rainy day and keeping folks dry / safe.

Great to hear.  Now anyone who wants to watch can get to see how good this Wesley team is, or at least I hope they play to the level I think they are capable of.

[Limbs66]

I know Frank and Dave are talking with Wesley's SID about a potential broadcast of the game. Hope so b/c I'd love to see some video as unfortunately I can't travel up for the game due to a full dance card of kid and other activities this weekend.

Update - Frank as color man and Gordon Mann as PBP has been greenlit for Saturday's game. Wesley is providing camera operators (aka students most likely). Some final arrangements being made to accomodate / factor in likely rainy day and keeping folks dry / safe.

Great to hear.  Now anyone who wants to watch can get to see how good this *Hobart team is, or at least I hope they play to the level I think they are capable of.