Triple-take predicts first round

D3football.com editor and publisher Pat Coleman and I first took stabs at playoff scores on a meandering ride from our Northern Virginia home base to Thiel (Northwestern Pa.) for a 2005 first-round game against Johns Hopkins. Though we might have been just trying to kill time then, what we found when we compared our guesses, er, predictions turned out to be interesting enough to share. We gave it another try the next week and away we went, doing it again in 2006.

We brought the tradition back for a third year, bringing another wise mind, Gordon Mann, on board for the ride and making it our weekly Triple-take. The goal isn’t to prove which of the three of us is smartest or coolest — that’s obvious, right?. It’s to give fans from Curry to Redlands and everywhere in between an idea of what is expected to happen.

We’re well aware that this is the playoffs, when top teams face off in high-pressure situations, ensuring things don’t always go according to plan. It’s when respect is earned and minds are changed.

So cut us a break if we don’t pick your team by a satisfying score. There are reasons to like everyone that’s left, but our job is to be honest. You might find that even we can’t agree on which way these games will go.

We did not consult with each other at all — the three of us did our score predictions separately.

We’d like to hear what you think too, under two conditions: 1. We keep the bashing of each other to a bare minimum, and 2. You flesh out your thoughts a little bit.

Sound good? Then here goes, beginning in the East:

Ithaca at Mount Union
Coleman: Mount Union 42, Ithaca 10
Mann: Mount Union 42, Ithaca 7
McMillan: Mount Union 52, Ithaca 7

New Jersey at RPI
Coleman: TCNJ 14, RPI 6
Mann: RPI 21, TCNJ 17
McMillan: TCNJ 13, RPI 10

Hartwick at Curry
Coleman: Hartwick 32, Curry 28
Mann: Hartwick 43, Curry 42
McMillan: Hartwick 33, Curry 27, OT

Hobart at St. John Fisher
Coleman: St. John Fisher 38, Hobart 28
Mann: St. John Fisher 31, Hobart 28, OT
McMillan: St. John Fisher 35, Hobart 34

Olivet at Central
Coleman:Central 41, Olivet 14
Mann: Central 35, Olivet 21
McMillan: Central 40, Olivet 7

Redlands at St. John’s
Coleman: St. John’s 27, Redlands 17
Mann: St. John’s 28, Redlands 21
McMillan: St. John’s 21, Redlands 20

UW-Eau Claire at St. Norbert
Coleman: Eau Claire 24, St. Norbert 21
Mann: Eau Claire 21, St. Norbert 10
McMillan: St. Norbert 28, Eau Claire 21

Concordia (Wis.) at Bethel
Coleman: Bethel 41, Concordia 6
Mann: Bethel 35, Concordia 7
McMillan: Bethel 30, Concordia 13

North Carolina Wesleyan at Washington and Jefferson
Coleman: Washington and Jefferson 50, N.C. Wesleyan 16
Mann: Washington and Jefferson 31, N.C. Wesleyan 21
McMillan: N.C. Wesleyan 38, Washington and Jefferson 35

Trinity (Texas) at Mary Hardin-Baylor
Coleman: Mary Hardin-Baylor 41, Trinity 14
Mann: Mary Hardin-Baylor 35, Trinity 14
McMillan: Mary Hardin-Baylor 42, Trinity 24

Salisbury at Muhlenberg
Coleman: Salisbury 31, Muhlenberg 27
Mann: Salisbury 20, Muhlenberg 14
McMillan: Salisbury 20, Muhlenberg 14

Hampden-Sydney at Wesley
Coleman: Wesley 35, Hampden-Sydney 28
Mann: Wesley 28, Hampden-Sydney 21
McMillan: Wesley 35, Hampden-Sydney 13

Capital at UW-Whitewater
Coleman: Whitewater 20, Capital 13
Mann: Whitewater 21, Capital 7
McMillan: Whitewater 24, Capital 12

North Central at Franklin
Coleman: North Central 35, Franklin 34
Mann: North Central 31, Franklin 21
McMillan: North Central 33, Franklin 30, 2 OT

Mt. St. Joseph at Wabash
Coleman: Wabash 30, Mt. St. Joseph 21
Mann: Wabash 21, Mt. St. Joseph 10
McMillan: Wabash 34, Mt. St. Joseph 21

Widener at Case Western Reserve
Coleman: Widener 20, Case Western 17
Mann: Widener 17, Case Western 14, OT
McMillan: Case Western 22, Widener 14

Unanimous favorites: Mount Union, Hartwick, St. John Fisher, Central, St. John’s, Bethel, Mary Hardin-Baylor, Salisbury, Wesley, UW-Whitewater, North Central, Wabash

By split decision: TCNJ, UW-Eau Claire, Washington and Jefferson, Widener

Support participants, in a positive manner

I want to reprise something I first wrote a couple of years ago after some particularly rough weekends in the sportsmanship department:

“Ladies and gentlemen, the NCAA promotes good sportsmanship by student-athletes, coaches and spectators. We request your cooperation by supporting the participants and officials in a positive manner. Profanity, racial, or sexist comments, or other intimidating actions directed at officials, student-athletes, coaches or team representatives will not be tolerated and are grounds for removal from the site of competition. Also, the consumption or possession of alcoholic beverages at the site of competition is prohibited.”

I’ve heard this so many times in the past decade or so it rolls off the tongue (or fingers) in a flash. But it often seems like there are some fans who need a reminder. This remains on the minds of decision makers as we come to the postseason.

Consider this, fans, especially you students out there. These are big games, no doubt, and it’s great to get excited about them, but these players do not deserve your abuse. A Division III football player gets no special treatment above and beyond what you get. They’re not on scholarship, don’t get special dining halls or treatment in the classroom (in fact, you can count on some professors being harder on football players than on the rest of the class).

I would be in favor of immediately kicking anyone out of the stadium who is in violation of the sportsmanship agreement. So what if you paid $5, $8, whatever to be there? Act like a grownup, since that’s what you allegedly are.

If you need to get all liquored up in order to enjoy a football game, stay home. The football should be reason enough. If you’re of legal age, there’s plenty of time to drink after the game — that’s one of the benefits of a noon kickoff.

On a related note, I was heartened to visit a Middle Atlantic Conference facility for the first time in 2007 and see the conference’s code of conduct posted prominently. Good work, MAC, welcome aboard. Be loud, proud and positive.

ATN Podcast: Wild weekend, wild pairings

Well, we survived another Selection Sunday, though the day has barely ended as I write this portion of the site. Four hours of sleep, up at 7:15, off to ESPNU, analyze the bracket, check graphics and pronunciations, go over highlights, write a script, go through a dress rehearsal and do the show. Then tape a segment for ESPNews (did anyone ever see that?) and another for online.

Thankfully, the podcast was pretty simple, too, only requiring one edit to piece two parts together.

It’s our look at the bracket, the key points in each game, etc. How many points can Capital give up and still win? Do Keith McMillan and I both like the way this was put together? Why Eau Claire instead of Whitworth?

It wasn’t quite a record day trafficwise but with the brackets being revealed so early in the morning, we didn’t expect it. But it was a great day in Division III football, both Saturday and Sunday. Hear the highlights in our ATN podcast.