Quote from: Matt Barnhart (kid) on January 16, 2008, 08:51:18 AM

Quote from: skoaltrain on January 15, 2008, 08:56:07 PM[...] Llamaguy? Peggy? Chris? Matt? Snake? You guys still out there?

Oh yes, I'm still here. Just having 'deep' ODAC football thoughts to myself, one of which I'll share...

Perhaps Bridgewater has dropped back to being an average team like they were in 1999, instead of the ODAC getting better the past couple years?

In other words, most of us (coaches, players, fans) have been saying over the last couple years that the conference has stepped it up closer to the level of what Bridgewater accomplished from 2001 to 2005. Really?

BC went undefeated (30-0) in the ODAC during those years, and won nine playoff games over that span. The three non-BC ODAC champs since 2000 tell a different story...

2000: Emory & Henry (5-1 ODAC) loses 38-14 to Western Maryland (first round)
2006: Washington & Lee (5-1 ODAC) loses 42-0 to Wilkes (first round)
2007: Hampden-Sydney (5-1 ODAC) loses 45-17 to Wesley (first round)

I have a feeling that BC just isn't performing as well as they used to, and when that happens, naturally the conference will get more competitive. Sure, the conference is more interesting with any team capable of beating another on any day, but BC set a standard for competing outside of VA, NC, and DC. And that clearly isn't happening anymore.

So in my mind, BC has dropped back and rejoined everyone else in competing for conference titles and nothing more. I sure hope that changes over the next couple years!

Absolutely agree.  To take this arguement a step further, I would argue that this year's HSC team that won the ODAC couldn't hold a candle to the Ricca qb'd squads.  Problem is, BC isn't nearly as good as it was those years either........

Quote from: allsky7 on October 23, 2007, 08:59:06 AM

Quote from: Oil Can on October 23, 2007, 07:58:19 AM

Quote from: ToddEandH on October 22, 2007, 08:27:52 PM
The ODAC is a very competitive league but I wounder how long it wll take for us to get another team in the finals. The Bridgewater team that went was a very special team with some great playmakers.  Lutz was a winner at QB. I just don't see the talent level today getting anybody to the next level soon.

I've seen a boat load of D3 games the last 8 years, including a (lesser) boatload of D3 playoff games.  The current edition of ODAC football does not strike me as having any one team that could make a serious run deep into the playoffs.  Although the league is more balanced, record wise, the teams I've seen firsthand all have flaws that can be exposed in a playoff run.  I am still to see W&L, Macon and CUA, so I shouldn't lump them in just yet, and the non-ODAC teams I've seen this year have been less than steller, but we'll see.  Playoffs, particularly 2nd and 3rd round games, reveal beasts!

Doesn't mean I don't want to see an ODAC team (or 2) represent well

     I agree. I have only seen a couple of ODAC games so far this year. My gut is the ODAC rep could win one...two tops. I will see the 2nd tier of the USA South this weekend and at least one more ODAC match up. The Stagg Bowl is on the calendar but hopefully a first round playoff game will be close by. My only in person experience with teams making it deep in the playoffs is MU and WW last year and the year before. Other than the 2001 BC team, the Chris Warren Ferrum team, and the 1977 Tiger team, no ODAC or USAC team I have ever seen can compete with these two. No shame there though....there are dozens that fit into that category.   
     BTW....IMHO, the Chris Warren/Freddie Stoval Ferrum team (year escapes me) was talented enough to win a NC. I saw them lose to a solid, fundamentally sound, but beatable Union team. Ferrum just couldn't hold on to the football. Guess that's why they play the games.  8)

It's difficult to see and judge a team's real potential in one viewing.  Remember that '01 BC team needed overtime to defeat a 5-5 W&L team and had to hang on in the last minute after nearly blowing a 28-point lead at 5-5 HSC.  In contrast, the '03 team rolled through the South region on the backs of the defense before getting demolished 66-0 by Mt. Union in the semis.  The '01 team did have talent, but they also had "moxie" and an inate ability to pull out wins in the 4th quarter even when they weren't necessarily playing well. 

My point is only that it's nearly impossible to predict what could happen week-to-week much less to predict how well a team could do versus unknown competition.  That said, I think this year HSC is a team that can scheme very well and cause problems but I don't think they have quite the athletes to go far.  In the OCAC, I still think BC is the only team who really could go on a deep run based on talent alone.  However, I haven't yet seen that same "moxie" in this year's team that we had in '01.

Quote from: ToddEandH on October 21, 2007, 08:49:01 AM


Question of the day? How many more wins will it take Bridgewater to get to .500 against E&H in the series?

Answer:  BC needs exactly one less win than it needed last Friday, and six less wins than it needed seven years ago.  And counting......

Quote from: TheEHC52 on October 10, 2007, 02:09:24 PM

As for cruising the Dairy Queen parking lot, that won't happen until after the game on Saturday.  Wednesdays have historically been reserved for cow tipping.  Let me know the next time you're in the area though and I'll take you snipe hunting.

That's funny.  You won't get me on the snipe hunt though (I saw the Cheers episode where Norm and Cliff got Woody on that one........). 

Quote from: TheEHC52 on October 10, 2007, 01:44:28 PM


(read "didn't stand on the sidelines praying to get on the field")

Just curious what you were referring to by this statement?  If you would like to compare football credentials we certainly could...

Again, as far as current players and teams go, we'll see over the next few weeks.  Have fun watching game film with your ex-coaches in the meantime.  Don't you SW VA guys have a Dairy Queen to cruise or something?

Quote from: Matt Barnhart (kid) on October 08, 2007, 11:21:34 PM
We're a very reactive board. Meaning, we don't post much prior to the games, but we sure do talk about them afterwards.

Are we just being careful fans since the race is so close this year?

I'm no more "careful" than ever..........but marriage, job, and grad school have seem to have taken much of my time previously devoted to message boards......

I like the E&H guy who said he watched the BC/HSC game film and concluded that BC is not a very good team.  Yeah, we'll see next week.  And since when do "recent grads" get access to opponents game films?!?  10-1 he's full of it and never saw any tape.   

Guilford first..........obviously we're in do-or-die mode from here out.  Hopefully with two weeks we've made adjustments to correct holes that we're exposed at HSC.  I'd give almost anything to see us come out aggresive on defense like in the old days. 

And for the record, I could not care less how many fans Emory wants to claim they have at home games. 

Quote from: Snakehandler on August 27, 2007, 02:47:33 PM
David Letterman's Top Ten Reasons why HSC kept their starting QB and RB out of the CNU scrimmage.

#10  They took a day trip to shop for sport coats
#9    Overheard CNU during pregame talking about cheap shotting the star players
#8    Must think they will blow through JHU, they can use that game as a warm up
#7    They are holding out for plaid uniforms
#6    Hang nail
#5    Thought it was a road game, last saw them tanning at Va Beach
#4    Saw a guy that looked like Reggie Jackson in the stands, thought it might be Kmack scouting for RMC
#3    They didn't make weight
#2    Could'nt find their skirts
And the number one reason is........
That's Marty ball baby!!!

That's funny.

Quote from: abnrgr on February 01, 2007, 01:36:55 AM

It was a FIGHT. a damn fight. has no one ever got punched in the face. I have several times. Big deal.  Sounds like somebody was talking some smack not willing to stand on their hind legs and defend it.

I've been a football player and (a long, long time ago......) got in a few fights.  But never once did I get together with 11 of my teammates and participate in a racially motivated beating of three kids.  No matter how much smack those three kids talked, that is bush league all the way. 

And as far as "standing on their hind legs" goes, from the pictures of that linemans back in the one article that was linked it looks like the three kids got some descent shots in before they got sent to the hospital. 

Sorry for the harsh response but saying something like this is "no big deal" is an idiotic statement. 

-Miz

Good luck to the Gererals tomorrow.  Enjoy it guys, and make some noise for the ODAC!!!

For my part, I will wear a collared shirt between the hours of noon and 3pm. 

Quote from: WLU78 on November 10, 2006, 09:17:36 AM

"Statistics are like a bikini, what they reveal is suggestive but what they conceal is vital"  I can't remember the name of the guy said this.

That is really funny.

Quote from: miz on November 09, 2006, 08:58:28 AM

Quote from: hasanova on November 09, 2006, 08:15:41 AM

Quote from: miz on November 09, 2006, 07:42:49 AM
... On one hand, we lost to two teams we shouldn't have lost to...

miz - ?  I respectfully disagree.  I can't intelligently discuss what happened on Oct. 21, but Oct. 14 was a nice sunny day.  No key players were hurt and out of the line-up.  You were playing a good team with a winning record.  You didn't fumble multiple times on the 1-yard line.  It was 17-0 and 24-7 in the first half.  I was there.       

You guys deserved to win that day, no arguement here.  It is my opinion that BC is a better team and would (or should) beat Guilford on any given Saturday.  The fact that we didn't is a credit to Guilford for out-preparing, out-coaching, and out-playing Bridgewater on that day.  That said, I stand by my previous assertion that IMO we should not have lost that game..........but that is not to say you guys didn't deserve to win, because you did (deserve it). 

(SHAMELESS DIG):

And not to bring up old sh*t, but of course we can also speculate what might have happened had both schools complied with NCAA eligibility requirements

Quote from: hasanova on November 09, 2006, 08:15:41 AM

Quote from: miz on November 09, 2006, 07:42:49 AM
... On one hand, we lost to two teams we shouldn't have lost to...

miz - ?  I respectfully disagree.  I can't intelligently discuss what happened on Oct. 21, but Oct. 14 was a nice sunny day.  No key players were hurt and out of the line-up.  You were playing a good team with a winning record.  You didn't fumble multiple times on the 1-yard line.  It was 17-0 and 24-7 in the first half.  I was there.       

You guys deserved to win that day, no arguement here.  It is my opinion that BC is a better team and would (or should) beat Guilford on any given Saturday.  The fact that we didn't is a credit to Guilford for out-preparing, out-coaching, and out-playing Bridgewater on that day.  That said, I stand by my previous assertion that IMO we should not have lost that game..........but that is not to say you guys didn't deserve to win, because you did (deserve it). 

Quote from: Llamaguy on November 09, 2006, 12:38:43 AM

Quote from: xbcdad on November 08, 2006, 09:49:40 PM

Quote'Bout time we were ranked above W&L.

Since the eagles have a win over a play off team what other collapses would need to occur this Sat. in the south or east to get the eagles a sniff a playoff road trip.

I suppose Cumming's (I think it was him) assessment that there are too many other 1 loss teams is the easy answer. In 2000 there was only one in conference loss (E&H) but there was a the signature win over McDaniel who had the Centennial AQ.

Just curious.

Hey there xbcdad,

After looking at every senario that could fall in BC's favor ,which includes about 7 teams in front of us losing this weekend, I still see BC falling short on the criteria this year. It boils down to two things, 1) we needed to win either against Guilford or E&H (giving us the ODAC Championship), or 2) our opponents as a whole needed to play better. The best QOWI we can finish with is 8.899 which will not get an atlarge with 2 losses.

Here is the schedule and our opponent's records: (in region which the QOWI is calculated from)

• McDaniel                        4-4
• Shenandoah                    2-7
• Ferrum                           2-6
• LaGrange                       0-8
• Hampden-Sydney            3-6
• Guilford                         6-3
• Emory & Henry               4-4
• Washington & Lee           7-2
• Randolph Macon             2-7
• Catholic                         2-5

You are right that in the past we have had some quality out of conference wins. This year our out of conference opponents went a combined 8-25 in region. We have also not lost 2 conference games in our playoff run. This year's schedule would allow for 1 ODAC loss and a shot at a Pool C. With the combination of a second ODAC loss and the fact that six of our other opponents will finish with records below .333 in region. There was no way to get the QOWI index high enough to compete with other 2-loss teams nationally for a Pool C spot this year. Were we still in the running? Yes!

All this being said, I will be at peace if we can get a win over Catholic this week and finish 8-2 for the season. We will come into next season with around 40 hungry Seniors who will have something to prove in '07!

I have mixed feelings about the pool C deal.  On one hand, we lost to two teams we shouldn't have lost to.  In that light, we don't really deserve it. 

Then when I look at Pat's south region playoff bracket, I think to myself that we would probably be "favored" to beat almost all of those teams.  And we have much better potential to represent the South region well than say a Carnagie Mellon (sp.?) or even a Washington and Lee. 

Then again, if pools C's were handed out by "reputation" and past success we probably wouldn't have gotten ours back in 2000...........

Quote from: Jacketlawyer on November 08, 2006, 11:59:03 AM

Quote from: hasanova on November 08, 2006, 11:15:04 AM
OK, where are we now regarding ODAC Coach of the Year?  I'm leaning towards Frank Miriello at W&L, although Montgomery and Kiesel may also deserve some consideration.

Got to go with Monty, and the dramatic turnaround from 2005.  Schizophrenic turnaround at that. . .  

Had W&L managed to beat the Eagles, then Miriello.  But everyone knew coming in the W&L was going to be formidable this year.  No expectations for E&H.  In fact, and please correct me if I'm wrong, I believe E&H was picked to finish lower than R-M. . . . . .

Agree w/ your points, but contingent on EHC beating Guilford this weekend.  If not, the win at BC looks more like a fluke than a pattern.  But if EHC is sitting at 6-4 and 4-2 in OCAC than yes, he deserves it. 

Quote from: skoaltrain on November 07, 2006, 12:50:44 PM
Anyone have any idea on why Josh Knight left or was dismissed from the team on Friday of last week?  I had no idea until I saw the article in the DNR.

Good question.  Last year we had a starting linebacker dismissed going into the playoffs due to a conflict with a coach.  We had another offensive starter leave the team earlier this season for unspecified reasons.  I don't know anything about this situation with Knight, but it's kind of a concerning pattern.