I didn't get a chance to watch the Central game (the old man was there though) but I was able to catch a good chunk of the 2nd half on the radio. From the sounds of it, UWO just had the size and experience to take the game over. My dad seemed to think they had TEs (based on their size) lined up on the outside and the secondary couldn't match up. That being said, despite it being a mark in the loss column, you have to paint this as a step forward for the team. Hanging with the #12 team in the country (one of those damn state schools, as my dad refers to them) is definitely something to build off of. I also may be the only CUI poster to not have commented on the uniforms but I have to say, I like the look. Maintains that same classic style but adds a little bit of modern flair. Very sharp.

Quote from: D3Dutchman on August 27, 2013, 09:18:43 PM

Quote from: notlongago on August 26, 2013, 11:50:33 PM

Quote from: D3Dutchman on August 26, 2013, 11:14:34 PM

Quote from: Fannosaurus Rex on August 26, 2013, 03:47:05 PM
Central has its 2013 roster up on its web site.

When I look at the roster, my first thought is that they might lack a little size.  Then I pull up the rosters of other IIAC teams (Coe and Wartburg), and I really don't think that holds true in comparison to the competition...at least not with an unscientific eyeball test.  Then I pulled up the two gold standards (MU and UWW), and it appears that all 3 of arguably our best programs in recent history lack size in comparison (especially in comparison to UWW, and especially in the trenches). 

Has this always been the case?  I went to look for some of my old media guides from the early 2000's and I'll be damned if I could find any of them.  I'm fairly certain those Central teams had more size in the trenches.  Has anyone else noticed a trend towards rosters with less size, or am I wrong on this (I very well could be...us old timers have a way of thinking we were bigger and badder than we really were)?

Size certainly isn't everything, and I know there is a difference between size and "good size."  That said, it's nice to have the right kind.

I don't know if I would consider the central line small this year. They will all go between 265 and 295 (which is bigger than the past couple of years) Not to mention the type of offense central runs requires athletic lineman capable of moving, not just big bruisers.

I believe good coaching and fundamentals will more than make up for 10-20 lbs.

Agreed on your second point.  I think footwork/technique are key when you are trying to evaluate line play.  Obviously having both size and good technique are best, but you can't always have your cake and eat it too. 

Ferentz (the O-line guru himself) often has a slightly smaller line in comparison to the competition, and yet Iowa's lines are generally at least above average and at best excellent.   Again, just an eyeball test and an observation.

Welcome back Reaper94.

Thanx for the welcome back! I would certainly agree that Central has had smaller lines in recent years than some of the Kac teams. I remember being on the scout team and having to come up on run support against guys like Brandon Sowers, John Brees, and Ike Hammerly and getting absolutely trucked. Same thing with the starting D-Line. I knew I was not destined for any sort of success when I showed up to that first camp due to my size alone. That being said, hasn't Central's offense been rather prolific in the last few years (I've been out of the loop)? Maybe the smaller lines are working?

Hey, whats up guys? Back on the board after a few years and a different moniker. Central DB 02, 03, and 05. Missed half of 03 and 04 with an ankle injury. After CUI, there were a few government paid expeditions to the less desirable spots of SW Asia and now I'm finally back in Iowa and able to take in a full IIAC season. Gotta say that the new Central unis, while not revolutionary, look pretty good...