Memo to the other 233: Better step it up!
Dec
2006
I’ve been asked this question more this year than any other, and it usually takes one of a couple of forms:
Isn’t it boring if the same team wins all the time?
Don’t you hate that Mount Union wins every year?
Is it boring? Ehh, probably a little bit.
Do I hate it? Nah, not at all. We’re watching one of the greatest dynasties of our day. It’s not like Mount Union 2002 and Mount Union 2005 have anything in common. Each year is a little different.
However, what I don’t like in Division III football is when we enter the season with Mount Union’s championship being a foregone conclusion. Unfortunately, it looks like 2007 is shaping up to be one of those years. Mount Union loses a key piece in Justen Stickley, but the Purple Raiders have proven that offensive linemen are replaceable and Greg Micheli returns, as does Nate Kmic and Pierre Garcon.
Everywhere else you look, teams are losing key pieces. UW-Whitewater loses its coach, its quarterback, three of its four starting defensive linemen, its No. 1 receiver. Capital loses the only quarterback they’ve had during this run of impressive seasons. St. John Fisher loses the best running back in school history and its top tackler. And those are just a few of the key names on the list.
So this is the challenge I throw out to the other 233 Division III teams. Show us something, please. Give us something to be excited about. Move your game to the next level. Otherwise fans outside of Alliance will be hitting the snooze button and waiting for 2008.
Or 2009.
December 20th, 2006 at 6:31 pm
I hate to disagree with you, but I certainly do. It was very difficult for me to endure the game on Saturday. Granted, UWW certainly fell flat on it’s face in the second half and made it a far from competitive game, but for pete’s sake…how can you say that you are okay with a decade’s woth of the SAME CHAMPIONSHIP?
If you say that you think that it’s boring, but you are okay with it being the same victor year after year, then you are clearly saying that you like boredom. The same winners year in and year out are bad for business at any level. I love my Brewers, but can easily understand why people don’t enjoy baseball. It’s no fun watching the Yankees win year after year.
DIII football doesn’t have the ability to regulate parity like major league sports do, and college teams at any level aren’t able to (or aren’t supposed to) buy up the best players and stack the deck. DIII, however, does have a playoff system and can use that to its advantage. If people hate seeing the same team year in and year out, then why not put the National Champions in the toughest bracket? Mt. Union’s trip to the Stagg Bowl was cake compared to UWW’s. MUC had only 4 ranked teams while all of the UWW bracket featured ranked teams and 4 in the top ten. Even with the horrendous special teams play that had plagued UWW throughout the plaoffs, you can’t tell me that UWW wasn’t a little more beaten up than MUC by the time the Stagg Bowl came around.
Bringing my rambling to a close, it was great to see the Stagg Bowl and my Hawks in person for the second year in a row. It may never happen again. I think the NCAA would be fools to move the event away from Salem…the city does it right and they obvously care about its customers. The only downside was some jerk from Ohio shouting “Ohio is the greatest football state!”
Apparently he isn’t aware of the Bengals and the Browns.
December 20th, 2006 at 6:45 pm
In fairness, Warhawk, Pat only said he found it a little boring. But he’s right: the MUC teams are very different, in personnel and often in style. It’s not like watching the Yankees make it to the postseason every year with the same big-money, power-hitting style (though they haven’t won in quite a while, considering they’re in the playoffs every year).
What Pat’s challenge boils down to, in my opinion, is for teams to find both the talent and the coaching that MUC has. It’s no easy task. But I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: outside of Garcon’s speed, I thought that UWW was probably just as talented as MUC. The difference is that Kehres, et al are superior coaches to just about everyone.
The challenge, then, is to build a talented team with a coaching staff that can equal that of the Purple Raiders. It’s no easy task, particularly at the DIII level, with small budgets and less noteriety. I believe that it can be done, though.
One nice thing about having a dynasty such as MUC is the sense of great joy and accomplishment that comes from beating them. It’s been done. Ohio Northern did it. UMHB did it. St. John’s did it, decisively (but for a horrible call, in a Monkey Stomp!). Rowan did it, though the Profs’ sense of accomplishment was probably taken too far, given the result the next week.
Things would be worse if the Raiders had one every title in this period. But the fact that they haven’t, and the competitiveness of the West Region, in particular, gives me hope that the 2007 season and beyond will not likely be a coronation for MUC.
December 20th, 2006 at 6:46 pm
WiWarhawk…
got any other excuses youd like to throw out there…I dont think your own team and other fans would offer up the lame excuses you do..MUC could have taken every team in your bracket, the same way they took you…and I think Capital and SJf might have a slight disagreement with your opinion of MUC’s road to the title…not that it matters really…because they havent done it once, theyve done it 9 TIMES!!! if you dont think MUC couldnt have taken Wesley and everyone else in your bracket, and then UWW, youre crazy…and you right…you are rambling…incoherently…you want to see someone else win…like Pat said, step up your game…Ive enver heard anything as dumb on this site as someone suggesting changing the format of the playoffs so it can be easier for someone else to win…do you really feel that the other DIII teams need such baby like treatment…”boo-hoo…we can’t win with these rules”…please….
December 20th, 2006 at 6:46 pm
Oops. By “coronation,” I meant “mere coronation,” as in a formality.
December 20th, 2006 at 6:46 pm
After having attended the Stagg Bowl 9 (2005) years after I stopped playing, I still was amazed by the entire Stagg Bowl scene. Years after playing, all I could think about was how cool/fun/amazing it would have been to have played in that game.
That being said, I think it would be a great idea for college coaches to strongly encourage their players to attend the Stagg Bowl. You could even go as far as to raise funds for a bus ride out there. But, at the very least it’s just an good, old fashioned road trip. I understand there are issues with all of my suggestions (West Coast players driving to the Stagg Bowl, limited funds for both students and institutions, etc.).
However, I can’t imagine that any current player would not be totally inspired by being there. Not only by the scene, but, by the level of football that is played in that bowl. In other words, seeing what it takes.
And those guys still have a chance to train, improve, and most importanly….play.
At the very least, go to an in-region playoff game. I remember seeing MUC beat UW-Lacrosse at Camp Randall (UW-Madison) AFTER my senior season. My team and I could have benefitted greatly from going to a playoff game before that, but, I am not going to go all woulda/coulda/shoulda on you.
And on a side note, that game is why I have never and never will hate on MUC. They had a ton of fans in the stands, 50 (maybe older) year old guys doing push-ups with the cheerleaders, and after the game the players shook hands and then all the MUC players went and jumped in a huge snowbank on the sidelines. And it wasn’t even a “in your face” deal. They were just enjoying the moment.
Now, that’s what I call understanding the game.
December 20th, 2006 at 8:28 pm
Wow! Use a rule change to try to unseat the National Champion! Did I read that right? When that happens we will know that the “sport” has gone out of college sports. No less than 15 attempts were made to unseat last years National Champions. All failed. Why blame MUC for those other teams shortcommings? Thats like saying……Jimmy, you are much better than the other kids, you win all the time. You cant play anymore! Its damaging to the other kids self esteems. PLEEEEEZE! Watch Jimmy excell, then LEARN how to excell too. Some teams have already taken notice and started bettering their staffs, facilities,and players. It will pay off soon enough for someone. Until then just be happy for MUC because they represnt the NCAA and D3 very well. Their credibility spills over on all of D3. Hey UWW, SJF, CAP, WHEATON and HOPE….be proud you made the playoffs and lost to the best. You now know what you have to do to play for a championship. Get busy and work for it while the whiners are busy trying to scheme and scam their way to success.
December 20th, 2006 at 9:11 pm
Oh, good grief. Enough with the excuses. If you don’t want Mount Union to win, there is one thing you can do. Want to guess what that is? Try beating them!
The whole “weak region” thing is a joke and I am tired of hearing about the number of ranked teams a team has played on the way, or that the WIAC is definitely the top conference from top to bottom. UWW has had two chances to win against them in the Stagg Bowl, two other opportunities in the regular season (1 at UWW) and the same result every time. Also, I never see a NAIA team on Mount Union’s schedule, same goes for the other OAC schools. They don’t need to schedule Azusa Pacific (or in this area, Malone). Enough whining. They have regions for a reason and seem very unlikely to ship more than 1 or 2 out of their native region.
Suggesting to stack the region intentionally to try to keep a team out is blatantly ludicrous. Period. No way to argue for that so spare me the lame song and dance routine. If you want another champion and you have to go through Mount Union, then beat them. So rather than chat away, hit the weight room and hit the practice field. Are we clear? Good luck.
This “best conference” chatter is the same stuff we have heard from the SEC for years. As long as they tell themselves that, they believe it. Mount Union beat Capital twice this season, and they finished #3 in the country. Hmmm. Their conference usually has more than two teams finish in the Top 25, though this year it was two, with Ohio Northern and Marietta not far out (and these teams are 6-4, which says a lot to be ranked that highly). Baldwin-Wallace is always tough and until the past couple of years, John Carroll used to be very, very good. They were shipped to the East a few seasons ago and I believe finished in the quarterfinals (or was it semifinals?). I do recall some of the D3 people here that they squeaked by some games, one in overtime, but the neat thing is, they won. Period. That’s all that matters. The OAC is a tough conference and there are plenty of strong teams in the conferences in the North region. Funny thing about the WIAC, you only see two teams. Like there are bottom feeders in the OAC, there are bottom feeders in the WIAC Eau Claire, Stout, River Falls all 3-7 and this is an 8-team conference. Is the WIAC the best, some say yes, some say no. You can throw out all the documented and ridiculously useless statistics you wish, but the bottom line is when it has counted the most, the OAC has come out on top.
December 20th, 2006 at 9:27 pm
WIWarhawk
So, just to make sure we understand what you are saying: Mount beats #2 WW, #3 Capital and #4 SJF. And you think they had the easiest draw in the tourney? What am I missing? WW didn’t beat anyone in the top 4. Mount beats three in the top four. Sorry, can’t buy that logic.
December 20th, 2006 at 9:34 pm
Ehh, any chance those teams are in the top four because they played Mount Union? I think that’s a chicken-egg thing.
December 20th, 2006 at 9:44 pm
I’d say they are in the top four…because they are the top four teams in the country. I have no idea whether WW would have beat Capital & SJF. But we do know that Mount beat them, along with WW. So I’m struggling to figure out how their road to Salem was easier than WW’s.
December 20th, 2006 at 9:52 pm
I say Congrats to MUC always! They are a fantastic dynasty that I don’t mind seeing win. I think parity at that top level would also be great, but…we are witnessing a dynasty here that in my opinion represents some of the most pure thinks in sports today: class, heart, hard work, commitment, coaching, and academics! There is no money, special treatment, or really even a opportunity at making this sport professionally for these kids. To me, this is a great dynasty and I will enjoy it as long as it lasts. I am not even a MUC fan and I can see how special this all is.
December 20th, 2006 at 9:58 pm
Just a couple of things here.
It does disturb me that Mt Union is the powerhouse that it is, but the only way to stop that is for someone to beat them. We have failed the past two years, it sucks, but that’s the way it is right now. I’d still like another shot at them. They are a class act, though, I’m sure after christmas break they’re gonna be right after a tenth title, if not now.
As far as arguing about which conference is better, it’s a matter of opinion, both the OAC and WIAC have very good teams, it’s not something that I want to argue about because in the end, it really doesn’t matter except in the playoffs and even then they are in seperate regions, and are both the strongest conferences in those regions.
I can understand where WiWarhawk is coming from, I don’t think that he meant the NCAA should stack numbers 1-8 in the same regional brackett or whatever. What I think he meant was that there is some discrepency in the strength of each brackett. What I think he was trying to say was to set up something like march madness where the top four teams all get #1 seeds, the next four get #2 seeds, etc… I agree with him that this is a good idea and I would venture to say that most of you out there would agree with me. However, I think most of us also realize that this is just not going to happen because of D3’s economic situation.
As far as someone SEEMED to imply that UWW was scheduling Azusa so they could get an easier schedule, that is simply not true. Someone, backed out of playing against us last spring and Azusa was available, so we scheduled them. (someone that is informed please correct me if I’m wrong)
December 20th, 2006 at 10:17 pm
AAGGGHHH!!! I have lurked on this site for a few years, but the whining about Mt Union is really getting out of hand… I grew up six blocks away from MUC’s campus and used to go to the games with my buddies on our bikes. I remember Mount falling just short (every time) back in the 80’s to either B-W or Augustana. It hurt, but they learned from it and grew. (I went to ONU and Kent State for disclosure purposes)
I have seen the last six Stagg Bowls in person due to my proximity to Salem - Mount or no Mount. I have sat on the “other side” (accidentally, of course) a couple of times with mixed results. Regardless, a good to great game everytime - even when St John’s beat Mount.
WiWarhawk, enough with the excuses for the “Why” the Warhawks lost to Mount due to a “tougher” regular / playoff schedules and the like. UWW played a tight game - a few plays switched would have made this game a lot closer than it ended up. UWW had nothing to make excuses about and you shouldn’t try to for them. They got beat by a superior team that day.
Which is, as they say, the reason we play the game.
Go Mount!
December 20th, 2006 at 10:39 pm
Ha! Welcome to the storm I guess. I appreciate your comments, but also need to clarify that your responding to intentions that don’t exist.
First: Do I believe that MUC was the better team on Saturday…yes, I do. Clearly, MUC was the better team. So, sorry everyone…I am not giving any excuses for the lack of excellent play on the WW squad.
Second: Is there a precedent for changing the format in the way championships are made? Yes….BCS anyone? Eventually DI will move to a playoff format, so at that point MUCnash and OhioFootball, are you going to be against it simply for the sake of NOT changing?
Third: mainjack - You need to look at the rankings before the playoffs…Wesley was ranked number 3 before WW knocked them out. and SJF was not even in the top 15. It’s easy to look at how the chips fall and then make a decision. UWW did beat a top 4 team WHEN they were ranked as such. Not when all is said and done.
So, go ahead everyone. Crucify me for defending my opinions. I would appreciate it however (ohiofottball) if you leave the personal comments out and keep it to the opinions. Again…MUC was clearly the better team and I even was rooting for MUC to break the NCAA Win streak. I even ordered an MUC hat when they did so. I’ll even go so far as to say that the OAC is a bit better than the WIAC. However, the WIAC is a damn tough conference as well. So, it’s not like i am personally upset at MUC…but like any dynasty that lasts forever, it gets old. The same would go for UWW if that ever happened.
Now let me get some shelter while the lightning bolts shoot down.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:04 am
Who will coach UW-W next year? They will be strong again as will be MUC, and UMHB. Wesley will not be as strong nor will W&J.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:13 am
Does UW-W play UMHB next year? If so, I hope it’s early before the cold sets in….. UMHB needs their own stadium (Fredenberg stated this in the local paper a few weeks ago) for recruiting and for ownership. I know we just sunk $400,000 in the High School field and it seats like 9,000. However, UMHB is a powerhouse every year and usually ranked in the top 5. C’mon someone write that check because the CRU deserves their OWN stadium.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:15 am
The only reason you are for changing the format is because Mount keeps winning in the current format…if Mount wasnt hoisting the trophy nine times you’d be fine with it…If you wanted to change the format because you truly wanted a more fair system for all teams, that would be one thing..you want to change the format to attempt (which is the key word in this whole discussion) to sandbag the team that keeps outplaying everyone…you dont like the outcome so you change the rules…its not change for the sake of change…its change because you keep losing…if D1 ever went to a playoff system, it would make it more fair for all teams..not a rule change aimed at one particular program as you suggested…but really, I’ll be honest…take whatever rules you want…set it up however you think is fair…MUC would have still won number #9….take any of the teams in any combination…this years team was good enough to beat them all….its the sportsmanship of the idea that we change the rules to stop that big bully Mount Union from beating up on us…its just silly…
December 21st, 2006 at 1:17 am
^^^^^^^
UMHB should schedule MUC and UW-W next year just to see where they are. I believe we return 8 on offense and 7 and defense.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:44 am
U-Dub-Dub,
First off, how’s your roomie handling the defeat? Secondly, I think everyone would love to see a “level playing field” but that’s just not in the cards. It is extremely expensive to fly a plane every weekend on a budget that is tight due to… and I hate this… lack of funds because the NCAA does not market the games. If there were TV contracts for the entire playoffs and someone was interested in paying the bucks things could change, but I don’t (personally) think that will happen.
But such is life.
Purple,
I think we would all love to see some of the top 10 teams play more than just those on their conference schedules but these schedules are generally set years in advance and, by that point, the school may not be the super power they were this year. And you have situations like a certain school we all know about that generally schedules cake walks for their non-conf schedule for whatever reason and still have to play a full conference schedule. I can’t speak for the conferences that come to mind but I would find it hard to imagine that the OAC and MIAC would look too highly on some of their teams playing truncated conference schedules so they could get to those high profile programs.
But I am (again personally) looking forward to the Home-Home matchup between MUC and SJF in the near future.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:57 am
I think I recall Fredenburg and Berezowitz saying it was a home and home.
The UWW coordinators have been there 13 and 16 years. I would not be shocked if one of them is ultimately the next coach.
I think Wesley will still be pretty good next year. They were developing some young talent, and their QB has been in the offense as a WR, so maybe that will speed the transition.
Anyway, I wrote some opuses on this very topic different places around the board recently. I was definitely in the ‘I’m getting bored with Mount Union winning it all the time’ camp for a while.
As long as we have the drama, where you honestly believe there’s a chance MUC can be beaten (and they were in ‘05, in the regular season), then it’s not necessarily boring. I definitely thought after the St. John’s and Linfield titles that the division was wide open in ‘05. I pretty much pegged ‘06 for an MUC-UWW rematch, but it wasn’t until the third quarter of the Stagg Bowl that we knew for sure MUC was the better team.
That’s good enough for me. As long as MUC’s dominance doesn’t completely sap the drama, I am OK with it.
It may completely sap the drama next year though.
Thing is, a lot has to go right for a team to win. What if certain guys can’t stay healthy? What if someone catches them on a bad day, going right at their weakness?
In a way, it’s definitely a shame if you’re from Capital that you know you could have beaten Mount Union, you just didn’t. Same for some other teams.
But that’s where what Pat said comes in … in a way, you have to at least appreciate what you’re seeing. One of the all-time greats here.
Trust me, I could live with a little more drama instead of penciling MUC into the semis each year, but as long as they play 2-4 tough games against elite teams that have a shot at beating them, I can get through the season.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:59 am
Here’s one of the things I said elsewhere on the similar topic:
December 21st, 2006 at 2:03 am
“I’ll even go so far as to say that the OAC is a bit better than the WIAC.”
They’re 1-2, but every time we do the research (out of conf. record, depth of conference, NFL pedigree, etc.) the WIAC comes out No. 1.
Mount Union is better than UW-W, but give me River Falls by 20 over Heidelberg, etc.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:07 am
“Mt. Union’s trip to the Stagg Bowl was cake compared to UWW’s.”
Hope — St. Norbert
Wheaton — UW-LaCrosse
Capital — St. John’s
St. John Fisher — Wesley
Stagg Bowl
They look pretty similar to me, actually. Lax was a bit better than Wheaton, and the North was by no means a stronger overall bracket than the West … but “cake” is so hyperbolic I probably shouldn’t even have responded.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:19 am
“They are a class act, though, I’m sure after christmas break they’re gonna be right after a tenth title, if not now.”
Larry contends that the Stagg Bowl puts his staff five weeks behind in recruiting. And he is dead serious.
He is obviously not complaining, as he knows he also gets five extra weeks to “coach up” his players most years, and all the playoff exposure and the chance to win championships are big factors in getting good players.
But it shows you how focused he is, and that rubs off on his staff.
Right now they think Baldwin-Wallace, John Carroll and Ohio Northern are going to get all the good, smart players unless they recruit their tails off.
Just another reason why it’s easy to dislike MUC on the surface, but harder to once you get to know what they’re all about. These guys honestly believe they have to outwork the other guys to win it next year.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:26 am
I will say one more thing on this issue.
The D3 season does become like two, or maybe even three seasons. There’s the regular season/playoff chase, there’s the first two rounds of the playoffs where the good-but-not-elite teams get weeded out, and then there’s the round of 8, where the Stagg Bowl contenders take their shots.
If you look at it this way, you might find the same excitement I do in watching, say, Rowan battle Cortland State for a playoff spot, then watching Carnegie Mellon get further than it had in years, then watching the Stagg Bowl.
Basically, man, enjoy the journey to the top as well as the view from the summit.
We almost never write stories about Mount Union or some of the other elite teams until the playoffs because we suspect, and are usually right, about them ending up there.
And in a way that would seem boring … but by the same token, our system offers everyone the chance to settle it on the field, so you know as a player, if you didn’t win it, it was something you or your team didn’t do, but nobody robbed you of your shot at winning it all.
As a competitor, all you really can hope for is a chance to prove it on the field.
And we have that.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:37 am
MUCnash: The only reason you are for changing the format is because Mount keeps winning in the current format…
Buddy…did you read the part of my post where I said that “the same would go for UWW if that ever happened”? Besides, couldn’t the same arguement be said about why you think it’s a crazy idea to adjust the format? When MUC is losing, I look forward to reading your posts on this website.
“if Mount wasnt hoisting the trophy nine times you’d be fine with it…”
Now this statement is actually true. If it was like the NFL where I can watch different teams win year in and year out, then that’d be great.
Read my initial post…I said that the same victors year after year isn’t good business at any level. In no way would I condone changing the rules for one team to benifit another single team. That’s just stupid. Not only that, it’s crazy to think that I would suggest it to benifit UWW. I sincerely doubt that they wil advance beyond the quarters next year. They will lose to UWL in the regular season, since the reg season game is at UWL and UWL hates UWW. They’re also losing enough to make another rematch almost impossible. So, to think that I have sour grapes is a non-issue.
December 21st, 2006 at 4:03 am
Just a quick not on the UWW coaching position. Offensive coordinator Stan Zweifel is one of the candidates for head coach. Others include Rick Willis (AD @ Wartburg), Curt Weise (Head Coach @ Marietta), and Lance Leipold (Offensive Coordinator @ Nebraska-Omaha). Popular opinion pegs Zweifel as the favorite.
December 21st, 2006 at 4:04 am
Sorry…forgot to proofread…a quick note* as opposed to a quick not…
December 21st, 2006 at 7:23 am
It ain’t boring if you’re the team playing MUC!
December 21st, 2006 at 8:48 am
UWWRunner - I also recall Ken Wable quiting at Mount in 1985 and his O-coordinator taking over for him. We all were a little worried in Mount being able to maintain its momentum at that time. It took him a few years, but LK did OK… Berezowitz has set whoever up with a very nice place to start from.
December 21st, 2006 at 9:44 am
A couple of things on Wesley… First, Wesley’s defense only loses two. One being Mario Harris at Safety, which is huge. The loss of Warrick on offense will be filled by more run heavy offense in the early season to give the next QB a chance to get his footing. I look for Wesley to challenge for the South Region again, most likely against UMHB who could have an incredible year. Second… as far as ranking Wesley as low as 6 or 8 in the end of this year is solely based on the performance of one person in one game. If we do that, then we should put UW-W down a bit based on Jacobs performance. Honestly, that shouldn’t happen. UW-W is unquestionably #2. By putting other teams in front of Wesley, such as St. John’s (MN) after losing to both UW-W and Bethel is unfounded, just because they had a good game in the playoffs. Wesley only stumbled once, in the National Semifinals of all places.
December 21st, 2006 at 9:58 am
very funny dedragon…if saint johns played wesley…they would KILL wesley…the wesley against whitewater was 44-7…st. johns against whitewater was 17-14…am i missing something?
December 21st, 2006 at 9:59 am
Ok, here is my final say on this.
1. I neither implied nor stated that I would be against the playoff format changing. Blatantly false statement by warhawk.
Honestly, I would love to see it changed. How? By including teams from multiple regions in each bracket. Maybe 2 from each region per 4 brackets. However you want to do it would be great. UWW is a fantastic team, as is La Crosse. Both would do outstanding in other regions and certainly be legitimate threats to win the regions. Same goes for other schools in other conferences. The tough part about getting these changes done is for all parties involved to work together to make it happen. It will not be easy, but I would definitely like some “tweaking” to be done.
2. The very weak argument from Pat Coleman: “Ehh, any chance those teams are in the top four because they played Mount Union? I think that’s a chicken-egg thing.”
Wow, you’re kidding, right? Do you think some other factors may also be involved? Including:
1. The records of these teams (outside of their performance against Mount Union), conference titles or runner-up positions. What happened to your conference power strength statistics? Hmmm.
2. You could say the same thing about UW-Whitewater (notice who is #5, #6, and #7).
3. Chicken and the egg? Probably not the best analogy to make here. These teams were already highly ranked during the season and it is no surprise they are where they at now that the season has concluded.
If you want to try to present the truth, try for the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
3. The post from WiWarhawk:
“Read my initial post…I said that the same victors year after year isn’t good business at any level.”
Again, blatantly incorrect. What business are you talking about here? Business in Salem, the product of D3 football, each D3 school? What? First, I could go through a long list of very dominant teams in men’s and women’s college and professional sports (some of which have been discussed in previous threads. The “business” has not been hurt for any of the sports, schools, franchises, or cities involved. Mount Union has helped put D3 football into the spotlight. D3 gets very little attention at all, but thanks in large part to Mount Union, it has received attention and helped to spread awareness of such a great level of competition. Part of the fun of having a dominant team is that their opponent is usually very psyched to play them with hopes of beating them. Plus, to further dispel the “bad business” bull, as teams work to improve to try to emulate the success of Mount Union (which UWW has clearly stated they have been doing), it improves the product of D3 football. Teams get better and better, the competition improves, and more and more fan support comes with it. It may still be difficult to beat Mount Union, but you cannot fault teams for working hard during the season and offseason to try to beat them. The product is getting better, so get a clue.
As has been said before, if you don’t want a team to win a national championship or conference championship, etc., there is one thing you can do to settle the argument without whining about it here. Beat them on the field (or court, rink, whatever, depending on the sport :))! Mount Union is not invincible. Just ask SJU, Ohio Northern, and Mary Hardin-Baylor. It can be done. You just have to earn it on the field.
Case closed. Good luck to all teams next season!
December 21st, 2006 at 10:25 am
dedragon…what are you smokin? Do you sell the stuff too? Jeez after two monkey stomps at the hands of UWW and SJU’s major improvement against them this past year(3 turnovers compared to 7)…I think that says enough…They play big boy football in the WEST, everyone knew whoever won the west region was getting a free pass to the Stagg Bowl after it was learned you had won against MHB…
St. John’s has problems finding teams to play…how about this, ask your coach to call SJU, to set up a game, in fact its been rumored that SJU would gladly help with travel expenses if you would like to come see the beauty of Collegeville on a September Saturday…
SJU will be one of the favorites in the West next year with a Sr quarterback, most of the offensive line back including All-American center Andrew Salvato, much of their defense back and a host of young talent just waiting to get on the field…its just a matter of re-loading
December 21st, 2006 at 10:35 am
UMHB plays Oct. 27 @ UWW. The Crusaders lose 10 players off of their 54 man play-off roster. The CRU only had 11 seniors on their full roster. On offense they lose 1 starter @ WR, Padron (back-up QB) and Freddy Rollins (back-up RB) plus Punter (All-American) and placekicker (All American). On defense they lose both starting tackles, a LB, Josh Kubiak (safety All American and biggest loss) and back-up strong safety. Also of note, CRU JV finished 8-0 in 06. Could 07 be the YEAR OF THE CRU?
December 21st, 2006 at 10:39 am
D-3…. NCAA; add 11th game…teams have bye week, maybe conference challenge, that way the NO-names would have a opportunity to upset the Mt. UNIONS of the football world. Sounds to simple/easy. All challenges/opinions should be left on the field of battle. FRANKLIN GRIZZLIES (9-1); left out on THE ROAD TO THE SALEM!
December 21st, 2006 at 10:46 am
D-3…. NCAA; add 11th game…teams have bye week, maybe conference challenge, that way the NO-names would have a opportunity to upset the Mt. UNIONS of the football world. Sounds to simple/easy. All challenges/opinions should be left on the field of battle. FRANKLIN GRIZZLIES (9-1); left out on THE ROAD TO SALEM!
December 21st, 2006 at 11:00 am
bottom line is Warhawk..set it up however you like…
it doesnt matter..the best teams will find a way to get it done…
and there will come a day when MUC is not winning the way they are now..and when that day comes, it will be because someone outworked them…and I wont have a problem with it…so dont be so smug with your post there, like you already know Im a big crybaby….every Mount fan has to know that there will come a day when this will end…are you for changing the format b/c you think its more fair to all teams, or because you just want to be entertained…
December 21st, 2006 at 11:02 am
And no…the same argument could not be used, b/c I think Mount could win in any format..
December 21st, 2006 at 11:55 am
Ohiofootball: Are you seriously telling me that St. John Fisher would’ve leapt from No. 16 to No. 4 without playing Mount Union and putting in a decent showing? That’s what I’m talking about.
Without that, I would project them somewhere down in the 8-10 range. They played No. 22, No. 15 and No. 11 to get to Alliance. Without the game against Mount Union they are nowhere near the top four.
December 21st, 2006 at 12:21 pm
Pat, if that is what you meant, then yes, I understand what you are saying about SJF. Of course, this is the post you responded to and your reply never stated SJF. Word massaging after the fact does little to bolster any perceived argument:
mainjack Says:
The 20th of December, 2006 at 9:27 pm
WIWarhawk
“So, just to make sure we understand what you are saying: Mount beats #2 WW, #3 Capital and #4 SJF. And you think they had the easiest draw in the tourney? What am I missing? WW didn’t beat anyone in the top 4. Mount beats three in the top four. Sorry, can’t buy that logic. ”
I don’t vote for these teams, so don’t blame me. When it comes down to the bottom line, the final rankings mean very little to a team unless they finish #1 or are ranked for the first time in school history or in a very long time. Not long from now, no one will care! Tell me, without cheating, who finished #5 in the polls in 2001. How about #9 or #11 or #18? You don’t know off the top of your head, do you? Why, because no one remembers and no one cares. If you want to debate this topic even further, you could propose each team play each other on a neutral site or something. I am done bickering over something so pointless.
December 21st, 2006 at 12:33 pm
dedragon:
Give us a break.
Wesley didn’t just “stumble”, it peed down its leg or, using a phrase I think I learned from our esteemed moderator “crapped the bed.”
Again.
It was 58-6 last season and easily could have been 66-zip this season.
Folks can say “It’s the matchups, it’s the matchups” over and over but tell me dedragon, how many times did Wesley even cross midfield?
December 21st, 2006 at 1:08 pm
VOJ,
I talked to two assistants at two IIAC schools this fall about playing SJU in a future year. One of them laughed and said, “There’s no way in [mild expletive] Jim would schedule us.” To say that they cannot find high profile opponents is like the school bully sitting alone on his front house because all his “friends” aren’t willing to give him the time of day.
I’d love to see Linfield or MUC or SJF or someone like that make the trip in to Collegeville, outside of the expected (by me) victory in the Bethel/SJU game, that might be a game worth making the drive for.
It’s not about the money, but the impression left on the other schools. At least according to two IIAC assistant coaches.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:18 pm
You’re missing the point. I wasn’t defending the way Wesley played in that game. It was obvious that Wesley didn’t belong on the field THAT day. My point is that if you judge one game, then you must also judge that other teams were defeated on TWO occassions. Your misguided interpretations were fueled by passion for Johnny Football and good for you. But, the fact remains is that Wesley only lost one game this year, all be it badly. How did your 4th ranked Johnnies lose to the 17th ranked Royals by two TD’s?
December 21st, 2006 at 1:29 pm
I agree with Pat except for one comment….. that it is getting a little boring….not at all. Trying to unseat Mount Union is an awesome task and could be harder next year than it was the last two years. The Warhawks felt that they were a better team this year but the Purple Raiders improved more. This struggle I believe is anything but boring…..teams must game plan to stop the numerous weapons Mount Union has and be cognizant that their legendary coach will change formations, plays , and philosophy to keep his opponent off balance. In the last two years our team has been a solid second best and unfortunately not played all that well in the Stagg Bowl but in talking with a few of our seniors after this game they attribute quite a bit of our poor performance to Mount Union’s excellence. I believe next year Mount Union will be there unless key players are injured and they will be even a better team…….I hope the Warhawks will be there again and if they are I will be there and I won’t be even a little bored…….
December 21st, 2006 at 1:35 pm
Pat, my roomate is handling the loss OK, I think the initial reaction on Saturday and Sunday was to be expected. He does want to thank you guys though for putting him on the All-region team when he wasn’t nominated by the coaches
I completely understand that a playoff system as I suggested will probably not happen, maybe in a perfect world, but then again in a perfect world, we probably wouldn’t need this thread.
As far as the new coach at Whitewater goes: I don’t think that Rick Willis was very good in his public forum, just wasn’t convincing enough as I saw it, his chances, I think are the lowest out of the four. Curt Wiese, from Marrietta, I think was very good yesterday, confident, didn’t skirt any questions and has a good system as far as academics and recruiting. I’d say he’ll be the guy right behind Stan. Lance Leipold is up later this afternoon, I haven’t heard anything about him withdrawing his name from any reliable sources (only on post patterns).
Zweifel is definatly still the popular choice out here, and our AD knows it. Though with Jagodzinski getting the job at BC I think that if Z doesn’t get this job, he’ll head out there, which would be pretty cool. He has been the one doing alot of recruiting the past few years, and is the reason we have alot of the talent we do, so it would be very tough to see him go.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:53 pm
As the old saying goes, this too shall pass.
Hobart went on quite a run from 1980-1994 winning 13 D3 lacrosse championships in 14 years (which IMO is a better comparison than the MUC/UCLA dynasty comments being bandied about on this site. Sure both squads were dominant, but UCLA had the 1960’s, the city of Los Angeles and scholarships to entice the absolutely best HS BB players in the country to go there. Hobart and MUC are small schools in tiny college towns in the middle of no-where that developed winning traditions with “true” student athletes).
MUC is having a great run right now, but I’d be surprised if it keeps going on into perpetuity (and fortunately I doubt MUC’s administration or the NCAA will change the rules of play in D3 FB making MUC consider going up divisions).
Besides, if you watched the Stagg, most fans would probably agree that Kehres didn’t out coach Bereowitz - UWW lost that game by not playing well (UWW’s QB really came up short) and allowing MUC to capitalize on UWW’s mistakes (like the UWW WRs regularly getting behind the MUC DBs only to see sure TD passes fly over their heads; and the punt block).
Still, I can’t really fault MUC for this since championship caliber teams typically make their opponents pay for their mistakes.
I think the rest of the pack is catching up to MUC. The fact that young SJF football program (only 20 yrs in the making) from the “weak East Region” was able to play with MUC for most of the game is a good indication of this fact. It’s just going to take another couple of years, but all sports dynasties eventually come to an end.
December 21st, 2006 at 3:11 pm
Not sure lacrosse is a great comparison — there are many fewer lacrosse teams and the field to beat is therefore much smaller.
December 21st, 2006 at 3:20 pm
i believe mount and UWW play in the regular season in 2008, don’t they?
December 21st, 2006 at 3:46 pm
Hobart lacrosse is also not a good example since they made the move to Division I in 1995, only two years after winning their 13th Div. III title in 15 tries. The team they lost to in the 1994 finals, Salisbury, went on to win five more titles. There have been only six teams that have won Div. III lacrosse titles in 27-year history of the championship (Hobart 13, Salisbury 6, Middlebury 3, Nazareth 3, Washington (Md.) 1, Cortland 1). If Hobart remained a Div. III school in lacrosse, that number would probably be lower.
December 21st, 2006 at 3:55 pm
buddy,
MUC plays a home and home with SJF in 08-09
December 21st, 2006 at 4:18 pm
I forgot to add, that yes, UMHB will be playing up here in the beautiful city of Whitewater next year. Not sure about MUC in ‘09, but I think mainjack cleared that up.
December 21st, 2006 at 4:21 pm
dedragon,
Well, two factors work against your argument.
SJU and Wesley played a common opponent a week apart. One was in the game until the final minute and one was never in it.
Also, the playoffs are a great gauge for determining rankings. sju’s road was far tougher than wesley’s. dickinson and carnegie mellon just weren’t very good, while sju defeated two unbeaten top-10 teams just to reach the final.
And you can’t just throw out Wesley’s effort against UWW . . . it was a telling effort.
Ryan: So what exactly was the point of the IIAC coaches? SJU’s record against that league is pretty impressive but how much does a team like Wartburg (with its annual playoff ambitions) get by playing Augsburg (even if the Auggies almost beat them a couple of years ago)?
SJU scheduled two WIAC NCs last year and has an OAC and WIAC team on the schedule for next year. While UWRF isn’t great, that UWEC was down this year was a bit of a surprise.
December 21st, 2006 at 5:24 pm
i cant belive these stupid comments…pat coleman doesnt even know what hes talkin about…..bethel is gonna win it all this year and they were way better the LAX…the refs cheated us out so we would of won and then we would of bet whitewater…then we would of beat st. johns cuz we beat them earilier in the year…we would of matched up better with mt. union with our smash mouth football….bethel would of beat mt. union no doubt…watch out for the royals next year…ROYALS 07 BABY!
December 21st, 2006 at 6:12 pm
Pat -
Fair point, but I still see don’t see comparing MUC to UCLA as a valid example. Too many significant differences btw D1 and D3.
Re: D3 lax, The field is certainly smaller (about 130-140 teams), but during 80-94, Hobart did play against a full slate of D1 (50-60) teams as well, so the overall field wasn’t much different.
December 21st, 2006 at 6:33 pm
labart your contention Mount Union’s run is almost over is your opinion. I happen to disagree and time will tell but I have been hearing what you are saying since 1997.
Anyway your contention Mount Union won in Salem because Whitewater did not play well is an argument fans of every sport that don’t know crap fall into to give a reason for a team losing. Maybe instead of Whitewater just missing on 40 yard passes they should have been throwing ten yard passes to the tight end. Maybe instead of trying to run wide on the smaller, faster Raider defense, they should have run at them. Maybe they didn’t have a punt blocked all year because they hadn’t faced a rush like that. After all the Raiders damn near got the one before.
I would contend the score could have been worse at halftime had Mount Union played as well as it did in the second half. The long kickoff return setting up Whitewater’s only touchdown and the fumble inside the 25 on the first drive was a TD each way under the logic you are using.
Mount Union has been winning championships for 14 years, if you go back and watch the past Stagg Bowls they won I’m sure you would come to your same conclusions. My opinion is they are pretty lame.
December 21st, 2006 at 7:30 pm
Purple Crush, do not count wesley out so fast. as D3Keith and dedragon stated they do not lose much and the change at qb is not expected to be as dramatic as some would think. I agree with dedragon, does wesley deserve to drop to 7 based on a bad game. some of the teams that leaped over them lost to someone they should not have during the season, wesley did not. everyone keeps talking about UMHB and how good they are, well wesley dominated that contest. the same excuses that UWW is making about their lose to MUC could be made by wesley, missed receivers and such, but you did not hear that from us. We were beaten by a better team that day. Repete is correct, wesley will be a strong force in the south next year.
December 21st, 2006 at 8:03 pm
???
I wasn’t saying MUC’s run is over. I was just trying to say that MUC is no longer absolutely destroying teams like they did in past seasons. That’s the problem with these posts - you can’t really put things in context w/o someone (esp fans with obviously biased POVs) reading too much into something written by another poster.
I think b/c of the standard of excellence MUC has set, the rest of D3 football has improved in order to play catch up.
December 21st, 2006 at 8:04 pm
Well Pat, I agree with you on one of your points: SJF does lose two great plaerys in Lang and Robinson. However, lets not forget that Robinson replaced a great rb in M. Myers and Lang replaced an All-Amercian in Fox. And I have no doubt that Josh Gottlieb and James Reile will follow in the footsteps of Robinson and Lang. If you remember, last season (’05) Robinson injured his shoulder and missed a good part of the season. And it was Reile who stepped in and rushed for over 1,000 yards.
Also, SJf has the rest of its offense returning next year. Kramer, the entire offensive line and all the skilled players return. Someone everyone has forgotten is a kid named Sean Nowicki. Nowicki was SJF leading receiver in the regular season, but he did not play against Rowan or MUC because he broke his leg in the Springfield game. So the way I see it, SJF offense will be even better next season.
As for the defense, they lose Lang, Greg Pyszczynski (DT) and Matt Maggio (DT). Other than that the rest of the defense also returns. And after allowing Kmic rush for 371 yards last year, I know that the underclassman will be working out hard this offseason to get bigger, faster, stronger, (and I know the other 233 D3 teams will be doing the same) so that never happens again.
I know that MUC will have another great team next season, however I also know that SJF will be better in ‘07 than they were in ‘06. I look forward to traveling to Alliance again in ‘07, but this time I hope the result will be different.
December 21st, 2006 at 8:08 pm
Yep, Jon. All you had to do was win at LAX, at UWW, vs. SJU, at Wesley, and vs. MUC, and the title would have been yours. You should explain to Steve Johnson just how easy it is to win in the playoffs against top-flight competition.
wesleydad, Wesley was simply confounding. When looking at another utterly non-competitive game at UWW, though, it’s hard to blame the voters for thinking that the other five teams rated ahead of Wesley would have beaten them.
December 21st, 2006 at 8:13 pm
dedragon and wesleydad
Purple Crush is just trying to get your dander up. He is hoping that beyond hope that Wesley will fall by the way side next year. Just think if Beavers, rumored to be returning, and Lee, don’t know his situation, come back what weapons Welsey will have!!! I too believe that Wesley deserves a top five spot but I don’t take much stock in final polls. The only one that matters is the last team that wins.
DEDragon and Wesleydad you should come to the ACFC page and post
December 21st, 2006 at 8:27 pm
You really think Robinson and Myers were interchangeable? I don’t. Do you think Reile and Robinson are interchangeable? If so, why didn’t you make the playoffs last year?
I think Robinson is a special, once-in-a-decade player and won’t be just plugged in for.
December 21st, 2006 at 9:07 pm
I agree with Pat. Robinson was a big time player. You just don’t replace talent like that every year. I was very impressed with him when I watched the Mount game. I think he was the only back to gain 100 on the Raiders this year. I wouldn’t assume you will replace him without any problem.
December 21st, 2006 at 10:35 pm
Maybe the problem is labart that you did not clearly say what you meant. I would be the first to agree Division III football is better today than it was 15 years ago overall and Mount Union probably has a small part in that. But your comments about the Purple Raiders winning their most recent championship only because the opponent played poorly is usually made by someone that has very little understanding of the game.
December 21st, 2006 at 10:47 pm
pa wesleyfan
the word is that beavers is returning this semester. hopefully, he has learned a lesson and will do his job in the classroom. he will certainly raise the level of the receivers with his presence. you mention an acfc page for posting, were do i find it?
December 21st, 2006 at 11:22 pm
well - i played d3 ball and have been a fan for almost 20 yrs. i am sure in your eyes however, that doesn’t mean anything.
keep drinking the purple kool aid.
December 21st, 2006 at 11:25 pm
Wow,
Ric came with the fire.
Labart, boards always lack context, and I know you cased it a little bit later, but you did say:
And I think those comments earned you everything Ric gave you.
Good points though, by you and a lot of people. No need to get into responding to everyone, but …
Re: Wesley at No. 7 … there are arguments to be made, but the strongest is that “pull effect,” that UWW’s domination of Wesley boosted some West Region teams who stayed close with UWW. All the teams ahead of Wesley were teams who stayed close with either UWW or MUC … not really sure what the argument is.
As for only having one loss, that could be a legitimate gripe … but they really only played one elite opponent, UMHB, as far as they went, and they won that game fair and square, but I wouldn’t necessarily say they dominated. Any game that’s within a TD in the fourth quarter is a good one to me.
I had Wesley 7th behind MUC, UWW, Cap, SJF, U-La Crosse and St. John’s.
Which of those teams do you think Wesley should be ahead of?
SJU_Nick had a pretty good post on the matter … and he also bothered to respond to crazy Bethel guy
Also, a lot of you have proposals to add 11th games, mix up the playoff regions, etc.
You’re forgetting that all of this stuff doesn’t come for free. Division III fans, if I’m not mistaken, couldn’t support the teams they root for by their ticket sales. Some places the game is free to get into. And it’s fine that way … but you have to accept the limitations that come with it.
That means there’s no way the Occidental-Whitworth pod plays the winner of the W&J-CNU pod … it’s never going to happen, not at this level.
If we went to the 11th game, BTW, there’s no way they’d allow the five rounds of playoffs.
I do wish the nine-game teams could all get a 10th though.
December 22nd, 2006 at 12:43 am
PA_wesleyfan,
I’m not trying to “get your dander up.” I just don’t think Wesley will be as good next year. Then again, I could be wrong. Warrick will be hard to replace, well, he can’t be replaced, he’s that good. He is the heart and soul of the offense. I do hope for a rematch because UMHB has 2 scores to settle. If Wesley makes it far enough to play UMHB the story will be much different. UMHB will win by 3 TD’S. UMHB has almost everyone back. 10 O AND 7 D. I could be wrong who know’s what will happen. I respect Wesley a great deal. I’ not trying to be a homer here. I predicted W 28 UMHB 10, and Wesley won by 14 instead of 18.
December 22nd, 2006 at 1:44 am
WiWarhawk -
I am late to this discussion. I know how you feel as a Brewers fan…I feel even worse as a Devil Rays fan. The thing is you cannot compare the MLB to NCAA D3 football in this regard. The big market teams of the MLB, the NY teams in particular, have huge financial advantages over their opponents. Whereas all other sports put some kind of cap on the large markets to keep the league competitive (the NFL goes too far in this regard, leaving nothing but parity), MLB just lets the same teams horde the talent every season. You might get different world series winners, but you cannot pretty much pencil in 3 or 4 of the same teams into the playoffs every season. Boring.
Now obviously colleges/universities have inherent advantages over one another. Some might have academic advantages, others large recruiting bases (Texas and Ohio come to mind), some financial advantages (while Cortland and Brockport have nice stadiums, they cannot exactly pump a lot of money into their sports programs as public schools). However none of these advantages are “unfair,” as I feel they are in MLB.
December 22nd, 2006 at 1:52 am
keith -
maybe you’re right, but i’ll stand by my opinion that what i saw was a uww team that played straight up with muc in the first half. they were certainly equals in talent and game planning.
at the start of the 2nd half uww had a chance to keep their opening drive going but their qb - instead of rushing for a 1st down that would have kept things going in their favor, sailed a pass over the head of an open receiver. the qb had the space to get the 1st down on foot and the time to complete the pass, he just chose to throw and flubbed it.
muc got the ball and scored. next drive uww missed hitting wide open throws to wrs who were several yards behind the muc db’s (normally a sign that the offensive team is beating the defense) that should have gone for scores and kept uww in the game. we all know what happened next.
i am not saying that muc wouldn’t have won the game, but uww certainly did not play to their potential based on the number of errors they made (i saw at least 3 open td passes or 18-21 pts that uww should have had if their qb didn’t lob the ball 10 ft above his open wrs).
if i recall correctly, several members of the forum (and not all uww fans btw), agreed (i think even pat did as well) that the qb play really hurt uww in the stagg bowl.
i guess my final point is simply that uww didn’t play as well as they could (and should). i didn’t intend that as a slight against muc - although clearly some muc fans here may (and did) take offense to that.
i am just saying that it’s possible to consider that although muc played a great game, their victory (as is the case in many football games; especially at a championship level when there really is no margin for error) was part them playing a great game and their opponent just played a good (not a great) game.
December 22nd, 2006 at 1:56 am
Sorry,
going back to the very first response to this.
Why? Because they are a North Region team and the 32 teams in our playoff system are chosen, then grouped by geography in four groups of eight.
The powers that be in Division III (schools, ADs and coaches have input — don’t blame everything on the NCAA) have decided that they are all about “fair access” to the playoffs. What that means is they want every team to start the season knowing they have a chance to win a championship on the field. Through the AQ system and the 32-team bracket, every team has that (at least technically, if not realistically), so they are satisfied with how the playoffs are run.
There is no interest that I am aware of of trying to “balance” the brackets/regions … which probably implies that the powers that be believe the best team in the nation would win the championship no matter how you set up the brackets, because they have to earn it on the field.
And there’s some pretty good merit to the ‘cream rises to the top’ theory.
December 22nd, 2006 at 2:04 am
I agree with Keith that you really have to break the D3 season into 2 parts if you want to enjoy it, unless of course you are a MUC fan. I was at the Cortland-Rowan game, with the NJAC (and ultimately the NCAA playoff birth) on the line. It was heart-wrenching, but a ton of fun. The following week the Cortaca Jug actually surpassed the excitement of the Rowan game.
While I was displeased with Cortland’s performance in the ECAC game, I was still thrilled with a 9-2 season. It became obvious once we lost our top 2 quarterbacks that we were no longer a serious national contender. I can live with that. And even if Smith and Miles had stayed healthy, and we were a serious national contender (like Fisher in 2006), the chances we would have beaten MUC are slim. Particularly playing in Alliance. Fisher probably did about as well as anyone in the country (short of Capital) could have done this season.
Yeah I’d love a few teams to step up and make the race for #1 actually interesting for a change. Is MUC’s run boring to a non-MUC fan? Well, to me it is. I watched the national championship game with only marginal interest, knowing it was just a matter of time before MUC pulled away. But it certainly isn’t “unfair.” They are just the best at what they do, by far.
I’m really torn by this topic because I have so much respect for MUC’s program and their coaching staff. I wish I could be a fly on the wall inside their war room for a few days to see how they pull this off every year. But on the other hand I would like to see my favorite team go into a season as a realistic threat to them, and I just do not foresee this anytime soon. And that is saying something, because Cortland has a very respectable program.
I do wonder however, how healthy it is for small college football to have the same team winning championship after championship. Well D3 lacrosse survived despite Hobart winning all but 1 national championship, but lacrosse was a much smaller spectacle back then. I’d think if Hobart were doing the same thing with all the teams that play D3 lax these days, it would turn a lot of people off to the sport. What is the point of following a sport where there is no suspense as to how it will turn out in the end? I ask this somewhat rhetorically, as I will always love D3 football.
December 22nd, 2006 at 2:29 am
Cortland,
I agree that the MLB comparison to D3 doesn’t fly, nor does Yankees to MUC (partly because the Purple Raiders actually finish the job!)
As you noted, there are advantages from one D3 school and conference to another, whether they be roster limits (100 in the WIAC; some elite schools have close to double that), existence/level of JV program, amount of full-time assistant coaches, practice limitations and redshirt rules (many of which have changed in recent years to create a more level playing field), differences in school commitment/alumni who donate/facilities, inherent advantages in recruiting (school cost, academic or athletic prestige, location)
and yet we can pencil several of the same teams in for the postseason each year too.
Part of the reason it’s not necessarily boring to me is the drama in the journey. There’s usually suspense, even for a consistent winner (as opposed to an astronomically consistent winner like MUC), in the chase for the AQ … there’s usually 1-3 rivals they’ll have to beat in close games, and then there’s fun in the early rounds of the playoffs, and some tight competition in the later rounds. In a 32-team bracket, nothing is certain.
Well, nothing except MUC will be one of the final four.
December 22nd, 2006 at 8:24 am
keith,
All true. It should be noted that you don’t need every single one of those advantages to be consistently competitive. Still, it would be interesting to index these and find out what schools come closest to reaching all of those marks and how that corresponds to victories (not that I’m volunteering …).
One of the funniest things I can recall was the ‘76 Stagg when there was an event before the game where the coaching staffs were introduced. Towson State introduced about 15 guys all in color-coordinated polyester gear. When it was SJU’s turn, it was basically JG and a couple other guys, including, I think, a brother in a cassock.
December 22nd, 2006 at 10:03 am
Pat- If you recall SJF did not make the playoffs in ‘05 because they lost their final game of the season against Alfred 14-6. And Robinson did play in that game.
I am not trying to take anything awat from Robinson. He is without a doubt the best rb in SJF history. However, I do think that Reile will do a great job next season. He is a little smaller than Robinson, but he makes up for his lack of size with quickness and speed. Also, the SJF offensive line did a great job of opening up some nice holes for the rb’s to run through. And since the entire o-line is returning next season, I think Reile will have a phenomenal season.
I do not think that it is getting boring that MUC keeps on winning year after year. I think it gives the other 233 teams incentive to improve their programs. I know for a fact that the ‘07 SJF team will be using their loss to MUC as motivation to get better next season.
CortlandFootball - I was not aware that you lost your top 2 qb’s. Is that why they did not make the National Playoffs? Cortland had such a strong team that it baffled me that they did not make the playoffs.
December 22nd, 2006 at 10:37 am
“i cant belive these stupid comments…pat coleman doesnt even know what hes talkin about…..bethel is gonna win it all this year and they were way better the LAX…the refs cheated us out so we would of won and then we would of bet whitewater…then we would of beat st. johns cuz we beat them earilier in the year…we would of matched up better with mt. union with our smash mouth football….bethel would of beat mt. union no doubt…watch out for the royals next year…ROYALS 07 BABY! ”
Jon, you better watch out or you’ll get banned to all the knuckleheaded threads.
Bethel is in the process of developing a nice schedule. They have had some success against St. John’s not only this year but also in the recent past. Their formula for beating SJU is ball control, no turnovers, and forcing a turnover or two by the Johnnies. I think this is the approach most teams should take with SJU but it is not that easy to do. Concordia has had some limited success with it also.
Although your program is coming along, your post is ridiculous and I think you know that. Rather than winning the Stagg Bowl, perhaps the Royals should concentrate first on (1) winning the MIAC, and (2) winning their first playoff game in school history. You’re bringing the MIAC win percentage in the playoffs down.
December 22nd, 2006 at 10:52 am
Bored with MUC?
Apparently SI is after affording the nine time champions a mere 5 lines in this week’s issue. Could Austin Murphy be lurking in the background…. ?
Merry Christmas all!
December 22nd, 2006 at 11:27 am
Well the last time I praised the Mount Union program, I got slamed. One, stop blaming Mount Union for them being so good. I am going to assume that most of the individuals that reply on this site are former players and/or coaches. Now it has been over 30 years since I stepped onto the field in pads but I am fairly confident that the steps to winning a championship are still the same. First of all as a player you need to get off your ass and get in the weight room and don’t just go through the motions. Work out everyday and work on every part of your body. Big chest/neck/arms with tooth pick legs don’t get it. When the 4th quarter gets here, it’s your legs that you will be depending on to carry you to the end of the game and not your biceps. Two, practice, practice and practice in your off time to work on things like speed, timing, form, execution, etc. 3. You must listen, you have to be dedicated, committed, and have that desire to knock the living crap out of someone on every play. I had a coach tell me once that you must play every play with 120% and with reckless abandonment. 4. Your school must develop a winning tradition in order to attract new recruits. (Mount Union does this now without any problem) 5. Your school must have qualified coaches who have that burning desire to win. Again, Mount Union has this down pat. These coaches need to know how to teach players to win, play, analysis, break down film, execute, etc.
I could go on and on, but I think you get the picture. Bottom line every school that plays Mount Union has the opportunity to have the same tools and abilities as MUC. MUC can be beaten, but you have to have your ducks in a row and play on all cyclinders in order to accomplish it.
Complaining & whinnying will not beat MUC. If you want your schools to be as good as MUC, then encourage them to start working now and establish the same standards as MUC has and build the program. There are more than 100 good DIII football players in this country and they are not all in Ohio. If you are good, you don’t care who you play. You obivisouly would rather play the best every game, but that is not going to happen, so don’t use excuses like schedules, recruitment, etc. Excuses are like butts, everyone has one and they all stink..
OK, I have said enough and now you can slap me around, some of you know who I pull for and believe me they are not anywhere near where Mount Union is now, but they want to be and they will play MUC again next year (and probably get spanked hard) but at least they are learning and willing to get on the field with the best.
December 22nd, 2006 at 11:36 am
purple crush
there is no arguing that warrick was a very good qb, he holds all the wesley qb records. he was a great leader, that is hard to replace. the thinking by those close to the team is that the projected starting qb has the ability to do the same things. the nice thing about all this discussion is that it will play out and we will see what the outcome is next year. wesley returns 9 on d and i think 7 or 8 on o, and if as mentioned earlier one of the additions is beavers then wesley will still be very good. i hope we get to play umhb again, it was a good game this year and would likely be a very good game again. as far as winning by 3 tds, i think that is wishful thinking on your part, your team only scored 3 tds this time around and 1 was a fumble return. have a good holiday.
December 22nd, 2006 at 12:32 pm
Keith,
You’re right on about the differences in advantages between schools and conferences. Still, it should be noted that you don’t have to have all of those advantages to succeed. Whitewater has done pretty well with the 100-player limit. SJU does it without a JV …
It would be interesting to develop an index of the difference and see how they correlate to success … not that I’m volunteering. Some of the stuff, such as location, is pretty tough to quantify.
Your post did make me think back to a Stagg long ago. When the Towson St. (now I-AA) was at a pre-game function they introduced all the assistants, about 15 of ‘em, all dressed in color-coordinated polyester. Then came SJU, JG introduced a couple of coaches — including if my memory — serves a brother in a cassock. Great game, SJU blew 28-0 zip lead to win 31-28 in final second field goal.
Off the subject and probably posted elsewhere … but several Wesley references in a Washington Post story today
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/21/AR2006122101569.html
December 22nd, 2006 at 1:23 pm
sorry for the repeat post. didn’t see the earlier version poxst.
December 22nd, 2006 at 2:28 pm
In response to Robinson at SJFU, remember we ourselves had a very good running back a couple of years back in Colin Burns and I would say that we were able to replace him when he had to stop playing football. Though I have never seen Robinson play, remember guys, good (or great backs) can be replaced by just as good or even better backs.
December 22nd, 2006 at 2:34 pm
SJFC81
The entire O-line is not returning. They are losing their Center and their LG to graduation.
December 22nd, 2006 at 3:04 pm
theoriginalupstate - I know that the center and LG are not returning (Sefcik and Todd - both outstanding lineman). However, SJF rotated those positions with underclassmen. So, even though the “starter” is not returning, they do have players that saw as much time as the “starter” coming back.
December 22nd, 2006 at 3:15 pm
labart when you wake up from your nap (coma) maybe you will realize Mount Union did not play a great first half, as you mentioned a couple times. For someone that has been around the game as long as you claim you certainly should know there are missed opportunities in every game and you certainly have tunnel vision for mentioning UWW’s and ignoring the fact Mount union fumbled the ball inside UWW’s 25 on its first drive and allowed a kickoff return to the four-yard line for UWW’s only touchdown. By your very, very ignorant logic it could (should) have been 21-6 at halftime. Man, sorry dude but I just call them like I see them. And what I see is a guy that lacks enough focus to actually see what happens in a game. Either that or you are so biased you are unable to see it.
December 22nd, 2006 at 3:17 pm
I really cannot blame MUC for being so successful. They are a model program to what everybody aspires to be, and are playing by the same rules as everyone else. That they are good at it is a credit to them.
What I find most impressive is how the North region has not found a way to at least hold in check Mount Union’s dominance over the past 10 years. That nobody in-region has been able to beat MUC in the playoffs is the biggest deal in my mind– they are always championship contenders (deservedly) in part because their region has not yet been able to knock the champions off before they get to the Stagg Bowl– after all, they have had to win 2-3 games over that time per year to get out of the region, and nobody has been able to do it.
In the past four years, while Mount has been champions twice, some very good MUC teams also went home without the hardware twice, so it isn’t as though they are so far above the rest of the D3 elite; but I don’t get why their region, who geographically should be recruiting the same players and fostering the same rivalries, cannot be more consistent in knocking them off. It’s a credit to MUC for being so dominant, but also a knock on the other North Region teams.
I’ll probably catch it for how Capital stayed close in the playoffs the past two years, and their run a few years ago through the North region, so I’m not oblivious to the strength of that region (and we can debate the merits of that, I’m sure). But the North region has essentially 13 chances to knock off MUC every year (regular season and playoffs) while the rest of the country gets two– in the past four years the North region is 1-47 against MUC; the rest of the country is 2-7.
December 22nd, 2006 at 5:27 pm
One of the original questions Pat said he was asked a lot was “Isn’t it boring if the same team wins all the time?” What is boring about greatness? If anything is boring it’s parity. Would everyone be happier if we just threw all the D3 football teams in a hat and pulled out a name to determine the champ? That’s what parity is. Everyone with an equal chance. Watching 32 different mediocre teams battle for a National Championship every year would not be exciting in my opinion.
Only a handful of teams can say they’ve beaten Mount Union during this run. And those teams will forever be able to say they beat the best there ever was. And isn’t that what it’s about? Mount Union has obviously been able to stay at the top longer than Augustana did in the 80’s but eventually like all dynasty’s it will end. Watching to see who will dethrown the champ is what makes it so much fun to watch.
December 22nd, 2006 at 5:45 pm
this mount fan wasn’t bored, because it was certainly no foregone conclusion mount would even make it to the finals, let alone win. this year’s team had flaws (pass defense, passing game at times, inordinate number of penalties). it had to beat an very, very strong team twice. it had to beat an excellent UWW team in the finals a second straight year, with UWW having the added incentive of winning one for its retiring coach.
this one was not as much of a surprise as last year’s, but i never accepted that it was a given.
December 22nd, 2006 at 6:16 pm
sjfc81–I saw Reile play once in 05 against Brockport-he had something like 330 total yards and 3 tds and I remember thinking- wow- if this kid is the back-up how good is the starter.But I’m pretty sure he is a senior and this was his last year.
December 22nd, 2006 at 6:59 pm
Go get’um Rick !!
December 22nd, 2006 at 7:09 pm
Can “The Mount” do it AGAIN in 07′?? Any thoughts??
December 22nd, 2006 at 8:29 pm
6th string, he has Junior eligibility. So he could be back if he wanted to be back.
December 22nd, 2006 at 10:15 pm
Ya Ric I guess part of me was trying to be funny but I’ll bet MUC would have been just a bit more nervous facing the Johnnies. I played for John and have been living in Massachusetts for almost 30 years and I get a kick out of the people who profess to know football. Not that Minnesota football can stack up to Ohio football as a general rule. But I do think both St. John’s and Mt. Union would have had a field day with the likes of Springfield, Curry, and obviously St. John Fisher. Good football is good football and there is nothing like D3 football anywhere in the country. I hope Coach Kehres and John G. get their rematch next year. I’m sure MUC will be loaded again and my soureces in Collegeville say they have a good team coming back. Maybe we’ll see you in Salem Ric???
December 22nd, 2006 at 11:56 pm
SJFC81 -
Actually Cortland lost its top 3 starting quarterbacks!
But it was the first 2 that made the difference. In the RPI game, we played a 4th string freshman.
Was it the reason we missed the playoffs? Well, in a roundabout way, it probably was. I don’t think the NCAA committee took our QB situation into consideration, as has been suggested by some Cortland fans. However anyone who was at the Rowan game saw how poor our offense moved the football with our 4th stringer at the helm, and yet it took an OT touchdown to beat Cortland in Glassboro. With our first stringer (Smith) in the game, we probably win, and we make the playoffs at 10-0. Most likely as the #1 seed too, which is quite ironic. Win in OT, and we are the #1 seed. Lose in OT, and we are out completely. Ouch.
In the end, we did not deserve to be in the playoffs, so no complaints here. With the amount of key injuries sustained, Cortland was not the same team in week 11 that they were in mid season. Yeah, we would have smoked the NEFC winner. But after that I have my doubts. We were probably about even with Rowan and Wilkes in terms of overall quality at the end, and that certainly wasn’t enough to win at Fisher.
December 23rd, 2006 at 2:33 am
Keith or Pat, just a quick question, a bit off topic, and mayne not the right thread here, but I signed up for a screen name on post patterns about a month ago and still haven’t gotten a verification email, it still says it’s coming. Is that normal for that to happen or is it just me and my outlandish posts on here that is preventing me from getting verified?
December 23rd, 2006 at 3:48 am
We verify all of them by hand, but the process takes no more than 18 hours.
If you use free e-mail you pretty much get what you pay for. They don’t deliver all of your e-mail to you.
December 23rd, 2006 at 8:56 am
D3Keith - Two NFC East opponents (on the road) down……..one to go!! Look for me behind the Eagles bench at the 50 yard line. I’ll have my Swarthmore sweatshirt and my Eagles hat proudly displayed!!
Some people have no problem sitting on the bench for a few years and possibly starting for a year or two (or never starting!!) for the trade off of being associated with a “winner”. Other people like to take on the challenge associated with creating their own success, attempting to knock off the King and maybe getting the chance to start for three or four years. The Mount’s competitors need to find STUDENT-athletes with the heart and drive of the latter…….not the “plug and play” of the former.
In business, you need to find those individuals willing to take on the huge challenge of going up against the Microsoft’s and the Intel’s and the Yahoo’s (think Google, Red Hat and AMD)………versus those individuals going along for the ride at the dominant company’s!!
We used to have a chant at Swarthmore (our football team was quite poor) which is also common at the Ivy League schools as well…….”That’s alright, that’s ok, you’ll be working for us someday”!!
Step up and take on the challenge of knocking off the top dog and going against convention professionally as well. The rewards are far greater than you could possibly imagine if you’re part of the success!!
Happy Holidays To One And All………..and don’t forget DIII wrestling……where we do “step up” and actually beat our DI competitors quite often!!!
December 23rd, 2006 at 10:10 am
CortlandFootball, your Dec 22nd 11:56 pm (CST) post describes how fine the line is between the top programs in D3.
In 2003, when there were only 3 Pool C bids, East Texas Baptist was the ASC tri-champion and earned the bid by one point on the point differential tie-brekaer. That one point was an OT PAT attempt that was not kicked. HSU and UMHB stayed home.
ETBU beat defending Stagg Bowl finalist Trinity in OT, then lost at (#1 seed and a tragedy-inspired) Lycoming in OT, which lost by 4 to Bridgewater. (That Bridgewater met MUC the next week in another story.)
HSU, UMHB, Trinity, ETBU, Lycoming and Bridgewater, 6 teams, were not separated by a TD. The “take-home life lesson” for our student-athlete friends from this example iand Cortland 2006 is that the team sport of football requires the ultimate of effort from the proverbial “last man” on the roster.
I suspect that Cortland’s off-season will be one of the best in the school’s history.
Merry Christmas to all. “Peace on Earth and Good Will to Men.”
December 23rd, 2006 at 11:13 am
Enough of this MU talk. Whitewater handed them the game with its own mistakes. If UWW gets a solid motivated coach look for them to be a regular in Salem or wherever the game is. With the facilities they have there and the proximity to Madison, Milwaukee, and Chicago there is a rich talent pool that needs to be tapped. There was no excuse for the 5-5 and couple of losing seasons they had in recent years. If I was MU I would savor this success because UWW maybe become the Beast of the West!
Why hasn’t LK tried to make jump up. Wouldnt anyone in that position want to take the next step?
December 23rd, 2006 at 12:01 pm
Flush the Johnnies, There are a large number of people in this (D3) community who think that Coach Kehres has reached the pinnacle of amateur athletics/football here in D3.
I think that the next step for him is actually down.
Analyzing the “Behavioral Systems” and/or “Management Systems” that we see in the Kehres method can teach many of us how to do it best. His student-athletes, all 180-200 each year who are going thru the “Kehres System”, are learning incredible life lessons that they can employ when they “turn Pro in life”.
December 23rd, 2006 at 12:24 pm
Flush, you have a very good point that with our proximity to those cities and our recent success we should be able to get quality talent. But I actually Coach Zweifel said it best in his public forum yesterday. The only thing holding us back is the numbers. As Ralph just stated, MUC gets almost 200 student atheletes playing football year in and year out, we only get 97 (which is maybe even going down because of title IX). Their freshmen and JV play 10 games a year, ours? We only have one JV team that plays about 3 games a year. It is much tougher to develop players in the system with that working against us. Those couple of things really work in MUC’s (and any other private school for that matter) favor and work against us (and pretty much any public school). We will have to see how the new coach handles this, I think Z had the best plan for it, at least the only one who actually stated it in that we need to get those big play guys who can change the game just like that (ala Stanley, Beaver, Jacobs, Kleppe, Jordan Wells, etc…)
I still agree with you, judging by the young talent I have seen this year, we are poised to make a bit of a run, maybe not like MUC’s but still respectable.
PS, Pat, I used my school email when I registered for Post Patterns, and not my hotmail, so I don’t know if that’s the difference that you’re talking about?
December 23rd, 2006 at 1:31 pm
Contact me via e-mail with details — better than discussing it here in the open.
December 23rd, 2006 at 1:51 pm
Errata re: Post 10:10 AM CST. Lycoming WR Ricky Lannetti became ill after the ETBU game and died before the Bridgewater game. Sorry.
December 23rd, 2006 at 2:30 pm
U-Dub-Dub, I would think that a coach can only keep about the Top 100 involved anyway. The loss of redshirting means that there are even more slots open for the offseason program anyway.
I would also say that the “character” and the motivational charcteristics are the distinguishing feature between #100 and #101 and even “#127″ on the roster, and not the 40-times, or the vertical leap or the bench press.
You cannot deny that the WIAC is an institutional anomaly inside D3. Aside from the NJAC, no other predominantly public college conference is as dominant among the 20+ conferences in D3.
In the mid 1970’s, the conferences comparable to the WIAC dominated NAIA Division I. These included the Lone Star Conference (whose members are now in D1 and D2) and numerous public schools from disbanded conferences.
http://naia.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/naia-m-footbl-body.html
See pages 9, 10 and 11 above.
The public college institutional peers of the WIAC (WSUC) from the 1970’s and even the early 1980’s are all playing D1 or D2 now. Reviewing those archives demonstrates that the WIAC has sought and executed a strategy that allows it to dominate D3 with all of the resources that it can summon. IMHO, the facilities and alumni/fan base from which the WIAC schools can draw more than offsets any roster restrictions.
As for Texas, I would hate to be competing against the current D2 and D1AA’s that McMurry, Sul Ross State and Howard Payne played against in the Lone Star Conference in the 1960’s and 1970’s.
December 23rd, 2006 at 4:26 pm
“I would think that a coach can only keep about the Top 100 involved anyway.” Not sure exactly how you meant this Ralph. If you meant it to say that they can only really play 100 on their JV and freshmen teams. To that, I heard, I believe from Coach Zweifel in his public forum yesterday, that they have 2 freshmen teams and a JV team (or two JV and one Frosh) with all of them playing about 10 games a year.
Or if you were trying to say that the head coach trying to become personally involved with more than 100 players is tough (which I would have to agree with you), but you also have to remember two things, that 1. you can not replace game experience and competition with another color Jersey and 2. assistant coaches will help alot. I agree that charecter and not intangibles are the difference between #100 and #101 (the guy that doesn’t make the team). But wouldn’t you rather have the guy with charecter AND the guy with the impressive intangibles? Who wouldn’t? What the extra players and JV teams help with is helping that guy with the intangibles build charecter or the guy who has great charecter work on his technique among other things.
I agree with you that the WIAC is an anomally among public schools in D3 football. And I know that part of that is that Madison is the only D1 school in the state for football. Even though there are other scholorship schools leaking into this state, that is definately a competative advantage for the WIAC when it comes to the rest of D3 football.
December 23rd, 2006 at 5:03 pm
MUC85…You have to think that as long as LK is around they will be in the mix. I remember going to the 93 game and thinking ”WOW” this will never happen again. Little did I know huh?? When will it end?? Who knows? Alot smarter people than me still don’t have that one figured out! I will say this…I think D3 has really gotten so much better fron then till now. You see alot of the same teams from that time frame but look at all the teams now. I think thats fantastic, and it speaks volumes about the other schools and their commitment to reach the top.. All should be proud!
December 23rd, 2006 at 5:47 pm
Mount Union does not have two freshman teams plus a JV team. They have a Varsity schedule and a JV schedule and that is it.
I do think being able to have 200 players to start the season does help, because you are bound to get the diamonds in the rough and the late bloomers that a school with only 100 players can’t afford to keep on their roster. But I think that mattered more in the early years of the “dynsasty”. As of late, the tradition and excellence of the program probably has more to do with better players coming to MTU.
I have seen quotes from players who say that they are either going to “walk on” at a DI school or come to MTU. But, I guess that probably happens with a lot of D3 schools that are good (JCU, BWU, ONU, CAP in the OAC).
That is the second time I have seen a coach at UWW make that statement though. Berez did it in the post game conference also.
Finally, Flush is back. Only took a week to come back after those ridiculous predictions on the Stagg bowl didn’t come true. Did it ever cross your mind that it was MTU causing UWW to make those mistakes? I also agree that UWW had a bad game plan that they didn’t get away from (sweeps instead of downhill running and deep passes instead of underneath routes to that big TE).
December 23rd, 2006 at 9:27 pm
Flush the king of progronticators is back. ALl hail the king. I think from your statements you must have watched a different game than the rest of us.
December 23rd, 2006 at 10:38 pm
U-dub-dub, thanks for the response.
How many teams does UWW have?
In the ASC, I know that HPU JV, HSU JV, McM JV, plus D2 ACU JV and Cisco JC play 8 games in a double round robin league. This league works very well, because the HPU trip to Abilene in the farthest and is only 80 miles. McM, HSU and ACU all are located in Abilene. Cisco is only 40 miles east of Abilene.
Texas Lutheran scheduled 5 games this year. They played 2 of 3 with Trinity and had 2 scheduled with UMHB.
The UMHB website refers to a JV coach but I find no results or schedule.
Sul Ross State only has a varsity, but seems to accommodate the players who wish to play football. (Alpine, TX is 5 hours from its nearest opponents.)
ETBU, MissColl and LaCollege do not mention JV programs.
I have heard complaints/lamentations about the paucity of playing time that the JV’ers get from the parents in some of the larger ASC programs, especially larger than McMurry’s. That was the main concern that I had. How do you get meaningful playing time beyond the first 50-55 on the varsity and then 2 strings for each platoon on a JV (44 players)? There is your 100.
I will say that the success that the WIAC has is the forward-thinking of the conference to maintain the lineup parity. That probably builds all programs, in turn strengthening the WIAC in general.
December 23rd, 2006 at 11:10 pm
I think it’s great that there is so much passion for D3 and support for favorite teams.
It’s fun to play what if, but the reality of it all is that is nearly impossible to claim one team would beat another based on who they played previously, because it’s often the result of match ups. For instance, in my opinion, Garcon is the single most reason that MUC beat UWW the last two years. UWW’s db’s just couldn’t match his speed and athleticism. I’m not saying UWW wins if Garcon doesn’t play, but I do believe we would have been in for one of the all time classic Stagg Bowls otherwise. I asked this in a previous post but don’t know if it was answered- Was Garcon a prominant part of the MUC game plan in the previous playoff games like he was against UWW? My hat is off to MUC as they just seem to be amazingly disciplined. For the record, I am an ex-UWW player and I believe the better team won.
December 24th, 2006 at 2:02 am
Ralph, UWW has just what you said the 55 man and the one 44 JV team. However, they only are allowed to play a certain percent (33%?) of the varsity schedule, which leaves them at three games.
Kirasdad, thank you for that info on only one team, kinda throws a kink in my little theory; but I think you can agree that those ten extra games by the time one is a Junior can not hurt those players, aside from any kind of injury. I agree with you on the assesment that MUC’s success has certainly helped the recruiting process, and I can only hope that it does the same for UWW. So far, judging by some major contributions we had from some frosh this year (Wells, Gifford, and Hunt) it has.
Ralph, as far as the lineup parity in the WIAC, I THINK they have it set at 100, but we, as a single university, have had to cut those numbers in recent years because we got into some heat with title IX a few years back, as I learned in coach zweifels class (btw, best class I have ever taken, they need to at least keep him here to teach).
December 24th, 2006 at 4:16 am
U-dub-dub,
You are welcome “for that info on only one team”, but I don’t have knowlege of other teama and you are the one who posted the mis-information on MTU:
“To that, I heard, I believe from Coach Zweifel in his public forum yesterday, that they have 2 freshmen teams and a JV team (or two JV and one Frosh) with all of them playing about 10 games a year.”
Also, I believe that the numbers really work themselves out over time. This years MTU Roster has:
121 Freshmen
29 Sophomores
40 Juniors
27 Seniors
So, as the seasons go on, the ones that stay are fairly well shittled down to the true players with passion. I suspect a lot of the Freshmen probably come in thinking they are going to dominate their first year, and find out that the playing level at MTU is a lot more competitive than they thought. It still does give the team the advantage of seeing that many more players and I do agree the more there are, the better the odds of finding a player that was overlooked by others.
But with that many underclassmen and only one JV schedule, they don’t get a lot of “game experience” to display their talents either.
I wonder how many players transfer out after their first year to other football schools because they just want to play, and not spend another 2-3 years on the bench?
December 24th, 2006 at 1:38 pm
D3Football-
Garcon is one of the main reasons we are having this thread. Keep in mind Garcon did not start his career at Mt Union. He was a receiver for Norwich, and flat out transferred to Mt Union after his freshman season. Nothing wrong with that of course, as it was his decision 100%. From what I read, he pretty much introduced himself to Mt Union - the