Around the Nation board

Started by Pat Coleman, September 22, 2005, 03:16:50 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

K-Mack

Quote from: smedindy on November 16, 2011, 06:58:59 PM
I love that feature, but having announced some games I know how hard it is to keep your mouth moving straight, and filling during blowouts is a whole 'nuther thang.

Oh, same here. I'm sure I say silly stuff, especially since I was never professionally trained. I wish I had the word for the thought I'm trying to describe plenty of times.
Former author, Around the Nation ('01-'13)
Managing Editor, Kickoff
Voter, Top 25/Play of the Week/Gagliardi Trophy/Liberty Mutual Coach of the Year
Nastradamus, Triple Take
and one of the two voices behind the sonic #d3fb nerdery that is the ATN Podcast.

HScoach

Try being an engineer, which by default hates language, and trying to broadcast.  No wonder ESPN hasn't called.......
I find easily offended people rather offensive!

Statistics are like bikinis; what they reveal is interesting, what they hide is essential.

K-Mack

I think the worst is when you're trying to explain a football concept using the terminology you were taught, but knowing those aren't words that make sense to most listeners.

For example, at R-MC we color coded all the coverages so we could talk freely amongst each other during games. Green was 3 deep Cover 3, White was 4 deep quarters, Orange was quarter-quarter-half, Gold was Cover 2, Red was man, blue was man under, deep help over top, etc. ... with all kinds of other words to describe other concepts, such as automatic switching of crisscrossing receivers, etc.

Same thing with certain blocking patterns, stunts, blitzes, pulling linemen, option plays, screens and route combinations ... a trained football eye recognizes all these things but it takes a really good touch to explain them quickly and clearly without confusing the listener. I really appreciate when a color guy is good at doing that.
Former author, Around the Nation ('01-'13)
Managing Editor, Kickoff
Voter, Top 25/Play of the Week/Gagliardi Trophy/Liberty Mutual Coach of the Year
Nastradamus, Triple Take
and one of the two voices behind the sonic #d3fb nerdery that is the ATN Podcast.

K-Mack

So here's something I stumbled upon a few weeks ago and wanted to sketch out and share. I think a post on another board also inspired me to make it relevant.

I think there's a discussion here about whether academically elite schools can compete, and if yes, at what level.

D-III football schools in the USN&R national liberal arts colleges rankings:
1. Williams
2. Amherst
3. Swarthmore
4. Pomona
5. Middlebury
6T. Bowdoin, Carleton
9. Claremont McKenna
12T. Wash. & Lee, Wesleyan
17. Hamilton
18. Harvey Mudd
19. Grinnell
21T. Bates, Colby
24. Oberlin
25. Macalester
27. Colorado College
29. Scripps
33T. Kenyon Sewanee
37T. Occidental, Trinity (Conn.)
40. Union
42T. Centre, Franklin & Marshall, Pitzer
47T. Dickinson, Gettysburg
49. Denison

(more to come)

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-liberal-arts-colleges/spp+50
Former author, Around the Nation ('01-'13)
Managing Editor, Kickoff
Voter, Top 25/Play of the Week/Gagliardi Trophy/Liberty Mutual Coach of the Year
Nastradamus, Triple Take
and one of the two voices behind the sonic #d3fb nerdery that is the ATN Podcast.

smedindy

If the NESCAC can compete for championships in almost every other sport, they can compete for championships in football. Whilst many of the other teams aren't the elite, they do try to put a competitive team out there. I'm concerned about Kenyon, based on what their outgoing coach said.

You need to attract the student athletes that can compete and excel on the field and in the classroom. That's a tricky balance but it's quite possible. And Williams, Trinity and Amherst definitely have good football teams. How good, I don't know, because they don't play anyone else.

W&L is contending on a regular basis. Others have recently. Heck, in 2008, Carleton was 7-3 (5-3 in the MIAC) and lost those three games by seven points total.

But what even these institutions need to realize that football does attract male students.


Ralph Turner

Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 10:21:29 PM
So here's something I stumbled upon a few weeks ago and wanted to sketch out and share. I think a post on another board also inspired me to make it relevant.

I think there's a discussion here about whether academically elite schools can compete, and if yes, at what level.

D-III football schools in the USN&R national liberal arts colleges rankings:
1. Williams
2. Amherst
3. Swarthmore
4. Pomona
5. Middlebury
6T. Bowdoin, Carleton
9. Claremont McKenna  3-3 in SCIAC
12T. Wash. & Lee, Wesleyan
17. Hamilton
18. Harvey Mudd  3-3 in SCIAC
19. Grinnell
21T. Bates, Colby
24. Oberlin
25. Macalester
27. Colorado College
29. Scripps  3-3 in SCIAC
33T. Kenyon Sewanee
37T. Occidental  3-3 in SCIAC, Trinity (Conn.)
40. Union  Co-champs
42T. Centre, Franklin & Marshall, Pitzer
47T. Dickinson, Gettysburg
49. Denison

(more to come)

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-liberal-arts-colleges/spp+50
I will apply the same standard to this list as I would the ECFC or the UMAC.

They are competing amongst peers.  They win their conference, they get a bid and we see where they go from there.
Looks like they are competing to me.

K-Mack

Smed, wait til you see the next 50:

51. Rhodes
53T, DePauw, St. Lawrence, St. Olaf, Wabash
57T. Wheaton (Ill.), Willamette
60T. Beloit, Lawrence
64T. Austin, Hobart/WS
68T. Earlham, Kalamazoo
71T. Wooster, Illinois Wesleyan, Knox, Lewis & Clark, St. John's, Ursinus
81T. Gustavus Adolphus, Muhlenberg, Puget Sound
85. Millsaps
86T. Allegheny, Augustana, Hendrix, Luther
94T. Cornell, Hampden-Sydney, Hope

LOT of schools that have made the D-III playoffs or win eight games, and even a few past champions, there.
Former author, Around the Nation ('01-'13)
Managing Editor, Kickoff
Voter, Top 25/Play of the Week/Gagliardi Trophy/Liberty Mutual Coach of the Year
Nastradamus, Triple Take
and one of the two voices behind the sonic #d3fb nerdery that is the ATN Podcast.

Ralph Turner

Quote from: K-Mack on November 17, 2011, 12:21:09 AM
Smed, wait til you see the next 50:

51. Rhodes
53T, DePauw, St. Lawrence, St. Olaf, Wabash
57T. Wheaton (Ill.), Willamette
60T. Beloit, Lawrence
64T. Austin, Hobart/WS
68T. Earlham, Kalamazoo
71T. Wooster, Illinois Wesleyan, Knox, Lewis & Clark, St. John's, Ursinus
81T. Gustavus Adolphus, Muhlenberg, Puget Sound
85. Millsaps
86T. Allegheny, Augustana, Hendrix, Luther
94T. Cornell, Hampden-Sydney, Hope

LOT of schools that have made the D-III playoffs or win eight games, and even a few past champions, there.
This is the second quintile of football playing schools in D-III.
I say that they are successful.

This is more of the "old D-III vs D-IV" argument.

smedindy

Quote from: K-Mack on November 17, 2011, 12:21:09 AM
Smed, wait til you see the next 50:

51. Rhodes
53T, DePauw, St. Lawrence, St. Olaf, Wabash
57T. Wheaton (Ill.), Willamette
60T. Beloit, Lawrence
64T. Austin, Hobart/WS
68T. Earlham, Kalamazoo
71T. Wooster, Illinois Wesleyan, Knox, Lewis & Clark, St. John's, Ursinus
81T. Gustavus Adolphus, Muhlenberg, Puget Sound
85. Millsaps
86T. Allegheny, Augustana, Hendrix, Luther
94T. Cornell, Hampden-Sydney, Hope

LOT of schools that have made the D-III playoffs or win eight games, and even a few past champions, there.

I knew what was coming up! (I peeked ahead, and of course we alums know where we're ranked).

Knowing the NCAC like I do - there's not a huge difference between the schools listed on your first list and the second list. There's a 'reputation' issue, which always filters into these rankings. I do know that most all of the NCAC are making an effort to improve football, and to compete as best they can.

The only thing in the way of a school like Kenyon competing in football is itself.

Ron Boerger

I just want to mention that, while not on the national rankings, Trinity (TX) is a consistent #1 in USNRW's western regional rankings - for something like 20 years running.   If they would consent to play in the national category (the regional category is their choice, apparently), my feeling is they'd be in the second 50 at least.  Despite what Hendrix' president may think, Trinity does compare quite well with most of the SCAC schools on the list. 

Ralph Turner

Trinity has been evaluated as a Western Region University.

02 Warhawk

#2321
Frank Rossi!!!!

"With that loss of privileges comes a very challenging Round 2 matchup [for Mount Union] (either Centre or Hampden-Sydney) and Round 3 matchup (likely either Wabash or Dubuque).

No NCC?? Interesting!!

jknezek

Ask me which I'm more proud of... W&L's place on this list or their recent football improvement... it's not football! That being said, I do think, especially in football where you have such large squads, there is a correllation between moving down the list and football prowess. It is hard to recruit enough kids to pull a full roster for the schools at the top of the list. On the other hand, it is a great hook for the kids who can cut the grade to tell them they are going to a school at the top of that list!

Does that mean I don't think the schools can compete? I'd put W&L in a game against anyone in the country ranked 10 or lower on D3football.com. They might not win, but they'd be competitive more than not (2 score or less game). I wouldn't say W&L would be competitive with the cream of the D3 football crop. Exceptions can be made, JHU (while not on the list because they would fall on a different list) has had at least one excellent tournament and may have another.

It all depends on how you define "compete."

Ron Boerger

Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 17, 2011, 02:33:59 PM
Frank Rossi!!!!

"With that loss of privileges comes a very challenging Round 2 matchup [for Mount Union] (either Centre or Hampden-Sydney) and Round 3 matchup (likely either Wabash or Dubuque).

No NCC?? Interesting!!

I found it interesting that he thinks Centre (or H-S) would present MUC a challenge.  Seriously?  I've seen Centre, they're a good team but to say they'd challenge MUC, even one that's limping a bit, seems a stretch.

Pat Coleman

I read and thought the same thing. My Triple Take second-round score for the Mount Union game won't reflect it being a challenge.
Publisher. Questions? Check our FAQ for D3f, D3h.
Quote from: old 40 on September 25, 2007, 08:23:57 PMLet's discuss (sports) in a positive way, sometimes kidding each other with no disrespect.