Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Pat Coleman

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 1889
1
I think also that it is as much about the fact that Berry doesn't currently have a win against anyone who is on anyone's ballot. Berry started the season at 16 and beat the preseason 20, so that moves them up a little bit based on their own performance, but the rest of it was based on other teams' attrition. You know what I mean?

2
Sorry, I either missed or forgot the committee chair's admission.  (With Joe Germinerio at QB, Brockport was NOT an outlandish choice.  I'd say them vs. SJU would be a 'pick-em', with a slight nod to the Johnnies.)

Or, to put it in the terms the committee actually used: With an unbeaten record and a trip to the 2017 semifinals, Brockport was not an outlandish choice.

Thatís sure a high bar.

When responding to people who seem to think it was an outlandish choice...

3
Sorry, I either missed or forgot the committee chair's admission.  (With Joe Germinerio at QB, Brockport was NOT an outlandish choice.  I'd say them vs. SJU would be a 'pick-em', with a slight nod to the Johnnies.)

Or, to put it in the terms the committee actually used: With an unbeaten record and a trip to the 2017 semifinals, Brockport was not an outlandish choice.

4
UST falls to 17. Bethel to 9. SJU to stay 4th.

You made me do a double-take, as I have the file here on a spreadsheet!

Did I nail it?  Quick!  I gotta look up that number for the bookie.

Close enough -- it was 18, 9 and 4.

5
UST falls to 17. Bethel to 9. SJU to stay 4th.

You made me do a double-take, as I have the file here on a spreadsheet!

6
Definitely going to be some spots, because there is an expectation that the game will be closer. But UST still has the chance to regain some of that in Week 11.

7
East Region football / Re: FB: Liberty League
« on: Yesterday at 12:53:18 pm »
Disappointed to see two people leave the board yesterday. :(

8
East Region football / Re: FB: Liberty League
« on: Yesterday at 12:46:19 pm »
Targeting or No targeting, that is the question  ???

I was at the Union/St. Lawrence game so obviously I did not see the targeting hit called on Hobart OLB Emmett Forde. I did witness a similar targeting personal foul and ejection called in the 2nd quarter on #9 Union safety Austin St. Pierre. These plays happen so fast that it is very hard to see exactly what happened. All I knew was that it was a huge, violent hit...the flag was thrown and after a conference by the officials the 15 yards was marked off and St. Pierre was ejected. OK, I didn't like it but it seemed like the right call. *It is important to note that targeting calls are reviewable if live video is available. This is not the case for most DIII football.

Just like the ejection of Forde, St.Pierre's loss immediately changed the game. St. Lawrence began working pass routes in the direction of his replacement which also put pressure on the CB on that side. The Union defense was having a hard time adjusting which greatly contributed to St. Lawrence QB Tyler Grochot throwing for 300+ yards in the first half. It was 17-17 at halftime and really the Larries should of had the lead.

Then something unusual happened. When the Union defense took the field for the 2nd half St. Pierre was back out there. I was confused. I thought a first half targeting call meant you were out for the remainder of that game. (a 2nd half call and you miss the 1st half of the next game)...What was I missing? Well, there is a new provision of the targeting rule that allows officials to review video at halftime and reconsider their ejection ruling. Apparently this is what happened with St. Pierre...To you Hobart fans who didn't think the ejection of Forde was justified, let me say that in all likelihood the refs reviewed the Forde hit and decided to let it stand. That's all you can ask from the officials.       

Yes, that is correct. And they will review it on game film if need be.

9
Actually, the best part is that the community does a great job of policing itself in this regard.

Exactly as Greg attempted to do. Which is why I'm not sure why you interjected into it?

10

I don't mind discussing the general state of NPU athletic recruiting here. But HOPEful's specific comments about NPU's recent fortunes in men's basketball really are not pertinent to this board. The CCIW men's basketball board is one of the busiest on d3boards.com as a whole, and there's all kinds of fruitful conversation to be had there on that topic if he wants it.

Okay, Greg.  Then let's just petition Pat about instituting a rule to allow only discussing a sport (in ALL aspects) for that sport's specific board. ::)

I think the concept of on-topic is pretty self-explanatory and shouldn't need me stating so.

Then you will be enforcing it on all the boards, right? :)

So here's the difference that seems like it needs clarification, for some reason:

I don't mind when a board strays from its topic. These are communities of like-minded people with affinities for a specific level of sport who may well have other things in common to talk about. (There are some obvious topics of conversation excepted which I normally would assume we understand, but I feel the need to point this out now because this conversation seems to be capable of veering into the pedantic.)

But I do mind when people talk off-topic about something that we already have a board for. So, IWU opera singers, reluctantly acceptable here in limited does. CCIW women's basketball, on the CCIW women's basketball board. CCIW men's basketball, on the CCIW men's basketball board.

I would have thought this was clear, but maybe it needed to be made explicit.

11
Middlebury coach Bob Ritter is the guest on the latest edition of our podcast: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3football/2019/10/18/atn-podcast-251-everyone-learns-to-pronounce-allianz/

12

I don't mind discussing the general state of NPU athletic recruiting here. But HOPEful's specific comments about NPU's recent fortunes in men's basketball really are not pertinent to this board. The CCIW men's basketball board is one of the busiest on d3boards.com as a whole, and there's all kinds of fruitful conversation to be had there on that topic if he wants it.

Okay, Greg.  Then let's just petition Pat about instituting a rule to allow only discussing a sport (in ALL aspects) for that sport's specific board. ::)

I think the concept of on-topic is pretty self-explanatory and shouldn't need me stating so.

13
South Region football / Re: South Region Fan Poll
« on: October 18, 2019, 09:49:39 am »
Two one-loss teams left on the schedule.

14
Re: the Commissioner's comments, I think it's way more of an indictment of her than of UST. That's your industry, it's literally your job to have an idea of the schools and teams that surround you, regardless of division. Typically people with a two decade background in football have a strong knowledge of all the teams within the footprint they work in. I get the sense she almost meant it as a dig, but to me I was left questioning her own capabilities.

D1 don't care about anything else.

15
Catholic and Georgetown played a series for 20 years when both were at the D-III level, but when Georgetown went I-AA non-scholarship, they dropped the series.

They did play this year, and the result was ugly.  Not sure how it benefited either team

Right. In the intervening 25 years, Georgetown started giving scholarships. :)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 1889