LL in game updates

[tecmobowler]

Didn't come from me, Port, +1 to prove it!

[pg04]

Didn't come from me, Port, +1 to prove it!

I think there are People that don't really post much that go around smiting people.  I'll hit you with some K too!

[Frank Rossi]

You are right, that was ****ing wrong of me!

****ing deleted....

Good luck to SU and Union in their ECAC trip.

Tecmo, it's okay.  I have no problem with people criticizing me or the work I do.  After 15 seasons of this, it comes with the territory.  Today was a touching day for me personally when Jared Gourrier's father, who came up from New Orleans, brought Tom Santa Barbara and me "New Orleans" baseball caps as a token of his appreciation for bringing the games to the Gourrier family in New Orleans every weekend.  It's a moment like that that really blows me away -- or when the parents at the tailgate kept thanking us for the work we did as they served us food postgame.  At the end of the day, I know why we do the Union broadcasts -- we've never made a secret of what team we're representing.  Yes, we try to be informative beyond just the Dutchmen with discussions about the LL and the playoffs -- but we're a Union broadcast crew.

That said, in 1989, there weren't message boards for criticism like U89 lobs at the Union teams the last couple seasons.  He sits there and acts like it's appropriate to tear down a team for a loss -- or even for not winning a game by enough.  Not 20 minutes passed after the game (and while the seniors were being honored) before he lobbed his (paraphrasing) "don't be proud of an ECAC game" BS.  If that was happening in 1989, he would have been the first player on the defensive, much like he takes around here when I throw the slightest amount of criticism at him here.  He can't take it now -- and he couldn't take it 20 years ago.  Why he expects the team he supposedly supports to take his comments without upset is beyond me.  I always say -- constructive, fine; destructive, not fine.  The view from the players and families this year about those comments (and I've asked) is that they have been much more destructive than constructive.  

Proud or not, Union has a chance to do what only about 12 other Union teams have done:  win 8 games in a season.  And they will likely have to do it against the likes of Cortland, SJF or Hartwick.  In addition, the amount of injuries from today's game are OVERWHELMING.  I'm not going into specifics here, but maybe 4 or 5 players will not play next weekend based on injuries.  If Union wins next week, it will pave the way to next year when they have a lot of returning talent on both sides of the ball.  

The game will be played next week whether or not U89 approves.  Thus, why not back this team.  Yeah, the game result sucked for a Union fan.  However, the result is in stone.  There's another game to be played.  Discuss what Union needs to improve next week instead of suggesting that they just forfeit the game and pack it in.

Enough is enough, U89.  It's not anger -- it's the fact that you're disrespecting your own team... a team of dedicated individuals that are as human as you and I.  They take enough crap from RPI fans and Hobart fans.  Why you seem to want to exceed those slings and arrows really and truly escapes me.

[Doid23]

You are right, that was ****ing wrong of me!

****ing deleted....

Good luck to SU and Union in their ECAC trip.

Tecmo, it's okay.  I have no problem with people criticizing me or the work I do.  After 15 seasons of this, it comes with the territory.  Today was a touching day for me personally when Jared Gourrier's father, who came up from New Orleans, brought Tom Santa Barbara and me "New Orleans" baseball caps as a token of his appreciation for bringing the games to the Gourrier family in New Orleans every weekend.  It's a moment like that that makes really blows me away -- or when the parents at the tailgate kept thanking us for the work we did as they served us food postgame.  At the end of the day, I know why we do the Union broadcasts -- we've never made a secret of what team we're representing.  Yes, we try to be informative beyond just the Dutchmen with discussions about the LL and the playoffs -- but we're a Union broadcast crew.

That said, in 1989, there weren't message boards for criticism like U89 lobs at the Union teams the last couple seasons.  He sits there and acts like it's appropriate to tear down a team for a loss -- or even for not winning a game by enough.  Not 20 minutes passed after the game (and while the seniors were being honored) before he lobbed his (paraphrasing) "don't be proud of an ECAC game" BS.  If that was happening in 1989, he would have been the first player on the defensive, much like he takes around here when I throw the slightest amount of criticism at him here.  He can't take it now -- and he couldn't take it 20 years ago.  Why he expects the team he supposedly supports to take his comments without upset is beyond me.  I always say -- constructive, fine; destructive, not fine.  The view from the players and families this year about those comments (and I've asked) is that they have been much more destructive than constructive.  

Proud or not, Union has a chance to do what only about 12 other Union teams have done:  win 8 games in a season.  And they will likely have to do it against the likes of Cortland, SJF or Hartwick.  In addition, the amount of injuries from today's game are OVERWHELMING.  I'm not going into specifics here, but maybe 4 or 5 players will not play next weekend based on injuries.  If Union wins next week, it will pave the way to next year when they have a lot of returning talent on both sides of the ball.  

The game will be played next week whether or not U89 approves.  Thus, why not back this team.  Yeah, the game result sucked for a Union fan.  However, the result is in stone.  There's another game to be played.  Discuss what Union needs to improve next week instead of suggesting that they just forfeit the game and pack it in.

Enough is enough, U89.  It's not anger -- it's the fact that you're disrespecting your own team... a team of dedicated individuals that are as human as you and I.  They take enough crap from RPI fans and Hobart fans.  Why you seem to want to exceed those slings and arrows really and truly escapes me.

Give it a rest. This isn't 3rd grade YMCA soccer, and everyone doesn't get a medal or trophy. This is college. Nobody's calling out kids by name, or blowing up coaches. Nobody's booing at games, or calling for coaches to be fired. And nobody's going out of control here. And nobody's saying the kids didn't try, or give it their best. But the facts are the facts, this team fell below expectations, pure and simple. It's nothing personal, it's just one mans (actually, many mens) opinion.

I played 4 years for the Dutchmen, coached a few years after that. Consider many of the coaches close personal friends. But this team disappointed, pure and simple, and I can comment on that. And I have most certainly earned that right, as have many other former players, coaches, and supporters of the program. Since when aren't we allowed to criticize our team? Who the hell are you to make the rules?

If these players are worth their salt (which I think they are), they are disappointed as well, and it will be up to the coaches to get them up for a possible ECAC game, because the players will see this as a bitter consolation prize.

Oh, and by the way, in 1987 or 88 (I forget which one), it became apparent that we were not going to get a bid to the NCAA playoffs, and the team voted NOT to participate in an ECAC game (I'm not sure if it was called that back then). When people criticized us (Bill Arsenault and Tim Layden specifically, and others), we didn't get defensive, because we set high expectations for ourselves, and knew that we didn't achieve them. We recognized that we didn't deliver, and that we deserved the criticism. But then again, we knew this wasn't 3rd grade YMCA soccer. 

So root for the team however the hell you want, but save your lecturing and posturing for someone else.

[Frank Rossi]

Doid - While I appreciate your statement... He HAS called out coaches and made insinuations about the need for personnel changes several times in the past.  

The players ARE disappointed.  They don't need U89 to remind them of how they need to be disappointed.  It doesn't help get anyone ready for next weekend.  He's making the coaches' jobs THAT MUCH TOUGHER.  Are we supporters, or are we movie critics here?  Did Drew Connolly play to his potential today?  No.  Did he admit it?  Did his father admit it to me today?  Yes, and yes.  Hopefully the sling his arm was in post-game was precautionary.  However, he doesn't need to hear a chorus of boos on a message board to feel disappointed about the game.

How about some props for Chris Coney?  Susquehanna's defensive player went after his knee not once, not twice, but at least three times today instead of attempting a simple tackle on him.  Yet, Coney put the Dutchmen ahead on one bad wheel late in the game.  Wouldn't it be nice to focus on some of the positives that came out of today -- like a non-senior who basically didn't want to let a team full of seniors down?  The injury was serious, if U89 had actually listened to the broadcast he would've heard us following it on the sideline.  However, he chooses to watch in silence instead of listening to the so-called "Homer with Blinders" who picked against his own team this week (it was for motivational purposes, but I didn't reveal that until today during the game).

If it was an isolated comment, I'd lay off him.  It's been two seasons of this fair-weathered BS by him.  

I've heard the stories of the ECAC rejection by the players in the late 80s... and all I can say is, "Shame on you all."  It's a spoiled disposition, regardless of your "expectations" of the season.  There are underclassmen that can learn a lot from playing a quality opponent in ECAC games.  If there is money available, it should be a no-brainer to play that bonus game.  Why is Mount Union so strong every year?  Perhaps it's because of the extra 5 games they play every year, helping prepare underclassmen in a big way with extra weeks of practice and maybe some game participation.  The ECACs produce one more week and one more game for teams.  It's absolutely selfish to not only tout how you passed up an ECAC in 1988, but then also use THAT as evidence as why the 2009 team shouldn't play an inspired ECAC game.  Do you not see some backward logic here??

Again, Doid, I appreciate your comments and take you much more seriously than U89.  We can agree to disagree on some points here -- and I'll still respect you because you generally are constructive here.  You decided to write a lot more than a sentence here to defend your point of view.  U89 just sends out zingers and hides his hands repeatedly, looking to blame me and others for supporting the team and/or questioning his intentions.

I think we can agree that the 2009 team is a team filled with quality men -- and that's what I'd like to focus on today, Senior Day.  And that's why I am defending them from the earlier BS.  We're all disappointed -- but some unified front would be nice from time to time, God forbid.

[union89]

Doid - While I appreciate your statement... He HAS called out coaches and made insinuations about the need for personnel changes several times in the past.  

The players ARE disappointed.  They don't need U89 to remind them of how they need to be disappointed.  It doesn't help get anyone ready for next weekend.  He's making the coaches' jobs THAT MUCH TOUGHER.  Are we supporters, or are we movie critics here?  Did Drew Connolly play to his potential today?  No.  Did he admit it?  Did his father admit it to me today?  Yes, and yes.  Hopefully the sling his arm was in post-game was precautionary.  However, he doesn't need to hear a chorus of boos on a message board to feel disappointed about the game.

How about some props for Chris Coney?  Susquehanna's defensive player went after his knee not once, not twice, but at least three times today instead of attempting a simple tackle on him.  Yet, Coney put the Dutchmen ahead on one bad wheel late in the game.  Wouldn't it be nice to focus on some of the positives that came out of today -- like a non-senior who basically didn't want to let a team full of seniors down?  The injury was serious, if U89 had actually listened to the broadcast he would've heard us following it on the sideline.  However, he chooses to watch in silence instead of listening to the so-called "Homer with Blinders" who picked against his own team this week (it was for motivational purposes, but I didn't reveal that until today during the game).

If it was an isolated comment, I'd lay off him.  It's been two seasons of this fair-weathered BS by him.  

I've heard the stories of the ECAC rejection by the players in the late 80s... and all I can say is, "Shame on you all."  It's a spoiled disposition, regardless of your "expectations" of the season.  There are underclassmen that can learn a lot from playing a quality opponent in ECAC games.  If there is money available, it should be a no-brainer to play that bonus game.  Why is Mount Union so strong every year?  Perhaps it's because of the extra 5 games they play every year, helping prepare underclassmen in a big way with extra weeks of practice and maybe some game participation.  The ECACs produce one more week and one more game for teams.  It's absolutely selfish to not only tout how you passed up an ECAC in 1988, but then also use THAT as evidence as why the 2009 team shouldn't play an inspired ECAC game.  Do you not see some backward logic here??

Again, Doid, I appreciate your comments and take you much more seriously than U89.  We can agree to disagree on some points here -- and I'll still respect you because you generally are constructive here.  You decided to write a lot more than a sentence here to defend your point of view.  U89 just sends out zingers and hides his hands repeatedly, looking to blame me and others for supporting the team and/or questioning his intentions.

I think we can agree that the 2009 team is a team filled with quality men -- and that's what I'd like to focus on today, Senior Day.  And that's why I am defending them from the earlier BS.  We're all disappointed -- but some unified front would be nice from time to time, God forbid.

Ok, now you're getting personnal.  I NEVER called for a coaches job.  I stated that I didn't respect what YOU did, but never a coach.  Next week, are you going to say this is your last year again......then in August tell us how the program begged you to come back again?  For the 3rd or 4th year?  Move on....give a student a chance....like you promise every year.

You called out the AD at Union....IMO that is pathetic.

Anyone who wants a good chuckle....go to Facebook.com and type in Frank Rossi.  He's the dude from NY,NY.....now that's pathetic.

You seem to love me a bit too much....that profile is a bit too DeNiro from 'Taxi Driver' for me......that's scary.

[union89]

Doid,
I told people about the ECAC vote and was called a liar. 

If this team wants to play in an ECAC game, I wish them the best and hope they 'MonkeyStomp' who ever they play.

[pg04]

Damn... I shouldn't have followed your advice and went to facebook...

[dewcrew88]

I talked to Audino after the game today and was around the team on the field after the game. from that vantage point, yes, the team was pissed to have lost the chance to return to the NCAA tournament, but you can bet they'll be pumped to play another game next week. It may be at home, too.

[lewdogg11]

I talked to Audino after the game today and was around the team on the field after the game. from that vantage point, yes, the team was pissed to have lost the chance to return to the NCAA tournament, but you can bet they'll be pumped to play another game next week. It may be at home, too.

Did he sell you a car after the interview?

[pumkinattack]

To drive over that piece of the Brooklyn bridge Dew now owns.

[Doid23]

I've heard the stories of the ECAC rejection by the players in the late 80s... and all I can say is, "Shame on you all."  It's a spoiled disposition, regardless of your "expectations" of the season.  There are underclassmen that can learn a lot from playing a quality opponent in ECAC games.  If there is money available, it should be a no-brainer to play that bonus game.  Why is Mount Union so strong every year?  Perhaps it's because of the extra 5 games they play every year, helping prepare underclassmen in a big way with extra weeks of practice and maybe some game participation.  The ECACs produce one more week and one more game for teams.  It's absolutely selfish to not only tout how you passed up an ECAC in 1988, but then also use THAT as evidence as why the 2009 team shouldn't play an inspired ECAC game.  Do you not see some backward logic here??

What are you talking about? My quote on the ECAC said nothing about "touting how I passed up an ECAC game" (and for the record, I didn't, I was a coach for that team, just commenting as to what I experienced)", and certainly never said that the 2009 team shouldn't play an inspired ECAC game. I simply said, well, hell, why don't I just paste what I said:

If these players are worth their salt (which I think they are), they are disappointed as well, and it will be up to the coaches to get them up for a possible ECAC game, because the players will see this as a bitter consolation prize.

And I'll stand by that statement. It is a bitter consolation prize, in my opinion.

As to the rest of what you wrote, how would you know? Seriously, how would you know what impact an ECAC game has? I have no problem with them going to an ECAC game, but I can see both sides of the story, and understand that people may not agree with my view. But "spoiled disposition"? "Shame on you all"? You really think you've got all of the answers, don't you? Kind of like you thought your picking SU would be a motivating factor in the locker room. Uhh, OK. And, let me tell you, I (and my teammates, as well as most players worth a damn) spent the better part of my high school and college life busting my hump in a weight room, spending summers working out, or in Schenectady instead of at home, working my ass off, doing everything I could to become a better football player and teammate, and somebody who NEVER played for Union is going to call me spoiled and that I should feel shame? Please.

Listen, I don't want to (and won't) get into a pissing match with you, I don't even know you, and certainly have nothing against you. Root for Union however you want, it's your right. Just stop telling people how they should root for THEIR team, because it's not just your team. And with that, I will move on.

[labart96]

First round of NCAA action -

22 yd TD pass after SUS strips the ball out of the DVC kickoff returner.

7-0 SUS but Aggies are driving.

[labart96]

23 yd FG so 7-3 SUS with 10:47 to play in the 1st

[labart96]

bad call by ref (not giving SUS Ritter's fwd progress) costs SUS a first down.