FB: Liberty League

[Bartman]

It is totally plausible  that Hobart beats RPI, Rochester and the Larrys but loses to Union(and the reverse is also true based on the second half against Springfield)....like in the Springfield-MM game , a few turnovers will determine the result in any game for the balance of the schedule...Yes, the Larrys have the inside track, but no team is either so strong or so weak  to generate result certainty( yes, that includes the Dutchmen). I for one, will enjoy the last 4 weeks for what it is. 

[ITH radio]

Toops joins at 19 min mark

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/ith/2015/10/19/in-the-huddlle--liberty-league-football-talk-show

ECAC discussion begins at about the 49 minute mark.

[dlippiel]

It is totally plausible  that Hobart beats RPI, Rochester and the Larrys but loses to Union(and the reverse is also true based on the second half against Springfield)....like in the Springfield-MM game , a few turnovers will determine the result in any game for the balance of the schedule...Yes, the Larrys have the inside track, but no team is either so strong or so weak  to generate result certainty( yes, that includes the Dutchmen). I for one, will enjoy the last 4 weeks for what it is.

It will certainly be entertaining. dlip is really hoping the Dutchmen can win one.

The last two weeks clearly show the difference between the LL in 2014 and 2015. Springfield defeating the Pumpkinheads and then losing to MMA the following week??? WTF 

[dlippiel]

Congrats to a gritty Merchant Marine in beating Springfield yesterday 22-21. A well deserved win with a strong drive and stop in the final minutes. No gimme games in LL this year.

Aggressive coaching by Rochester backfires on 2 unsuccessful fourth down attempts in Yellowjacket territory, as RPI notches an important win. Next week's contest in Geneva is critical for both teams.

Can the Larries run the table or will this be the season of more upsets and parity?

dlip is not one to ever go off about coaching but dlip can't resist mentioning how he respects you bartman for the polite manner in which you described those decisions by UR. The first one, in dlip's mind, has got to be the worst call dlip has ever witnessed aside from a Montclair St call against Union in the 80's that had the same result. IDHO UR's first choice to go for it lost them the game on Saturday even though there was an entire quarter left to play and the game was tied. The air simply fizzled out of their balloon after not getting that first down.

[Frank Rossi]

It's always a tough thing when we second-guess coaching decisions.  Kurt and Bob got into a minor argument in the WRPI booth about going for it from ROC's own 27 -- Kurt liked the call, and Bob clearly didn't from an objective observer point of view.  We generally focus on the misses in those situations because nobody makes a big deal out of the successful tries.  That said, you really do have to pick and choose your risks in football.  James pointed out in our show's opening segment this week that the punt average, perhaps due to wind in Troy, was a paltry 30ish yards per attempt.  With a return, that would technically take the ball back to ROC territory anyway.  My thoughts, without asking Coach Greene, are that he weighed the +/- of turning the ball over there with a 50/50 chance of retaining possession with kicking the ball and guaranteeing a loss of possession about 20 yards downfield.  We tend to look at these decisions in a vacuum, but we have to look at the entire game flow to really understand why those calls are being made.

For USMMA, we aren't criticizing the "go for 2" call because it worked.  However, the "card" reads that you make that decision on the road and when time is likely to expire.  Toop called the play with 3:14 left at home.  Again, it's a game flow situation.  There's a team that absolutely needed a win.  He felt that his depth wouldn't match Springfield's in an extra session, most likely.  He also wanted to put the onus on a primarily rushing offense to have to cover the field in 3 minutes or force them to pass the ball (big risk with a QB that isn't comfortable throwing the ball deep).  So again, game flow and, in this case, season flow dictated a different call than conventional football wisdom.  Toop himself admitted in our interview that in D1, he'd be criticized for the call by all of the talking heads out there.  Yet, the call makes sense when you fully understand the dynamics outside the vacuum.  Just some food for thought.

[lewdogg11]

It's always a tough thing when we second-guess coaching decisions.  Kurt and Bob got into a minor argument in the WRPI booth about going for it from ROC's own 27 -- Kurt liked the call, and Bob clearly didn't from an objective observer point of view.  We generally focus on the misses in those situations because nobody makes a big deal out of the successful tries.  That said, you really do have to pick and choose your risks in football.  James pointed out in our show's opening segment this week that the punt average, perhaps due to wind in Troy, was a paltry 30ish yards per attempt.  With a return, that would technically take the ball back to ROC territory anyway.  My thoughts, without asking Coach Greene, are that he weighed the +/- of turning the ball over there with a 50/50 chance of retaining possession with kicking the ball and guaranteeing a loss of possession about 20 yards downfield.  We tend to look at these decisions in a vacuum, but we have to look at the entire game flow to really understand why those calls are being made.

For USMMA, we aren't criticizing the "go for 2" call because it worked.  However, the "card" reads that you make that decision on the road and when time is likely to expire.  Toop called the play with 3:14 left at home.  Again, it's a game flow situation.  There's a team that absolutely needed a win.  He felt that his depth wouldn't match Springfield's in an extra session, most likely.  He also wanted to put the onus on a primarily rushing offense to have to cover the field in 3 minutes or force them to pass the ball (big risk with a QB that isn't comfortable throwing the ball deep).  So again, game flow and, in this case, season flow dictated a different call than conventional football wisdom.  Toop himself admitted in our interview that in D1, he'd be criticized for the call by all of the talking heads out there.  Yet, the call makes sense when you fully understand the dynamics outside the vacuum.  Just some food for thought.

I wasn't able to listen to the game Saturday but clearly if Bob thought it was a bad call, it was a fantastic call that didn't work out.  Most clueless broadcaster around.  One conversation from the last game I listened to:

Bob:  This second half is really dragging. 
Kurt:  Actually it's not.  it's going very quickly.
Bob:  Well it feels like it's taking forever.
Kurt:  There has been a player down on the field hurt for the past 5 minutes.
Bob:  <silence>

[Jonny Utah]

It's always a tough thing when we second-guess coaching decisions.  Kurt and Bob got into a minor argument in the WRPI booth about going for it from ROC's own 27 -- Kurt liked the call, and Bob clearly didn't from an objective observer point of view.  We generally focus on the misses in those situations because nobody makes a big deal out of the successful tries.  That said, you really do have to pick and choose your risks in football.  James pointed out in our show's opening segment this week that the punt average, perhaps due to wind in Troy, was a paltry 30ish yards per attempt.  With a return, that would technically take the ball back to ROC territory anyway.  My thoughts, without asking Coach Greene, are that he weighed the +/- of turning the ball over there with a 50/50 chance of retaining possession with kicking the ball and guaranteeing a loss of possession about 20 yards downfield.  We tend to look at these decisions in a vacuum, but we have to look at the entire game flow to really understand why those calls are being made.

For USMMA, we aren't criticizing the "go for 2" call because it worked.  However, the "card" reads that you make that decision on the road and when time is likely to expire.  Toop called the play with 3:14 left at home.  Again, it's a game flow situation.  There's a team that absolutely needed a win.  He felt that his depth wouldn't match Springfield's in an extra session, most likely.  He also wanted to put the onus on a primarily rushing offense to have to cover the field in 3 minutes or force them to pass the ball (big risk with a QB that isn't comfortable throwing the ball deep).  So again, game flow and, in this case, season flow dictated a different call than conventional football wisdom.  Toop himself admitted in our interview that in D1, he'd be criticized for the call by all of the talking heads out there.  Yet, the call makes sense when you fully understand the dynamics outside the vacuum.  Just some food for thought.

I wasn't able to listen to the game Saturday but clearly if Bob thought it was a bad call, it was a fantastic call that didn't work out.  Most clueless broadcaster around.  One conversation from the last game I listened to:

Bob:  This second half is really dragging. 
Kurt:  Actually it's not.  it's going very quickly.
Bob:  Well it feels like it's taking forever.
Kurt:  There has been a player down on the field hurt for the past 5 minutes.
Bob:  <silence>

I listened to them a few weeks ago for a quarter.  They reminded me of these two guys:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nt5Ga-Lk-c&list=PLnHQcSPNuwAq8V_497GvfM8BieosnmKiz

[pg04]

Seems like people have been bashing the RPI announcers since the days all the fun RPI guys ran these posts. 

[lewdogg11]

Seems like people have been bashing the RPI announcers since the days all the fun RPI guys ran these posts. 

Yeah, those guys sure were a ton of fun....terds.

[Frank Rossi]

You can't take away the fact that Kurt and Bob give up their entire autumn's worth of Saturdays to travel and/or announce the games.  They tried getting others involved prior to last year with no real consistency or success.  If nothing else, they show a lot of heart and dedication to the RPI program and deserve better overall treatment than this.

[pg04]

You can't take away the fact that Kurt and Bob give up their entire autumn's worth of Saturdays to travel and/or announce the games.  They tried getting others involved prior to last year with no real consistency or success.  If nothing else, they show a lot of heart and dedication to the RPI program and deserve better overall treatment than this.

The one season I did color for Brockport was enough for me to know that it's pretty tough and quite thankless, especially if you aren't as much of a homer as the listeners want you to be.

[lewdogg11]

You can't take away the fact that Kurt and Bob give up their entire autumn's worth of Saturdays to travel and/or announce the games.  They tried getting others involved prior to last year with no real consistency or success.  If nothing else, they show a lot of heart and dedication to the RPI program and deserve better overall treatment than this.

Instead of being a good samaritan and trying to stick up for anyone who's ever broadcast a Division 3 college football game, you should maybe shut it down on this one because you don't have a clue on this situation.  You forgot to mention, there are also 18-22 year kids on the field who work their a$$es off on and off the field and in the classroom who don't deserve some of the unfair criticism given by poor old Bob giving up his precious autumn's worth of Saturdays and his clueless opinions.  Sure, I enjoy the ability to listen to the games on Saturdays when I have the opportunity, but he should stick to being the color person and take his personal feelings or opinions about player performance and/or effort and stick them right where he poops from.

[Frank Rossi]

I mention the players on the field every week and give up my Sundays still to promote their work, and James gives up portions of his Saturdays and Sundays to do the same.  Isn't part of being a color commentator giving "opinions about player performance and/or effort?"  Yeah, I thought so.

Stated differently, you're being more negative intentionally in your posts than Bob has ever been unintentionally in his many years of broadcasting.  Kurt and Bob aren't perfect, and I've had run-ins with Kurt years ago.  So, to suggest I'm blindly embracing them is, as you would suggest, the equivalent of dropping a big deuce after a night at the Ruck.  They do overall great work, and I applaud their efforts.

[pg04]

Insert meme about escalating quickly.

[lewdogg11]

I mention the players on the field every week and give up my Sundays still to promote their work, and James gives up portions of his Saturdays and Sundays to do the same.  Isn't part of being a color commentator giving "opinions about player performance and/or effort?"  Yeah, I thought so.

Stated differently, you're being more negative intentionally in your posts than Bob has ever been unintentionally in his many years of broadcasting.  Kurt and Bob aren't perfect, and I've had run-ins with Kurt years ago.  So, to suggest I'm blindly embracing them is, as you would suggest, the equivalent of dropping a big deuce after a night at the Ruck.  They do overall great work, and I applaud their efforts.

Frank, I highly doubt you've ever personally criticized/attacked a player or their effort or their character or your thoughts on their athletic future based on your opinion of a single play or game over the airwaves.  Seriously, just end this conversation and stop trying to defend everything.  You're not right in your defense here because you don't know what you're talking about, and although it's tough for you to absorb, this isn't about you.  This also isn't about James or Kurt for that matter.  And for the record, I think Kurt does and always has done a phenomenal job as do the majority of the other broadcasters around the area.  There's a bad seed in the mix so any criticism that I might give here is 100% warranted.