THE IUP Football Thread

[Ram040506]

Get the F out of here and I used to respect your takes. LH guy is 9-21 and u want to replace a guy that is 59-19 with 2 PSAC titles, 1 regional title and greater record than the guy he replaced who is the hottest coach in D1 as we speak. His 3 losses this year our directly related to 3 yes 3 Blown calls by officials who are in way over their heads. All 3 calls in the last minute of all 3 games. Crews from first 2 losses were both suspended as will those hacks at Cal on Saturday……Funny thing is if they do fire the guy probably be the best thing that ever happened to him as there facilities and support is down right a joke. In addition they would owe him a boat load of dollars. And by the way they probably beat WF in 2017 if there 2 all American defenders play Tillman (Broncos player) and Max a complete stud….just sayin. Buy hey u cats got all the answers just like u we’re calling the guy from Boro the next great coach and he hasn’t won since the IUP s### game call. His amazing record is 12 and 26. Please 🛑.

The classic blame the officials excuse lol, Tort your daddy?

[IUPbigINDIANS]

The forecast is showing 52 and mostly sunny this Saturday in Erie. That's tropical compared to some of the games IUP has played up there in November.

If you've never been to Gannon's stadium, it's a pretty unique experience. Parking is a real joy. If you sit or stand on the visiting side, you're pretty much on the team bench (literally). Because you have very limited or no view of nearly half the field, most away fans sit on the home side. When the locals show up, it can be an interesting atmosphere. The neat part of watching a game there, however, is you can get an 'up close' view of the game that you can't at any other stadium in the league. There's no track and the the bleachers are extremely close to the field. From that aspect, it's pretty cool.

Gannon is 2-5. The Knights have played a brutal schedule -- at ESU, Kutztown, at Cal and at SRU (all four likely playoff teams). The three other games were Northwood, Seton Hill and at Edinboro.

Gannon's wins came against Seton Hill (23-17) and (at) Edinboro (25-21).

Here's a fun fact most don't realize: Gannon has won its past two games against IUP.

The Knights have some momentum after winning down at Edinboro last week. It's very hard to say what mental state IUP will be in come Saturday. If anything, snapping this losing streak to GU should give them a little juice.

Meaningless game, obviously, in regard to the postseason. That ship has sailed. But, it's still important to enter the off-season with some positive vibes.

[IUP24]

The classic blame the officials excuse lol, Tort your daddy?

What's hilarious to me is the claim that 2 of the 3 officiating crews were suspended, and that the third one will be.

1) There's no proof of that. So that was a claim that just was made up entirely. If it wasn't, I'd like to see the proof of it and I'll gladly say I was wrong.

2) I watch a ton of football. Missed calls happen. Questionable calls happen. I know people will take this the wrong way, but there are games with far higher stakes occurring on Saturday's than what's going on in the PSAC. And the crews calling those games are out there the next week.

3) Being an official is a tough job. Humans aren't perfect. Football (and any sport that is officiated) happens quickly. To blame the outcome of any game on a single call or sequence that was influenced by an official, is always an absurd claim to me.

[iupgroundhog]

What's hilarious to me is the claim that 2 of the 3 officiating crews were suspended, and that the third one will be.

1) There's no proof of that. So that was a claim that just was made up entirely. If it wasn't, I'd like to see the proof of it and I'll gladly say I was wrong.

2) I watch a ton of football. Missed calls happen. Questionable calls happen. I know people will take this the wrong way, but there are games with far higher stakes occurring on Saturday's than what's going on in the PSAC. And the crews calling those games are out there the next week.

3) Being an official is a tough job. Humans aren't perfect. Football (and any sport that is officiated) happens quickly. To blame the outcome of any game on a single call or sequence that was influenced by an official, is always an absurd claim to me.

Aside from this one, I haven't seen any IUP fans blaming the officials for the losses. However, the fact is that the follow-up penalty to the targeting call against SRU was an error. Nothing anybody can do about it after the fact. Against Boro, IUP was the victim of a ridiculously poor spot that really did steal the W from them. Against Cal, the Cal recovery and new 1st down after the FG block is on IUP. Not sure if you blame coaching or the players, but it happened. Yet, us IUP fans have not pointed the finger at the refs. That is surprising to me.

[IUPalum]

Get the F out of here and I used to respect your takes. LH guy is 9-21 and u want to replace a guy that is 59-19 with 2 PSAC titles, 1 regional title and greater record than the guy he replaced who is the hottest coach in D1 as we speak. His 3 losses this year our directly related to 3 yes 3 Blown calls by officials who are in way over their heads. All 3 calls in the last minute of all 3 games. Crews from first 2 losses were both suspended as will those hacks at Cal on Saturday……Funny thing is if they do fire the guy probably be the best thing that ever happened to him as there facilities and support is down right a joke. In addition they would owe him a boat load of dollars. And by the way they probably beat WF in 2017 if there 2 all American defenders play Tillman (Broncos player) and Max a complete stud….just sayin. Buy hey u cats got all the answers just like u we’re calling the guy from Boro the next great coach and he hasn’t won since the IUP s### game call. His amazing record is 12 and 26. Please 🛑.

You're a joke! 19 losses... yes, you're right BUT those are games you need to win to be credible! Mix in about 4-5 of those losses because he lost the team after losing the BIG game! Edinboro the last two years, the 2 losses to Gannon the last two years. Let's the talk about not knowing how many times outs you have left! You're a loser just like Tort is!

[IUPbigINDIANS]

Aside from this one, I haven't seen any IUP fans blaming the officials for the losses. However, the fact is that the follow-up penalty to the targeting call against SRU was an error. Nothing anybody can do about it after the fact. Against Boro, IUP was the victim of a ridiculously poor spot that really did steal the W from them. Against Cal, the Cal recovery and new 1st down after the FG block is on IUP. Not sure if you blame coaching or the players, but it happened. Yet, us IUP fans have not pointed the finger at the refs. That is surprising to me.

I've watched football long enough to realize you can talk about officials until you're blue in the face and nothing is going to change.

Three schools in the PSAC have review (IUP, Edinboro and ESU). The others do not. I can't comment on ESU's replay ability, but it's close to worthless at IUP and Edinboro. There is one view. It's from the pressbox. That's it. About 95% of things they'd love to replay they cannot because the angle is terrible. There's really nothing to review. The officials will tell the coaches they can challenge but with just one camera angle (from way up in the box) the odds are there won't be enough visible evidence to overturn any calls -- in particular regarding out-of-bounds, spots, etc. Alleged targeting can be seen a little better.

That said:


Was IUP hit with some bad calls and/or controversial rulings? It probably depends who you ask. One side would say yes. One side would say no.

The three biggies:

* The SRU 'targeting' call was the worst (in my opinion). Not only was this not 'targeting' as it was waived off, but it wasn't even a personal foul. It was a hard hit. To blow that call - in that moment - was a tough one to swallow.

* The 'spot' at Edinboro. Huge call. Tort is still saying the guy was 4' short. Edinboro (and the official) say the WR extended the ball with his arm as he went down. This isn't the NFL. There aren't 18 angles in HD and super slow motion to pinpoint where the ball was when the knee hit. It was a big WR. Could he have stretched it? Sure. But, without seeing it as described above, nobody can say for sure. We certainly cannot say from the video broadcast.

* The blocked FG at Cal was about as fluke circumstance as you'll run across. There is no review at Adamson Stadium. They called it in real-time. The ball was blocked and amazingly bounced right in to a Cal OL's stomach. Did he advance it far enough? Did it clear the neutral zone? Who knows.


Three tough spots to be in for sure. But, those losses weren't defined by those individual plays.

* SRU - Starting the game - at home - in a 21-0 hole sure didn't help matters. SRU's game-winning drive also spanned nearly 80 yards in under two minutes (with just one timeout). They still somehow got behind the IUP defense on the winning play.

* Edinboro - Many things went wrong up there, not to mention Edinboro drove nearly 75 yards with no timeouts in under 2 minutes to win the game. The Scots were idle the week prior and clearly had IUP scouted out very well. They attacked with the same short passing game SRU had used very effectively the week prior.

* Cal - IUP's offense struggled much of the first three quarters of the game, scoring just (3) points. IUP elected to throw three straight downs on its lone red zone trip before settling for the FG. IUP also missed a FG as the half ended. On the final series after finally getting the lead (2:36 left), IUP kicked off out of bounds, giving the Vulcans a shorter field.


As a fan and financial supporter, this was a brutal season. I felt terrible for the players. I've said all along this is a good team. Three losses by 7 points (combined). Last year was a wreck and it wasn't a good team. This is. Even before the controversial plays, SRU and Edinboro (twice) hit 4th-and-7's to keep the game alive. Cal got the most fortunate bounce of a game-ending blocked FG I'll ever see in my life. Three plays away from 8-0 instead of 5-3 is a bitter pill to swallow. I'd have been terrified to play this team in a playoff game.

Hopefully the players hold it together and go out with two wins. I think IUP's offense could have been way more explosive and consistent. I don't think, offensively, they played to their strengths. The slow starts continued on the offensive end -- the last three games in particular have been anemic starts. One could nitpick some lapses here and there but overall, defensively, this is a very good team.

[iupgroundhog]

I've watched football long enough to realize you can talk about officials until you're blue in the face and nothing is going to change.

Three schools in the PSAC have review (IUP, Edinboro and ESU). The others do not. I can't comment on ESU's replay ability, but it's close to worthless at IUP and Edinboro. There is one view. It's from the pressbox. That's it. About 95% of things they'd love to replay they cannot because the angle is terrible. There's really nothing to review. The officials will tell the coaches they can challenge but with just one camera angle (from way up in the box) the odds are there won't be enough visible evidence to overturn any calls -- in particular regarding out-of-bounds, spots, etc. Alleged targeting can be seen a little better.

That said:


Was IUP hit with some bad calls and/or controversial rulings? It probably depends who you ask. One side would say yes. One side would say no.

The three biggies:

* The SRU 'targeting' call was the worst (in my opinion). Not only was this not 'targeting' as it was waived off, but it wasn't even a personal foul. It was a hard hit. To blow that call - in that moment - was a tough one to swallow.

* The 'spot' at Edinboro. Huge call. Tort is still saying the guy was 4' short. Edinboro (and the official) say the WR extended the ball with his arm as he went down. This isn't the NFL. There aren't 18 angles in HD and super slow motion to pinpoint where the ball was when the knee hit. It was a big WR. Could he have stretched it? Sure. But, without seeing it as described above, nobody can say for sure. We certainly cannot say from the video broadcast.

* The blocked FG at Cal was about as fluke circumstance as you'll run across. There is no review at Adamson Stadium. They called it in real-time. The ball was blocked and amazingly bounced right in to a Cal OL's stomach. Did he advance it far enough? Did it clear the neutral zone? Who knows.


Three tough spots to be in for sure. But, those losses weren't defined by those individual plays.

* SRU - Starting the game - at home - in a 21-0 hole sure didn't help matters. SRU's game-winning drive also spanned nearly 80 yards in under two minutes (with just one timeout). They still somehow got behind the IUP defense on the winning play.

* Edinboro - Many things went wrong up there, not to mention Edinboro drove nearly 75 yards with no timeouts in under 2 minutes to win the game. The Scots were idle the week prior and clearly had IUP scouted out very well. They attacked with the same short passing game SRU had used very effectively the week prior.

* Cal - IUP's offense struggled much of the first three quarters of the game, scoring just (3) points. IUP elected to throw three straight downs on its lone red zone trip before settling for the FG. IUP also missed a FG as the half ended. On the final series after finally getting the lead (2:36 left), IUP kicked off out of bounds, giving the Vulcans a shorter field.


As a fan and financial supporter, this was a brutal season. I felt terrible for the players. I've said all along this is a good team. Three losses by 7 points (combined). Last year was a wreck and it wasn't a good team. This is. Even before the controversial plays, SRU and Edinboro (twice) hit 4th-and-7's to keep the game alive. Cal got the most fortunate bounce of a game-ending blocked FG I'll ever see in my life. Three plays away from 8-0 instead of 5-3 is a bitter pill to swallow. I'd have been terrified to play this team in a playoff game.

Hopefully the players hold it together and go out with two wins. I think IUP's offense could have been way more explosive and consistent. I don't think, offensively, they played to their strengths. The slow starts continued on the offensive end -- the last three games in particular have been anemic starts. One could nitpick some lapses here and there but overall, defensively, this is a very good team.

The defense was super. I guess I should use the present tense since they do play on Saturday. Younger has really looked good the last 2 games. The O-line will have to be partially rebuilt going into next year. I realize the medical RS rule is 4 games but Monaco has not played much at all. Is there an appeal process for that?

[IUPbigINDIANS]

The defense was super. I guess I should use the present tense since they do play on Saturday. Younger has really looked good the last 2 games. The O-line will have to be partially rebuilt going into next year. I realize the medical RS rule is 4 games but Monaco has not played much at all. Is there an appeal process for that?

Monaco has played in (4) games as of today.

If he plays another snap this year, ... that's it. I'm sure they'd love to have him back but that's a decision he'd have to make obviously.

I'm pretty sure he did dress this past Saturday but didn't play. If there's any inkling he wants to stay another year, ... shut him down.

[IUPNation]

https://iup.exposure.co/making_broad...djYr1U-vYtdvIg

[IUsuallyPonder]

https://iup.exposure.co/making_broad...djYr1U-vYtdvIg

I’m all for equality, I enjoy women’s sports, and I think you can be a great play-by-play announcer no matter what gender you are. My issue is these two are bad, just atrocious, and completely ruin the experience when watching online. My wife asked why I turned off the volume, and once I turned it up, she completely understood why it was muted. I get this is an opportunity to get experience - and I want IUP students to get experience. However, those two know absolutely nothing about the team and parrot what the in-game announcer is saying. If that’s the best product the IUP Communications Department can produce, I’m not confident those students will find jobs in that field (it’s already a notoriously hard industry to break into). I’d love to see a professional mentor these students - pair them with someone who knows what they are doing. At least this way they learn and have an idea of the expectations without fumbling in the proverbial dark. Maybe I’m being too harsh, but I literally can’t listen to them without starting to yell at my screen in despair. Am I crazy?

[iupgroundhog]

I’m all for equality, I enjoy women’s sports, and I think you can be a great play-by-play announcer no matter what gender you are. My issue is these two are bad, just atrocious, and completely ruin the experience when watching online. My wife asked why I turned off the volume, and once I turned it up, she completely understood why it was muted. I get this is an opportunity to get experience - and I want IUP students to get experience. However, those two know absolutely nothing about the team and parrot what the in-game announcer is saying. If that’s the best product the IUP Communications Department can produce, I’m not confident those students will find jobs in that field (it’s already a notoriously hard industry to break into). I’d love to see a professional mentor these students - pair them with someone who knows what they are doing. At least this way they learn and have an idea of the expectations without fumbling in the proverbial dark. Maybe I’m being too harsh, but I literally can’t listen to them without starting to yell at my screen in despair. Am I crazy?

No, you're not crazy. What they do is not anywhere close to the way the job is done. Their performance falls far short of reasonable expectations, even for a student broadcast. Nobody is out to pick on these young ladies but you kind of have to be truthful. If someone were to just read this story without having listened to the broadcasts it would seem like a great story, right?

No one else applied for it and somebody has got to do it so I give them credit for that. As another poster mentioned the focus is probably on technical aspects. But I doubt that the students know what they are doing wrong, what the shortcomings are. That is the problem. No supervision about their presentation.

[RockPride]

No, you're not crazy. What they do is not anywhere close to the way the job is done. Their performance falls far short of reasonable expectations, even for a student broadcast. Nobody is out to pick on these young ladies but you kind of have to be truthful. If someone were to just read this story without having listened to the broadcasts it would seem like a great story, right?

No one else applied for it and somebody has got to do it so I give them credit for that. As another poster mentioned the focus is probably on technical aspects. But I doubt that the students know what they are doing wrong, what their shortcomings are. That is the problem. No supervision about their presentation.

I'm answering the medical hardship waiver rule first:

1. The SA must have participated in no more than 30 percent of contests or dates of competition
2. An athlete can not appear in a game after the halfway point of the season (according to the NCAA Handbook, the standard denominator is 11, and must be before the 7th contest).
3. An athlete must have incurred an injury or illness before the halfway point of the season and have documentation from a physician that the athlete is incapacitated and unable to participate further in their season due to said injury/illness. This documentation must be contemporaneous and recorded at the time of illness or injury before the start of the 2nd half of the season.

For a "regular" redshirt:

1. There seems to be a bit of confusion regarding the difference between a D1 and a D2 "redshirt". Although many think they are the same rule, according to the NCAA material I've seen, the DII approved a similar redshirt rule before the 2024 College Football Season in which the NCAA stated that players can play in D2 in no more than 3 games, but there is no longer the caveat that it needs to be in the first 30 % of the games. so, in other words, a football team could make the NCAA playoffs, and play a player as long as they don't surpass the 3-game rule. I know NCAA D1 states 4 games, but I have not seen the game # go up in D2 (if anyone has other information on this please correct me).

[IUPbigINDIANS]

I’m all for equality, I enjoy women’s sports, and I think you can be a great play-by-play announcer no matter what gender you are. My issue is these two are bad, just atrocious, and completely ruin the experience when watching online. My wife asked why I turned off the volume, and once I turned it up, she completely understood why it was muted. I get this is an opportunity to get experience - and I want IUP students to get experience. However, those two know absolutely nothing about the team and parrot what the in-game announcer is saying. If that’s the best product the IUP Communications Department can produce, I’m not confident those students will find jobs in that field (it’s already a notoriously hard industry to break into). I’d love to see a professional mentor these students - pair them with someone who knows what they are doing. At least this way they learn and have an idea of the expectations without fumbling in the proverbial dark. Maybe I’m being too harsh, but I literally can’t listen to them without starting to yell at my screen in despair. Am I crazy?

The Valley Girls have become kind of famous.

[iupgroundhog]

I'm answering the medical hardship waiver rule first:

1. The SA must have participated in no more than 30 percent of contests or dates of competition
2. An athlete can not appear in a game after the halfway point of the season (according to the NCAA Handbook, the standard denominator is 11, and must be before the 7th contest).
3. An athlete must have incurred an injury or illness before the halfway point of the season and have documentation from a physician that the athlete is incapacitated and unable to participate further in their season due to said injury/illness. This documentation must be contemporaneous and recorded at the time of illness or injury before the start of the 2nd half of the season.

For a "regular" redshirt:

1. There seems to be a bit of confusion regarding the difference between a D1 and a D2 "redshirt". Although many think they are the same rule, according to the NCAA material I've seen, the DII approved a similar redshirt rule before the 2024 College Football Season in which the NCAA stated that players can play in D2 in no more than 3 games, but there is no longer the caveat that it needs to be in the first 30 % of the games. so, in other words, a football team could make the NCAA playoffs, and play a player as long as they don't surpass the 3-game rule. I know NCAA D1 states 4 games, but I have not seen the game # go up in D2 (if anyone has other information on this please correct me).

Thanks. Monaco has not used a regular RS year and he has been injured all year. He has played in 4 games which would seem to disqualify him for either type of RS. My original question was whether IUP could petition the NCAA for another year, especially since he has played on so few snaps. I think the NCAA considers these cases and IUP might have a case with Monaco.

Note: Actually, he also played during the 2nd half of the season (the 6th game out of 10). He played in 4 games. He has 51 carries. I don't believe he can get a RS.

[Iupgh]

You're a joke! 19 losses... yes, you're right BUT those are games you need to win to be credible! Mix in about 4-5 of those losses because he lost the team after losing the BIG game! Edinboro the last two years, the 2 losses to Gannon the last two years. Let's the talk about not knowing how many times outs you have left! You're a loser just like Tort is!

You’re a big name calling personality type. Your the only sour grapes on this board. I am just stating facts. Look it up, refs were suspended and records don’t lie pal.