|
Post by hchoops on Sept 12, 2016 14:22:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Sept 12, 2016 14:28:58 GMT -5
I can't think of another time, but, even if there were, this double recognition is a most impressive accomplishment! Congratulations to Pete and to Ryan.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Sept 12, 2016 21:03:16 GMT -5
No substitute for a W.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Sept 13, 2016 6:12:17 GMT -5
...and apples are not oranges. Why make a statement like that when two HC athletes are being honored?
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Sept 13, 2016 8:51:17 GMT -5
Like Pujals, I'm sure Smith would exchange his POW for a W. Fball is a team game. Individual performances should not be overemphasized--especially in a losing effort.
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Sept 13, 2016 9:39:17 GMT -5
I just spoke with the conference office. Moving forward, only teams that win are eligible to have weekly award winners.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Sept 13, 2016 12:28:40 GMT -5
We lost a close one to the #24 team at their place. A new place with tons of students and fans supporting them. If not for the POW both offensively and defensively being on the Holy Cross team, we would have lost by a much bigger margin. Yeah, I have little doubt that both of our guys would trade in their awards for a win but that is not an option. It doesn't work that way.
If if your team loses, getting an award like this at least gives you some affirmation that you did your personal best and did not let your team down.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Sept 13, 2016 12:35:56 GMT -5
I just spoke with the conference office. Moving forward, only teams that win are eligible to have weekly award winners. If true, that is sad to hear. There may well be some outstanding PL performances not considered for this individual honor, since that would mean the POW award would be based primarily on team play before the individual could even be considered.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Sept 13, 2016 12:41:20 GMT -5
RGS I think jrgnyr was being sarcastic
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Sept 13, 2016 14:15:35 GMT -5
The PL had only two wins this week - an unimpressive 3-point win by Georgetown over Marist and a joke of a win by Fordham over tiny D2 Elizabeth City. Thus it was inevitable that some of the awards would go to players on losing teams. Pujals was an obvious choice and Smith also was a better choice than anyone on the two winners. I think at least one more award should have gone to a player on a losing side, since imo no-one on Fordham deserved an award for beating up on Elizabeth City.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Sept 13, 2016 14:17:25 GMT -5
Individual awards for a losing team is bad for team chemistry. Think about it.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Sept 13, 2016 14:19:30 GMT -5
There's no good reason why POW awards must be given every week.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Sept 13, 2016 14:28:35 GMT -5
RGS I think jrgnyr was being sarcastic That is a relief...thanks!
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Sept 13, 2016 15:33:18 GMT -5
RGS I think jrgnyr was being sarcastic Indeed. Like several conferences, the PL's weekly awards are sponsored. There isn't a conference in the country that only gives weekly awards when the conference has had a good week. Typically, the only time awards aren't given out is if everybody is on a bye or league rules stipulate a certain number of teams or percentage of the conference played during the prescribed period of time. Weekly awards are an avenue by which a conference can brand and market the accomplishments of its student-athletes, win or lose. There are tremendous performances that take place regardless of the game's final score. Those awards are there to recognize integral, individual efforts that in some way played a role in the team's success, even if the team lost. It also creates content for the websites for the league as well as the institution whose athlete won the award, so it helps provide fresh news. Then you can add in potential video interviews or components and that's another avenue of content.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Sept 13, 2016 15:40:57 GMT -5
See why I advise against use of sarcasm? Creates confusion and waste of everyone's time.
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Sept 13, 2016 16:16:34 GMT -5
Broad-based, whitewash statements without any facts or knowledge to back them up or "No substitute for a W" are equally wasteful.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Sept 13, 2016 22:14:42 GMT -5
JRGNYR- I agree that marketing is an important justification for individual awards. But there should be other considerations that may override marketing.
When I posted "no substitute for a W" I think everyone knew what I meant. Sometimes I try to be succinct.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Sept 13, 2016 22:31:37 GMT -5
Actually, while a regular practitioner of sarcasm on this board when warranted, I got a few grins and giggles from the above and, I kind of think the person that you think didn't "get" the sarcasm (RGS), actually did and was trumping the original post with his own. I sure wasn't confused and anything that makes me laugh is not a waste of my time. But, that's just me. Then again, I think Larry David is funny.
But admit it, Sarasota, you smiled at my "Three Amigos" clip about "plethora," right?
BTW, I also "got" your "no substitute for a W" comment.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Sept 13, 2016 23:00:57 GMT -5
sader- I think I acknowledged that the plethora thing was very funny. BTW, how did you find that? Do you have every line in that movie memorized?
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Sept 14, 2016 4:46:55 GMT -5
JRGNYR- I agree that marketing is an important justification for individual awards. But there should be other considerations that may override marketing. When I posted "no substitute for a W" I think everyone knew what I meant. Sometimes I try to be succinct. I'd like you to elaborate about what other considerations you think should override marketing in this case. I'm not sure where you're coming from and your response is exceptionally vague. I don't want to guess or assume as to what you mean. I'd like to keep giving you the benefit of the doubt. I'm attempting to explain to you how certain things happen in the industry and it's becoming increasingly frustrating when your responses are always some variation of "Yeah, but..." It's as if you're reading what I and other people are saying but you're not internalizing it long enough to understand it. Maybe there are industry norms you won't understand but they exist and have existed for years. If, in the end, you don't agree with them, that's fine, but the way in which you communicate your point sometimes doesn't help your case. Our back and forth about TV and streaming is a perfect example. To think that you'd advocate HC walking away from road games, even money games vs FBS opponents, because the game wouldn't be streamed, or that HC should attempt to strong arm schools when it has ZERO leverage... It's ludicrous. But I get it because you're looking at it strictly from your point of view as a fan and not big picture. Right on. In my experience schools are free not to nominate players for weekly awards in the event of a loss, for example. However, most schools don't hesitate at the chance of free publicity. And in most cases national organizations only accept nominations for their weekly awards if a player already earned one from the conference on Monday.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Sept 14, 2016 5:15:05 GMT -5
JRGNYR- I agree that marketing is an important justification for individual awards. But there should be other considerations that may override marketing. When I posted "no substitute for a W" I think everyone knew what I meant. Sometimes I try to be succinct. In my experience schools are free not to nominate players for weekly awards in the event of a loss, for example. However, most schools don't hesitate at the chance of free publicity. And in most cases national organizations only accept nominations for their weekly awards if a player already earned one from the conference on Monday. There has long been a division of opinion on this. When I was a high school coach, I almost always nominated an athlete for weekly honors. Some football coaches found this silly and said they would never nominate a athlete since they thought such awards were a waste of time. (BTW, my athletes received multiple awards and did well on post-season teams since other coaches knew their names). Of course, if no athlete had a performance that merited a nomination, then none was made.
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Sept 14, 2016 5:58:44 GMT -5
In my experience schools are free not to nominate players for weekly awards in the event of a loss, for example. However, most schools don't hesitate at the chance of free publicity. And in most cases national organizations only accept nominations for their weekly awards if a player already earned one from the conference on Monday. There has long been a division of opinion on this. When I was a high school coach, I almost always nominated an athlete for weekly honors. Some football coaches found this silly and said they would never nominate a athlete since they thought such awards were a waste of time. (BTW, my athletes received multiple awards and did well on post-season teams (since other coaches knew their names). Of course, if no athlete had a performance that merited a nomination, then none was made. Fair point. I never really knew nor cared about player of the week awards until I started having to either nominate for them or decide the winners. For high school athletes, I've typically seen newspapers or media orgs just pick a player without nominations. Generally speaking I've seen more college coaches care about POW honors than those who didn't. Some argue that having weekly honors helps flesh out potential all-conference voting for them at the end of the season. Others hang their hat on its ability to market their program.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Sept 14, 2016 7:25:34 GMT -5
JRGNYR- I acknowledge all the plusses about awards that you elaborate. I am simply pointing out one negative, i.e., individual awards when a team losses. And I gave my reason for saying that, i.e., the negative impact on team chemistry. You are correct that I am looking at it as a fan. Because that is all I am--a fan. I'm not naive enough to ignore that there are other considerations. If I was a marketing exec I would have that point of view. But I'm not. I believe it is important for folks to advocate for their own interests. That's why there are customer satisfaction surveys--for those service/product providers who care about satisfying customers.
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Sept 14, 2016 7:44:06 GMT -5
JRGNYR- I acknowledge all the plusses about awards that you elaborate. I am simply pointing out one negative, i.e., individual awards when a team losses. And I gave my reason for saying that, i.e., the negative impact on team chemistry. You are correct that I am looking at it as a fan. Because that is all I am--a fan. I'm not naive enough to ignore that there are other considerations. If I was a marketing exec I would have that point of view. But I'm not. I believe it is important for folks to advocate for their own interests. That's why there are customer satisfaction surveys--for those service/product providers who care about satisfying customers. Exactly how would an individual award affect team chemistry?
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Sept 14, 2016 12:06:40 GMT -5
You mean you can't imagine how that can happen?
|
|