FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[seinfeld]

This is what I believe is the final installment in the "Schmitz Chronicles".

Following up on my previous posts that noted how poorly Wooster has played against teams with above .500 records and the fact that Schmitz has really never coached Wooster to an "upset" win in 13 seasons, this may be the most damning statistic of all. In 132 career games as head coach of Wooster, Schmitz has never beaten a team that finished that season with a better record than Wooster had that season. NOT ONE SINGLE TIME. Wooster has had eight seasons where they won six games or less and four seasons when they finished below .500, yet he has never managed to beat a team that finished that season with a better record. I guarantee there isn't a single NCAC coach during this period that can make this dubious claim.

The five NCAC selections this season mark the lowest total for Wooster since 1994 -- when they finished 1-9 and replaced long-time head coach Bob Tucker with Jim Barnes (and Schmitz as the offensive coordinator).

2004 Playoff Game Against Carthage:

Coach Schmitz has made a number of bizarre decisions during his tenure at Wooster. The 2004 playoff game against Carthage is a microcosm of what I would call "amateurish" decisions he has made.

In 2004 when Wooster went to the playoffs and played 12 games, Tony Sutton caught just six passes the entire season. He caught a measly one pass for three yards against Carthage in the playoffs, despite the fact that dump passes and screens to him would have helped against the every-down blitzing of Carthage. This is a guy who was probably the most athletic and dangerous player on the field every time he stepped on it. He was also a receiver his one year at Findlay, so obviously he had good hands and knew how to run pass routes. The reasoning Schmitz gave for not throwing to Sutton – he was in single coverage every time he went out for a pass. Think about that. He decided not to throw to Sutton because he was in single coverage. What was he expecting, no one in coverage?

Even more incredible than that is what Schmitz told the local paper a few days after the game:  He said he wouldn't have changed  the way he called the offensive plays against Carthage if he had to do it all over again. That's pretty surprising when you commit seven turnovers, complete 6-of-32 passes for 73 yards, bring in a backup quarterback (JD Lyle) for two handoffs, then pull him on 3rd down for Bobby Reiff, and then attempt a fake punt from your end zone in the fourth quarter. Sutton's 29 touches were also the fewest he had all year in any game that was competitive. He also did not have a single touch in the final two drives of the game, which amounted to 13 plays.

Insulting the opposition, resulting in major backlash upsets.

Two of the biggest upsets in the NCAC over the past decade have come against Wooster. In both instances the Scots were nationally ranked and undefeated. Both losses, in part, were setup by decisions that Schmitz and his staff made in previous seasons that served as extra motivation for their opponent.

-- In 2001, leading 28-0 with under seven minutes to play, Wooster, which had just put out its second-team defense after scoring with nine minutes to play, proceeds to pull its second team defense off the field and put its starters back in after Oberlin got a couple of first downs and approached midfield. Wooster, which entered the game at 1-5, chooses to take away what little playing time the backups would get in a lost season in order to preserve a shutout against Oberlin.  The Oberlin coaches were hot, and it was obvious when the game ended that this was something they wouldn't be forgetting.

Fast forward to 2003, when Wooster was ranked No. 13 but was without injured Tony Sutton. The Scots did not bring its full intensity, while Oberlin, partly still burning from the insult handed to them two years earlier, pulled off what was probably the biggest in NCAC history up until that point.

-- In 2004, Wooster was beating up on Kenyon in the second half, opening up a 63-21 lead early in the third quarter. With 8:42 left in the quarter, Wooster orchestrated another scoring drive by handing the ball to Sutton four times, allowing him to cap his day with 286 yards and six touchdowns. Now, while Kenyon accused Wooster of running up the score, I think it was more of Schmitz running up Sutton's stats, trying to get him every award and break every record he could. Not that this is particularly noble. Either way, Kenyon didn't take too kindly to this development.

Fast forward one year to 2005, when Kenyon visits undefeated and nationally ranked Wooster. With what they perceived as an insult fresh in their memory, Kenyon comes in and shocks Wooster 24-21. There is no question that the Kenyon coaching staff felt this was redemption for what happened the year before, and expressed this clearly as the game ended.

Strange Talent Evaluations/Position Decisions/Other Bizarre Stuff

Coach Schmitz's talent evaluation and what he says publicly about some of his players has been very strange to say the least.

-- Many of you remember the infamous comments about Justin Schafer, who he said "has all of the gifts to become not only the best quarterback in school history, but the best to ever play the position in the conference" (http://www.the-daily-record.com/local%20sports/2003/09/02/great-expectations-justin-schafer). This was said before he ever played a game, and we know that this never came close to materializing.

-- In 2009, Schmitz said about Robert Flagg: "Robert is as explosive, and quick, as any guy we've had in my 10 years as head coach at Wooster." I guess Sutton was just chopped liver. Obviously, this comment made no sense.

-- This season, after one good game against St. Vincent, he begins to tout Jonathan Miller as the Newcomer of the Year. Two games later he quits the program.

-- In 2003, he spoke at the Hall of Fame luncheon. He was reported as saying that while Wooster hadn't caught Mt. Union yet, they were getting close. You can decide how accurate that prediction turned out.

-- Picks Justin Rice as the team's only wide receiver on the all-conference team in 2012, yet down the stretch of the season he doesn't start two games and goes long stretches of games without even being on the field.

-- In 2007, in what is supposed to be an open competition for quarterback, Chad Parker is clearly winning the battle, yet two days before the opener, he goes with Austin Holter. Parker was even listed as the starter in the two-deep used in the first game against John Carroll. That decision seemed to work out fine, but makes you question his sincerity when he says that there are actual position battles.

The same thing has happened again with Barnes and Frongillo. From every indication, including listing Frongillo as the starter in the two-deep before this year's season opener, Frongillo won the starting job this year. Yet, he goes with Barnes.

-- For years, he has instructed his punt returners to never call a fair catch, regardless of the situation and the potential for them to take a big hit. Either Schmitz is a firebrand or a little nuts.

-- For at least a couple of years, instructed his defensive ends to never make an inside move, not under any circumstance.

-- In the 2011 game against Wabash, trailing 19-7 with 1:14 left, Schmitz decides to use his timeouts even though Wabash had the ball and was about to take a knee. After the first timeout, there is a 71-minute weather delay, during which he would not concede the game. When play resumed, he proceeded to use his last timeouts as Wabash took a knee deep in Wooster territory.

-- Since they moved to the spread offense in 2005, Wooster quarterbacks never go under center, no matter the circumstance. It can be 4th and goal at the half yard line and they are running out of the shot gun.

-- Playing against nationally-ranked Case and their high-powered offense in 2009, Wooster stops Dan Whalen and company on third down at the Case 34, setting up 4th and 2. Instead of getting the offense off the field, Schmitz elects to take a holding call against Case that gives them another crack at a first down (albeit it ends up being 3rd and 30). As would happen to Wooster, Whalen completes a 94-yard touchdown pass.

-- Speaking of Whalen, he was recruited heavily by Wooster. He ended up going to Case. According to Whalen's SI blog (http://www.fannation.com/si_blogs/the_sweep/posts/13201-inside-the-huddle), he said the Wooster coaches "scorned" him after that. The end result was Whalen torching Wooster three straight years. The gist of what the Wooster coaches apparently said to him was to question why he would got to a bad program like Case. Of course, who looks like the bad program now.

-- After the 2011 season, the coaching staff was evaluated. Despite having the second-best scoring defense in the NCAC and the 47th best in all of Div. III (compared to the 7th-best scoring offense in the NCAC and the 199th in Div. III), Schmitz shifted the blame for the poor season to then defensive coordinator Seth Duerr. The Wooster hall-of-famer is now coaching at Tiffin, and Schmitz is still at Wooster, running his vaunted spread offense.

[wally_wabash]

Here's a quick and dirty table on Round 2 attendance...

Host Team	Season Avg	Round 2	% of Avg
Linfield	2115	1304	62%
UW-O	1631	1947	119%
Hobart	1009	852	84%
St. Thomas	2654	735	28%
UMHB	3315	1697	51%
Wesley	1610	817	51%
Widener	2451	1612	66%
UMU	3479	1458	42%

A couple of notes...some have been pointed out already. 
- This happens every year.  The holiday break kills attendance.  Campuses are basically ghost towns for the first two rounds of the playoffs.  You might get more people to stick around for an extra day for that first round game, but it's hard to get people to come back a day or two early for round 2.  Just the nature of the beast. 

- Most of the travel for these 8 games was not trivial, especially around the holiday.  Not surprisingly, the games with close-ish teams had good attendance (Bethel/Oskhosh, Widener/Salisbury).  Surprised at the Wesley/SUNY Cortland number, but as it turns out, Wesley doesn't draw that well to begin with. 

- For some of these places, Round 2 games probably just don't move the needle all that much.  I know from talking to folks in Alliance last year that they don't really get fired up for a playoff game until the semis (I think the Raeburn factor got them into it one round earlier last year).  I don't know what the mood is in Oregon or Texas, but I would guess it's about the same.  The playoffs really don't start for a few of these fan bases until the regional finals.  Must be nice. 

[smedindy]

UMHB / Wesley and Linfield / Oshkosh would be huge draws if the schools were closer and, well, the general public had good taste in football.

[wally_wabash]

Oh no doubt.  I would love to be in Oregon this weekend...for a lot of reasons, but one of them would be Linfield/Oshkosh. 

[ExTartanPlayer]

Schmitz has never beaten a team that finished that season with a better record than Wooster had that season. NOT ONE SINGLE TIME. Wooster has had eight seasons where they won six games or less and four seasons when they finished below .500, yet he has never managed to beat a team that finished that season with a better record. I guarantee there isn't a single NCAC coach during this period that can make this dubious claim.

This "statistic" is a red herring that (like basically EVERY SINGLE THING YOU HAVE WRITTEN) sounds much stronger on paper than it actually is when you really think about it.  Larry Kehres has never beaten a team with a better record than Mount Union either.  And would you rather be 4-6 (with three wins over teams that finished 6-4) or just go 7-3 with those same wins over 6-4 teams, none of which would now count in your bizarre statistic?

Two of the biggest upsets in the NCAC over the past decade have come against Wooster. In both instances the Scots were nationally ranked and undefeated. Both losses, in part, were setup by decisions that Schmitz and his staff made in previous seasons that served as extra motivation for their opponent.

seinfeld, I honestly don't know if you've been a player or coach.  If you have, please feel free to express your own opinion on this.  However, as someone that spent plenty of time in Division III locker rooms...

Did we carry motivation and grudges into some games?  Of course.  Did it really make a difference in our gameplay on a particular day?  Not a chance!  You really think Oberlin's upset of Wooster in 2003 happened because of that non-incident in 2001, or Kenyon's upset in 2005 happened because they felt like Wooster ran up the score the year before?

You certainly can argue that Schmitz's poor coaching led to those losses against inferior teams, but the "insulting the opposition" from the previous year (while it may have motivated the opponents) is not the reason a team loses ANY game, it's poor coaching and/or play ON THAT DAY!

-- In 2009, Schmitz said about Robert Flagg: "Robert is as explosive, and quick, as any guy we've had in my 10 years as head coach at Wooster." I guess Sutton was just chopped liver. Obviously, this comment made no sense.

Ever heard of trying to build your current players' confidence?  Or have you listened to any NFL announcer ever talking about the teams playing on a given day?  Hyperbolic statements about one's current players are forgivable - EVERYONE does it!

-- For at least a couple of years, instructed his defensive ends to never make an inside move, not under any circumstance.

He's hardly the only coach to do this.

-- In the 2011 game against Wabash, trailing 19-7 with 1:14 left, Schmitz decides to use his timeouts even though Wabash had the ball and was about to take a knee. After the first timeout, there is a 71-minute weather delay, during which he would not concede the game. When play resumed, he proceeded to use his last timeouts as Wabash took a knee deep in Wooster territory.

This, I agree, is just plain small.  I'm in agreement with you here.

-- Since they moved to the spread offense in 2005, Wooster quarterbacks never go under center, no matter the circumstance. It can be 4th and goal at the half yard line and they are running out of the shot gun.

Quite common among spread teams these days, including some of the nation's best offenses.  I don't particularly like it, but if that's what you do, then that's what you do, and some prominent teams (ahem: Oregon) are doing just fine in this fashion.  Once you've totally switched to all-gun all-the-time, it is disruptive to your QB's and center's rhythm to go under center (trust me, I was our emergency center as a junior and senior and hated when I had to switch from conventional snapping to gun snapping and back - and that was just in a practice!).

-- Playing against nationally-ranked Case and their high-powered offense in 2009, Wooster stops Dan Whalen and company on third down at the Case 34, setting up 4th and 2. Instead of getting the offense off the field, Schmitz elects to take a holding call against Case that gives them another crack at a first down (albeit it ends up being 3rd and 30). As would happen to Wooster, Whalen completes a 94-yard touchdown pass.

Evaluate the decision by the thought process, NOT by the outcome.

4th and 2 at the 34 - presumably Case punts the ball and yes, you have it back, but probably starting around your own 35-yard line. You have to go 65 yards to score.

3rd and 30 at the 6 - if you stop them or hold them to a short gain, CWRU is now punting from WAY DEEP in their own end and you might get the ball around THEIR 35-yard line.  That is a huge, huge, huge difference in field position for your own offense.  And while CWRU ultimately scored, the percentages are well in your favor against CWRU picking up this first down or getting anywhere close to the 34 yard line.

It didn't work out, but this is a gamble well worth taking IMO; like I said, don't judge it by the outcome, but judge it by the thought process that goes into it.  Yes, there's something to be said for "just getting the ball back" but in this day & age of advanced analytics in football, more and more sportswriters are acknowledging that calls like this are often borne out as the better choice.

Finally, as far as a team giving up a 94-yard touchdown pass on 3rd and 30, some of that blame has to go to the players, chief.

-- Speaking of Whalen, he was recruited heavily by Wooster. He ended up going to Case. According to Whalen's SI blog (http://www.fannation.com/si_blogs/the_sweep/posts/13201-inside-the-huddle), he said the Wooster coaches "scorned" him after that. The end result was Whalen torching Wooster three straight years. The gist of what the Wooster coaches apparently said to him was to question why he would got to a bad program like Case. Of course, who looks like the bad program now.

This is very common.  When I told other coaches that I'd picked CMU, I got either no reply at all (Rochester, but that was a totally different staff than the guys currently there) or "open scorn" (Johns Hopkins, whose current staff does still have a few holdovers).

Again, if you think Whalen torched Wooster for three straight years because the coaches "scorned" him, I think you're looking way too deep into something that isn't there.  Maybe he torched them because he was a really good and supremely motivated player, but do you really think had had to be "scorned" to light a team up?  You did notice, perhaps, that Whalen "torched" a few other teams in his time there?

[wally_wabash]

My quick take on Wooster...it FEELS like Wooster should be a better football team than they are.  A couple of years ago I peeled back the layers on the all sports standings just out of curiosity (as I am wont to do from time to time) and something really stood out to me that was very unexpected.  Outside of men's basketball and baseball, Wooster athletics are surprisngly average (to below average depending on your perspective).  I've been to several games at Wooster over the years...they have the parade and the pipers and the kilts and the running down the hill and the big crowds and the badass hot dogs at their games.  All of the window dressing says "hey, football is a big, successful deal here".  The surprise comes because the results, outside of the Sutton years, just aren't there. 

I think some of seinfeld's points are good.  I think some aren't quite as germane.  The overall point here is that Wooster isn't a very good football team over the Anno Suttoni era, and have seemingly regressed in each passing year since the cruel, cruel hands of eligibility finally took the ball away from #7.  I don't know if this year's 2-8 is rock bottom for Wooster or if they need to go through 3-4 years of this before things start to turn over there like they did at OWU last year, but Wooster ought to be better than 2-8 and not being able to win a game against anybody other than 0-10 Hiram and 0-10 St. Vincent (in OT...yikes).  They just haven't replenished the roster since 2004.  Sutton made ALL the difference on those teams (the Oberlin loss without him was noted), but they had many other very good players.  Drushal, Kearney, Cline, Watson, Schafer to name a few.  They've never ever replaced those guys with equal or better players.  First and foremost, you've got to have players to win.  The Scots just haven't had the players to win consistently over the last handful of years (not the players' fault for sure...coaches have to recruit). 

[smedindy]

I never thought Wooster's issues were X's and O's. I always thought it was the lack of depth and the inability to get talent around someone like Barnes, who I believe could be like Belton or Florence if he had help (and stopped fumbling). Heck, Mandel looked great because he had Witjes and Richardson hanging around.

Any talk of 'slights' or 'motivation' making a difference is just talk for the ink-stained wretches.

[nike]

This is what I believe is the final installment in the "Schmitz Chronicles".

Following up on my previous posts that noted how poorly Wooster has played against teams with above .500 records and the fact that Schmitz has really never coached Wooster to an "upset" win in 13 seasons, this may be the most damning statistic of all. In 132 career games as head coach of Wooster, Schmitz has never beaten a team that finished that season with a better record than Wooster had that season. NOT ONE SINGLE TIME. Wooster has had eight seasons where they won six games or less and four seasons when they finished below .500, yet he has never managed to beat a team that finished that season with a better record. I guarantee there isn't a single NCAC coach during this period that can make this dubious claim.

The five NCAC selections this season mark the lowest total for Wooster since 1994 -- when they finished 1-9 and replaced long-time head coach Bob Tucker with Jim Barnes (and Schmitz as the offensive coordinator).

2004 Playoff Game Against Carthage:

Coach Schmitz has made a number of bizarre decisions during his tenure at Wooster. The 2004 playoff game against Carthage is a microcosm of what I would call "amateurish" decisions he has made.

In 2004 when Wooster went to the playoffs and played 12 games, Tony Sutton caught just six passes the entire season. He caught a measly one pass for three yards against Carthage in the playoffs, despite the fact that dump passes and screens to him would have helped against the every-down blitzing of Carthage. This is a guy who was probably the most athletic and dangerous player on the field every time he stepped on it. He was also a receiver his one year at Findlay, so obviously he had good hands and knew how to run pass routes. The reasoning Schmitz gave for not throwing to Sutton – he was in single coverage every time he went out for a pass. Think about that. He decided not to throw to Sutton because he was in single coverage. What was he expecting, no one in coverage?

Even more incredible than that is what Schmitz told the local paper a few days after the game:  He said he wouldn't have changed  the way he called the offensive plays against Carthage if he had to do it all over again. That's pretty surprising when you commit seven turnovers, complete 6-of-32 passes for 73 yards, bring in a backup quarterback (JD Lyle) for two handoffs, then pull him on 3rd down for Bobby Reiff, and then attempt a fake punt from your end zone in the fourth quarter. Sutton's 29 touches were also the fewest he had all year in any game that was competitive. He also did not have a single touch in the final two drives of the game, which amounted to 13 plays.

Insulting the opposition, resulting in major backlash upsets.

Two of the biggest upsets in the NCAC over the past decade have come against Wooster. In both instances the Scots were nationally ranked and undefeated. Both losses, in part, were setup by decisions that Schmitz and his staff made in previous seasons that served as extra motivation for their opponent.

-- In 2001, leading 28-0 with under seven minutes to play, Wooster, which had just put out its second-team defense after scoring with nine minutes to play, proceeds to pull its second team defense off the field and put its starters back in after Oberlin got a couple of first downs and approached midfield. Wooster, which entered the game at 1-5, chooses to take away what little playing time the backups would get in a lost season in order to preserve a shutout against Oberlin.  The Oberlin coaches were hot, and it was obvious when the game ended that this was something they wouldn't be forgetting.

Fast forward to 2003, when Wooster was ranked No. 13 but was without injured Tony Sutton. The Scots did not bring its full intensity, while Oberlin, partly still burning from the insult handed to them two years earlier, pulled off what was probably the biggest in NCAC history up until that point.

-- In 2004, Wooster was beating up on Kenyon in the second half, opening up a 63-21 lead early in the third quarter. With 8:42 left in the quarter, Wooster orchestrated another scoring drive by handing the ball to Sutton four times, allowing him to cap his day with 286 yards and six touchdowns. Now, while Kenyon accused Wooster of running up the score, I think it was more of Schmitz running up Sutton's stats, trying to get him every award and break every record he could. Not that this is particularly noble. Either way, Kenyon didn't take too kindly to this development.

Fast forward one year to 2005, when Kenyon visits undefeated and nationally ranked Wooster. With what they perceived as an insult fresh in their memory, Kenyon comes in and shocks Wooster 24-21. There is no question that the Kenyon coaching staff felt this was redemption for what happened the year before, and expressed this clearly as the game ended.

Strange Talent Evaluations/Position Decisions/Other Bizarre Stuff

Coach Schmitz's talent evaluation and what he says publicly about some of his players has been very strange to say the least.

-- Many of you remember the infamous comments about Justin Schafer, who he said "has all of the gifts to become not only the best quarterback in school history, but the best to ever play the position in the conference" (http://www.the-daily-record.com/local%20sports/2003/09/02/great-expectations-justin-schafer). This was said before he ever played a game, and we know that this never came close to materializing.

-- In 2009, Schmitz said about Robert Flagg: "Robert is as explosive, and quick, as any guy we've had in my 10 years as head coach at Wooster." I guess Sutton was just chopped liver. Obviously, this comment made no sense.

-- This season, after one good game against St. Vincent, he begins to tout Jonathan Miller as the Newcomer of the Year. Two games later he quits the program.

-- In 2003, he spoke at the Hall of Fame luncheon. He was reported as saying that while Wooster hadn't caught Mt. Union yet, they were getting close. You can decide how accurate that prediction turned out.

-- Picks Justin Rice as the team's only wide receiver on the all-conference team in 2012, yet down the stretch of the season he doesn't start two games and goes long stretches of games without even being on the field.

-- In 2007, in what is supposed to be an open competition for quarterback, Chad Parker is clearly winning the battle, yet two days before the opener, he goes with Austin Holter. Parker was even listed as the starter in the two-deep used in the first game against John Carroll. That decision seemed to work out fine, but makes you question his sincerity when he says that there are actual position battles.

The same thing has happened again with Barnes and Frongillo. From every indication, including listing Frongillo as the starter in the two-deep before this year's season opener, Frongillo won the starting job this year. Yet, he goes with Barnes.

-- For years, he has instructed his punt returners to never call a fair catch, regardless of the situation and the potential for them to take a big hit. Either Schmitz is a firebrand or a little nuts.

-- For at least a couple of years, instructed his defensive ends to never make an inside move, not under any circumstance.

-- In the 2011 game against Wabash, trailing 19-7 with 1:14 left, Schmitz decides to use his timeouts even though Wabash had the ball and was about to take a knee. After the first timeout, there is a 71-minute weather delay, during which he would not concede the game. When play resumed, he proceeded to use his last timeouts as Wabash took a knee deep in Wooster territory.

-- Since they moved to the spread offense in 2005, Wooster quarterbacks never go under center, no matter the circumstance. It can be 4th and goal at the half yard line and they are running out of the shot gun.

-- Playing against nationally-ranked Case and their high-powered offense in 2009, Wooster stops Dan Whalen and company on third down at the Case 34, setting up 4th and 2. Instead of getting the offense off the field, Schmitz elects to take a holding call against Case that gives them another crack at a first down (albeit it ends up being 3rd and 30). As would happen to Wooster, Whalen completes a 94-yard touchdown pass.

-- Speaking of Whalen, he was recruited heavily by Wooster. He ended up going to Case. According to Whalen's SI blog (http://www.fannation.com/si_blogs/the_sweep/posts/13201-inside-the-huddle), he said the Wooster coaches "scorned" him after that. The end result was Whalen torching Wooster three straight years. The gist of what the Wooster coaches apparently said to him was to question why he would got to a bad program like Case. Of course, who looks like the bad program now.

-- After the 2011 season, the coaching staff was evaluated. Despite having the second-best scoring defense in the NCAC and the 47th best in all of Div. III (compared to the 7th-best scoring offense in the NCAC and the 199th in Div. III), Schmitz shifted the blame for the poor season to then defensive coordinator Seth Duerr. The Wooster hall-of-famer is now coaching at Tiffin, and Schmitz is still at Wooster, running his vaunted spread offense.

Why did you do this?  It's Christmas season.  I was just getting over this year's performance.  And my Norwayne Bobcats lost.
I was at every game you mentioned in your "independent study".  A+.  At the Carthage game, we were actually predicting the plays Wooster ran before they ran them.  If I remember correctly, our QB had an obvious concussion, I mean obvious and he stayed in the game, which led to many of the turnovers.  Sutton was a beast, but Wooster could not figure out a way to get him some room to operate.  Always up the middle.  Carthage was not the better team that day, except on the scoreboard, which is all that counts.
I go farther back than a QB throwing tons of passes to one particular receiver while on the other side of the field you had a 4.3 second forty guy who was always an afterthought.  Who wound up actually getting a tryout with the Browns.  And that scheme cost them possibly a couple NCAC championships.  Possibly. 
Do not think this administration will force a coach out because of losses.  Not one, again, "... in like Flint".
Now rooting for the Mount to win another Stagg Bowl.  It's been too long. 

[wallyworld12]

I would agree with what Smed and Wally have said above, but I don't think there is as much reason to think that things won't change. Granted I'm not on the ground in Wooster, and only know it from several trips there covering football, basketball, and baseball, I'd have to say they have consistently underperformed during the Schmitz-era, but things can change. Look at what happened up at OWU--year after year they said Hollway would never lose his job. I joked that he must have some dirt about the university president or the AD to keep his position, and yet, they finally made a change.

Wooster is a great school, they  have made improvements with facilities--the Scot Center is beautiful. I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see the Scots fortunes improve, they will be ready to make a change.

[bashbrother]

The success of the "change" at OWU has to have put some pressure on the situation at Wooster.    No job is completely safe, when the program is losing... ever.   Although at the Div. III level,  revenues from athletics are close to nothing,  consistently under-performing will eventually create change.

[nike]

If I was a betting man, say $10,000.00, I would take that bet.   
Seriously, you may be right, but if Schmitz leaves, I doubt it would be by being fired.  Wooster just does not do that with their coaches.  And he has deep ties in the community, as have already been discussed.  The current administration does not seem too focused on athletics, except for basketball.  The 6"5" president is at all the games. The school has other improvements and upgrades being worked on, many academic in nature.  So it will be interesting to see how things play out with the football program.
Maybe we should turn our attention to Hiram.  After all, it was this board that brought about the changes at OWU.  Part of all that hardware they are taking in this year is ours.

[Bishopleftiesdad]

Remember Holloway was not fired.

http://www.battlingbishops.com/news/2011/12/12/FB_1212110713.aspx?path=football

I do not think he retired of his own accord though.

[sigma one]

Before I started typing this a little bird flew in to tell me that more attempts to look at Wooster's numbers will lead only to controversy.  That's OK.  I want to add another set of numbers that may, just may, speak to Wooster's recent woes.  Based on Roster numbers on the Wooster web site (and knowing that the numbers are approximate because we don't know when those roster sizes were printed and revised), here is 2008-2012.
     2012:  Total Roster size 82.  Seniors 11.  Freshmen 38.
     2011:  Total Roster size 74.  Seniors 11.  Freshmen 27.
     2010:  Total Roster size 73.  Seniors 12.  Freshmen 26.
     2009:  Total Roster size 85.  Seniors 17.  Freshmen 38. 
     2008:  Total Roster size 83.  Seniors 13.  Freshmen 32.

     While we know that teams with small rosters can be (occasionally) competitive--see Oberlin this year (small roster, but large, talented senior class)--roster size is a rough indicator of success, and is certainly a factor in Continuing Success (leave out the, again, occasional, senior-heavy, not too many injuries years).  So based on the numbers, from 2010 through 2012, The fighting Scots have had 12, 11, and 11 seniors.  I did not look to see how many of those actually contributed significant playing time.  And in the last five years the FSs have had modestly-sized freshmen classes.
     I did not run the exact numbers for Wabash, Wittenberg--those are likely the programs Woster wants to emulate--but their total Rosters and freshmen numbers are much, much larger.  Without looking at the Wabash roster, the LGs usually have between the mid-40s (in an off year) and mid-60s in freshmen numbers.  They usually have 17-22 or so seniors.  Wabash usually starts fall practice with 140-150+ players.  From what I've seen, Wittenberg is about the same, maybe even a little higher.
     The numbers here are subject to various kinds of analysis and conjecture.  Do Wooster's numbers indicate shortcomings in recruiting?  Do the numbers indicate that the coaches are told by the college to bring in only so many freshmen?  Do the senior numbers say anything about players sticking with the program for four years?  One thing I believe they show is that with these smallish numbers the football coaches can't afford too many mistakes among the recruits and that injuries might handcuff them because of lack of depth.  Lose a running back, experienced offensive lineman, key defensive player, etc., and the team really suffers.  Have a few players leave the program or fail to return for personal and/or academic reasons and the team suffers.  Fewer players; less chance of success regardless of other factors.
      Get the numbers up and very likely the football program will show significant improvement.   Questions:  will the Wooster administration encourage/permit this (wouldn't it be interesting to know how much support the football program really has from the top down--what are the coaches and Ad told, what understandings exist, spoken or not); can the coaching staff as presently constituted increase the numbers under any set of conditions; is there budget to raise the numbers; can Wooster use their new athletics facilities as a positive recruiting tool;  outside the few who post here does anyone at Wooster care enough to examine seriously the state of football and resolve to improve the situation.
     

[owubishops]

Making a change at Wooster won't result in an immediate change in their record. As much as everybody downs OWU's previous coach, the team was stacked with talented, skilled players with game experience. Wooster lacks the talent and it would take two good recruiting classes to turn things around. The word I got was that the aid package they used to get over other NCAC schools has left the building.

(OWU was still able to attain all-conference players with the same disadvantages over the past few years.)

[Dr. Acula]

I would think that pretty much any NCAC school is going to have trouble bringing in large classes based purely on the admissions requirements and price tag.  Witt and Wabash are tradition rich football programs that are nationally respected.  How does Wooster compare academically to them?  I'm not being a smart arse, I honestly don't know.  I guess my point is that it's hard for the Kenyons of the world to bring in a big class just based on non-athletics factors.  They have high standards and a higher price.  I always got the impression Woo was closer to a Witt situation than a Kenyon.  Is that incorrect?