THE IUP Football Thread

[Ram040506]

I do think the Shep coaching staff panicked a bit in the first matchup and got trigger happy. In fairness to them though, IUP did jump out big early and that changes the dynamic. This game was starting out to be a carbon copy of the first until inexplicably IUP’s secondary broke down and left a guy uncovered. I believe that was third and long, too. If IUP gets another stop and the ball back with the wind and momentum, who knows what happens next. It was a 7-7 game instead, and that allowed Shep to stick with a balanced plan. Next thing you know IUP has the wind in their face, then there’s a bad punt and pretty much from there the wheels came off. On the first three Shep touchdowns, there weren’t defenders within 10 yards of the receivers. It’s hard to say if that’s coaching or mental breakdowns by the players.

What’s bothering IUP fans isn’t the loss, it’s how it happened. Shepherd may be the better team, but they’re not 48-13 better. IUP’s lack of resolve and mental toughness in the biggest game of the season is what’s troubling. Even if IUP goes into halftime down 14-7, it’s a different mentality. The fumble to start the third quarter was the end of it, and IUP totally gave up at that point. It’s hard to say where that comes from but as someone else pointed out, it’s not exclusive to IUP. If you saw the USC game the other night pretty much the same thing happened. Even last year in the playoffs you had to be asking yourself is Ferris State 48 points better? Of course they weren’t.

Good luck the rest of the way. I’m sure this wasn’t the last big time game between our two schools so we’ll be back here to discuss it again, LOL.

I don’t know, Ferris could have easily scored 80 that day and they didn’t even attempt to throw the ball. If they weren’t 48 pts better, they were certainly 30-40 points better. That was a no excuse complete annihilation.

[Ram Tough]

I do think the Shep coaching staff panicked a bit in the first matchup and got trigger happy. In fairness to them though, IUP did jump out big early and that changes the dynamic. This game was starting out to be a carbon copy of the first until inexplicably IUP’s secondary broke down and left a guy uncovered. I believe that was third and long, too. If IUP gets another stop and the ball back with the wind and momentum, who knows what happens next. It was a 7-7 game instead, and that allowed Shep to stick with a balanced plan. Next thing you know IUP has the wind in their face, then there’s a bad punt and pretty much from there the wheels came off. On the first three Shep touchdowns, there weren’t defenders within 10 yards of the receivers. It’s hard to say if that’s coaching or mental breakdowns by the players.

What’s bothering IUP fans isn’t the loss, it’s how it happened. Shepherd may be the better team, but they’re not 48-13 better. IUP’s lack of resolve and mental toughness in the biggest game of the season is what’s troubling. Even if IUP goes into halftime down 14-7, it’s a different mentality. The fumble to start the third quarter was the end of it, and IUP totally gave up at that point. It’s hard to say where that comes from but as someone else pointed out, it’s not exclusive to IUP. If you saw the USC game the other night pretty much the same thing happened. Even last year in the playoffs you had to be asking yourself is Ferris State 48 points better? Of course they weren’t.

Good luck the rest of the way. I’m sure this wasn’t the last big time game between our two schools so we’ll be back here to discuss it again, LOL.

Man, that Ferris team was an actual juggernaut, all joking aside.
As far as the first game goes, I think that the coaching staff sometimes has leaned a little too much on Bagent, but I also get it. I also feel like Brown has matured in the postseason. He isn't dancing as much and is learning that it is often better just to get what you can on some plays instead of dancing in the backfield trying to break a long run.

[Ram Tough]

I want to talk about IUP's broadcast team for a second. I thought that they did a great job, especially when you consider that they're students. It would help the young men to learn the rules and situations of the game a bit. And I hope this somehow finds them because this is constructive criticism. Again, I felt that they did well. IUP had 4th & 11 in Shepherd's territory. It was one of those areas where you go for it instead of punting or attempting a long field goal. Anyway, 4th & 11 is long, but they acted like it was 4th & 25. They were basically already giving the ball back to Shepherd. Shepherd did get the stop, but it wasn't a foregone conclusion. Another situation occurred when they were talking about how there could have been pass interference on a deflected pass. Once that ball is deflected, it takes pass interference out of the equation. A great job. Just focus on learning the game a little better.

[EyeoftheHawk]

I want to talk about IUP's broadcast team for a second. I thought that they did a great job, especially when you consider that they're students. It would help the young men to learn the rules and situations of the game a bit. And I hope this somehow finds them because this is constructive criticism. Again, I felt that they did well. IUP had 4th & 11 in Shepherd's territory. It was one of those areas where you go for it instead of punting or attempting a long field goal. Anyway, 4th & 11 is long, but they acted like it was 4th & 25. They were basically already giving the ball back to Shepherd. Shepherd did get the stop, but it wasn't a foregone conclusion. Another situation occurred when they were talking about how there could have been pass interference on a deflected pass. Once that ball is deflected, it takes pass interference out of the equation. A great job. Just focus on learning the game a little better.

I’ve gotten flack here because I’ve been hard on them so I quit complaining, but since you brought it up…

The broadcast itself is good. It’s quite good, actually. The guys calling the game though are poor. I know, they’re college kids but that’s not an excuse for not understanding the game, the rules, or sometimes not pronouncing their own team’s players’ names correctly. I think what makes it tougher for us here is we have a legendary voice calling the game on the radio in Jack Benedict. If they used his call of the game along with the broadcast, it would be outstanding. I’d give the students that film and produce the game an A, but the ones calling the action get a C-.

Cue the guys who are going to yell at me because, “They’re just kids.” :)

[iupgroundhog]

I want to talk about IUP's broadcast team for a second. I thought that they did a great job, especially when you consider that they're students. It would help the young men to learn the rules and situations of the game a bit. And I hope this somehow finds them because this is constructive criticism. Again, I felt that they did well. IUP had 4th & 11 in Shepherd's territory. It was one of those areas where you go for it instead of punting or attempting a long field goal. Anyway, 4th & 11 is long, but they acted like it was 4th & 25. They were basically already giving the ball back to Shepherd. Shepherd did get the stop, but it wasn't a foregone conclusion. Another situation occurred when they were talking about how there could have been pass interference on a deflected pass. Once that ball is deflected, it takes pass interference out of the equation. A great job. Just focus on learning the game a little better.

I agree with your take but I've been hesitant to comment because they are students.

I think they do a good job, overall. The criticism I have for the one guy is, unfortunately, his diction. It drives me crazy when he calls the IUP RB House-er, rather than howzer. The other problem he has is that he doesn't pronounce "t's." For example, against Ashland there was a key player named Martens. He does the mar-ens thing. It's other words, as well. I noticed "high-ened" and many others. Needless to say, if he wants to work in broadcasting he should at least be made aware of these things. I am also trying to be constructively critical.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

I’ve gotten flack here because I’ve been hard on them so I quit complaining, but since you brought it up…

The broadcast itself is good. It’s quite good, actually. The guys calling the game though are poor. I know, they’re college kids but that’s not an excuse for not understanding the game, the rules, or sometimes not pronouncing their own team’s players’ names correctly. I think what makes it tougher for us here is we have a legendary voice calling the game on the radio in Jack Benedict. If they used his call of the game along with the broadcast, it would be outstanding. I’d give the students that film and produce the game an A, but the ones calling the action get a C-.

Cue the guys who are going to yell at me because, “They’re just kids.” :)

They aren't kids. They are college students. Not being able to pronounce names on a live broadcast is completely unacceptable. That's the easy part of their job. I'm not talking a slip of the tongue but to mispronounce the same name 14 times.

You expect the long gaps and pauses in a student broadcast. But, the simple stuff is ridiculous.

It's a great opportunity provided to them. Many schools use professional announcers.

IUP's announcers called Jacabo Diaz something different every game for four years. He was only the star on campus and an All-American.

Again, we aren't expecting Joe Buck on the call. But, the names are absurd.

The other thing -- my biggest pet peeve -- is student broadcasters tend to do zero research. They have such long pauses and gaps because they dont have any backstory to fill time.

Last night, perfect example, Bloomsburg's announcers said IUP looked like a good team and "they may be able to contend for the PSAC playoffs."

They've won three PSAC titles in a row and are ranked No. 2 in the country. It's just easy stuff and it shows they are not preparing at all.

Yes, they are students. Which, of course, terrifies me to think the level of faculty support and coaching they are (not) receiving.

I fully support having students go live on the mic for a broadcast. But, it doesn't have to be the live feed. I'd much prefer professional announcers actually get the air time. A shaky broadcast offsets a really strong production (for D2).

Now, we have some doozies in the league. Some of our 'pro' broadcasters are just cheerleaders. The color guy at SRU about cries on air every time SRU loses. The Gannon basketball color guy openly cheers on the air and is the worst homer in the PSAC.

Listen to some MEC basketball broadcasts. They are superb. It really elevates the fan viewing experience.

[Ram Tough]

I agree with your take but I've been hesitant to comment because they are students.

I think they do a good job, overall. The criticism I have for the one guy is, unfortunately, his diction. It drives me crazy when he calls the IUP RB House-er, rather than howzer. The other problem he has is that he doesn't pronounce "t's." For example, against Ashland there was a key player named Martens. He does the mar-ens thing. It's other words, as well. I noticed "high-ened" and many others. Needless to say, if he wants to work in broadcasting he should at least be made aware of these things. I am also trying to be constructively critical.

On that 4th & 11 they actually mentioned how IUP may consider punting. The ball was around the 30. Why would any team punt in that situation? You either go for it or attempt the FG if you feel confident that your kicker can hit it. It just didn't make sense.

[iupgroundhog]

On that 4th & 11 they actually mentioned how IUP may consider punting. The ball was around the 30. Why would any team punt in that situation? You either go for it or attempt the FG if you feel confident that your kicker can hit it. It just didn't make sense.

Not to pile on, but a few games ago when Logan got his only significant playing time of the season in mop-up duty the one guy said it was a good idea to get him some experience since Sexton would be graduating. That was news to me since Mak does have another year of eligibility, as we all know. That kind of stuff is absolutely inexcusable. And it's misinformation.

You would think that if they have the interest to do the broadcast they would have the interest to actually follow the team.

[IUPNation]

I’d like to see any of you critics step in and do the play by play and color commentary see how well you all do. It’s easy to criticize until you actually do the job.

They were much better this year. The play by play guy really improved.

I miss the students from a few years ago who had the really heavy yinzer accents..made me laugh every game.

[IUP24]

I honestly felt like Shepherd starting to find success rushing the football on its second scoring drive was huge.

Although very early, Shepherd's second offensive drive of the game was a massive swing in the football game. IUP goes on a very good drive to make is 7-0 after their first drive. They have Shepherd in a 3rd and long, appear to be ready to force another 3 and out, and will get the football back in likely good field position. Get decent pressure in on Bagent, he stepped up in the pocket, avoided a blitz, and found a guy standing wide open behind the linebackers and in a hole in the secondary. You go from seizing big momentum as the home team to it being 7-7 in a blink like that. I felt like that was a massive play in the football game, on just the 3rd drive of the game.

I think once it became 7-7, I feel like IUP got out of what they wanted to do. They did not try to dictate the terms. They struggled running the ball. And they were running low percentage passing plays. Even if IUP doesn't score on the next drive had they stopped Shepherd, I felt like that response, that quickly, won the football game right there.

IUP should've recovered. It was early. And it's not like you were going to win a game 7-0 anyways. Shepherd has a good team; they were always going to score. The question is why did the players and staff melt down like that once the game was tied.

[Ram Tough]

They aren't kids. They are college students. Not being able to pronounce names on a live broadcast is completely unacceptable. That's the easy part of their job. I'm not talking a slip of the tongue but to mispronounce the same name 14 times.

You expect the long gaps and pauses in a student broadcast. But, the simple stuff is ridiculous.

It's a great opportunity provided to them. Many schools use professional announcers.

IUP's announcers called Jacabo Diaz something different every game for four years. He was only the star on campus and an All-American.

Again, we aren't expecting Joe Buck on the call. But, the names are absurd.

The other thing -- my biggest pet peeve -- is student broadcasters tend to do zero research. They have such long pauses and gaps because they dont have any backstory to fill time.

Last night, perfect example, Bloomsburg's announcers said IUP looked like a good team and "they may be able to contend for the PSAC playoffs."

They've won three PSAC titles in a row and are ranked No. 2 in the country. It's just easy stuff and it shows they are not preparing at all.

Yes, they are students. Which, of course, terrifies me to think the level of faculty support and coaching they are (not) receiving.

I fully support having students go live on the mic for a broadcast. But, it doesn't have to be the live feed. I'd much prefer professional announcers actually get the air time. A shaky broadcast offsets a really strong production (for D2).

Now, we have some doozies in the league. Some of our 'pro' broadcasters are just cheerleaders. The color guy at SRU about cries on air every time SRU loses. The Gannon basketball color guy openly cheers on the air and is the worst homer in the PSAC.

Listen to some MEC basketball broadcasts. They are superb. It really elevates the fan viewing experience.

I do feel like certain crews are better than others. And I agree that a lot of students just don't do prep work. I used to work for another school and the women's basketball team started 4 ladies from Romania. They got a student to do PA, and you could just see the look on his face when he saw the names. Yeah, he butchered them horribly.

[IUP24]

It happens. They are asking the same things at USC, TCU, and Grand Valley State. The score obviously doesn't reflect the difference between the teams. In fact, if they played a rubber match I would still put my money on IUP. Things just sort of snowballed in that game to the point of being out of reach. Once Shepherd got that momentum they took over.

The long pass before Shep's first TD was almost a sack in the backfield. That gave Shep life because until that point IUP was in control. I will say that in the first game IUP had both pressure on Bagent and good coverage, but they lacked the good coverage part this time. IUP had a lot of dropped passes. I recall the punt into the wind that set up Shep's 2nd TD. I didn't see Houser's fumble at the beginning of the 3rd quarter but that obviously was the icing on the cake.

It is what it is. There were a lot of question marks at the beginning of the year. There aren't many question marks looking ahead. They should be able to fill the holes they have. We'll see how Shep does in the post-Bagent era.

I agree on the first TD for Shepherd. It seemed like that was a massive swing play in the game. Shep was facing a 3rd and long. They had guys in the backfield. He avoided the blitz, evaded the sack, and found the breakdown in coverage. If IUP stops them there, it may be a different game. That was really early in the football game, but I agree totally. That was a huge swing.

[Ram Tough]

Although very early, Shepherd's second offensive drive of the game was a massive swing in the football game. IUP goes on a very good drive to make is 7-0 after their first drive. They have Shepherd in a 3rd and long, appear to be ready to force another 3 and out, and will get the football back in likely good field position. Get decent pressure in on Bagent, he stepped up in the pocket, avoided a blitz, and found a guy standing wide open behind the linebackers and in a hole in the secondary. You go from seizing big momentum as the home team to it being 7-7 in a blink like that. I felt like that was a massive play in the football game, on just the 3rd drive of the game.

I think once it became 7-7, I feel like IUP got out of what they wanted to do. They did not try to dictate the terms. They struggled running the ball. And they were running low percentage passing plays. Even if IUP doesn't score on the next drive had they stopped Shepherd, I felt like that response, that quickly, won the football game right there.

IUP should've recovered. It was early. And it's not like you were going to win a game 7-0 anyways. Shepherd has a good team; they were always going to score. The question is why did the players and staff melt down like that once the game was tied.

My whole thing is this. Yes, it was a big play, but if Shepherd won the game by making a big play that early, IUP is mentally fragile. But you do bring up a point that IUP seemed to panic a bit after that play.

[Ram Tough]

I’d like to see any of you critics step in and do the play by play and color commentary see how well you all do. It’s easy to criticize until you actually do the job.

They were much better this year. The play by play guy really improved.

I miss the students from a few years ago who had the really heavy yinzer accents..made me laugh every game.

I have done that job. I'm just saying that they need to work harder on learning the game.

[IUP24]

My whole thing is this. Yes, it was a big play, but if Shepherd won the game by making a big play that early, IUP is mentally fragile. But you do bring up a point that IUP seemed to panic a bit after that play.

I think that's what's kind of been said here to this point. IUP probably was mentally fragile. I think both teams are pretty even. If they played 10 times, the series may be an even split. Maybe Shepherd is a little bit better, but to EyeOfTheHawk's point, they aren't that many points better.

I think this played out very similar to the PSAC Championship, just the script was flipped.