Yes, I know. How come I have such an obsession about terms made by tragicomic political figures (in this case, Spiro Agnew, Richard Nixon's vice president who resigned in 1974 in the wake of the Watergate affair)? One can only wonder what terms I'll be coming up with in the future in these Sunday Words, such as "Henny Penny The Sky Is Falling", or "It depends on what your definition of 'Is' Is".
In any event, I don't think it's any secret that I'm referring to Mr. Agnew's reference to the nattering 'nabobs' of negativism.
Looking objectively, this Saturday's win against VMI was Lehigh's largest margin of victory against an out-of-conference opponent since the Mountain Hawks waxed Central Connecticut State 58-10 on September 29th, 2001 (to what then was essentially a non-scholarship team). For a win against a "scholarship" team of the same magnitude, you need to go back to 1984 when Lehigh throttled Delaware 46-6. (And that was with a team that ended the year 5-6.) With Lehigh at 2-1, with wins over tough Princeton, last year's Ivy League co-champions (and recent victors over Lafayette) and now scholarship VMI, you'd think there would be dancing in the streets.
But here come the "nabobs". The comments I got on my "victory" post yesterday numbered two: one criticizing the "new" way junior P/K John Leo is punting the football, and one lambasting me for neglecting to mention senior WR Pete Donchez' big day on offense in my wrapup last night.
You have to think something is going right in Lehigh Nation when the worst thing folks have to complain about is 1) the punting game, and 2) me choosing the *wrong* players to honor on offense since there were *so many*.
Where's the postings about a great win? The thoroughness that Lehigh played, especially defensively? The fact that we finally had a big blowout victory and had a game where the outcome was not in doubt midway through the second quarter? Wouldn't just a tiny bit of rah-rah be OK?
No doubt, this game was easier than the Harvard game will be next week. VMI was not the next coming in the Big South of Coastal Carolina, circa 2006: this was a less-than-stellar team we whooped on. But would it kill fans to have something positive to say, for once? Have we all gotten so gunshy after losing three straight to "the team in Easton" that even in a blowout victory it's still gloom and doom?
This week's game against Harvard will be big. I think Lehigh fans are still sitting around wondering, "Are we really back?" Rather than being thrilled at another victory, we're complaining about punting. I think the bandwagon will be revving up for these "nabobs" if we can manage a victory - even a slim one will do - against the Crimson.
In any event, I don't think it's any secret that I'm referring to Mr. Agnew's reference to the nattering 'nabobs' of negativism.
Looking objectively, this Saturday's win against VMI was Lehigh's largest margin of victory against an out-of-conference opponent since the Mountain Hawks waxed Central Connecticut State 58-10 on September 29th, 2001 (to what then was essentially a non-scholarship team). For a win against a "scholarship" team of the same magnitude, you need to go back to 1984 when Lehigh throttled Delaware 46-6. (And that was with a team that ended the year 5-6.) With Lehigh at 2-1, with wins over tough Princeton, last year's Ivy League co-champions (and recent victors over Lafayette) and now scholarship VMI, you'd think there would be dancing in the streets.
But here come the "nabobs". The comments I got on my "victory" post yesterday numbered two: one criticizing the "new" way junior P/K John Leo is punting the football, and one lambasting me for neglecting to mention senior WR Pete Donchez' big day on offense in my wrapup last night.
You have to think something is going right in Lehigh Nation when the worst thing folks have to complain about is 1) the punting game, and 2) me choosing the *wrong* players to honor on offense since there were *so many*.
Where's the postings about a great win? The thoroughness that Lehigh played, especially defensively? The fact that we finally had a big blowout victory and had a game where the outcome was not in doubt midway through the second quarter? Wouldn't just a tiny bit of rah-rah be OK?
No doubt, this game was easier than the Harvard game will be next week. VMI was not the next coming in the Big South of Coastal Carolina, circa 2006: this was a less-than-stellar team we whooped on. But would it kill fans to have something positive to say, for once? Have we all gotten so gunshy after losing three straight to "the team in Easton" that even in a blowout victory it's still gloom and doom?
This week's game against Harvard will be big. I think Lehigh fans are still sitting around wondering, "Are we really back?" Rather than being thrilled at another victory, we're complaining about punting. I think the bandwagon will be revving up for these "nabobs" if we can manage a victory - even a slim one will do - against the Crimson.
Comments
The VMI game was the perfect chance to start meshing the O and D. I just wish this game was the first of the season, rather than third.
Harvard will definitely be a bigger challenge, but I believe the team will continue to improve and I love the prospects of two freshmen showing the skills Kankam and Walker have.
No more lambasting from me! GO ENGINEERS!
Maybe Leo ought to just concentrate on making extra points instead of trying to be the next Einstein of college football.