FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[old wabash]

Finally found the link to largest upsets in D-3 via Massey:

http://masseyratings.com/extgms.php?s=181623&sub=11620

Biggest upset is Albion over Wheaton, but Wabash was #2 and #3.

Oh, what could have been...

i'm am no expert (not played since 8th grade) but have followed wabash football for 40 years, 30 in cville.
missed very few home games!!
and those were the weirdest games i have ever seen!!
EVER, not just last season!!!

[bashbrother]

Finally found the link to largest upsets in D-3 via Massey:

http://masseyratings.com/extgms.php?s=181623&sub=11620

Biggest upset is Albion over Wheaton, but Wabash was #2 and #3.

Oh, what could have been...

i'm am no expert (not played since 8th grade) but have followed wabash football for 40 years, 30 in cville.
missed very few home games!!
and those were the weirdest games i have ever seen!!
EVER, not just last season!!!

Many, if not all of us, are still unable to reconcile....  As I have mentioned a few times.... "something" was structurally or emotionally wrong with this year's team.   Many pointed to youth or lack of leadership....which was very plausible in looking at the amount of underclassman in the starting line-up... some pointed at other reasons... whatever it was....  those games were very strange... to the point,  that in both games,  you almost knew at halftime or early in the 2nd half.... that the result was not going to be good.  I bet those were very tough games to be a coach. 

Onward and Upward,

WAF!

[sigma one]

Much earlier we beat on the upsets of Wabash topic.  Inexplicable, etc.  Can any other Division III team with at least 8 wins have had halftime scores like these (all ten games):  16-6, 14-2, 10-10 (Allegheny loss), 28-21, 13-3, 20-7, 10-0, 0-0 (OWU), 7-6 (Oberlin loss), 9-0 (Bell Game)? What stands out to me, bashbrother et al, is the inability of Wabash to jump to big leads.  True enough, opponents did not score many points and Wabash was ahead at the half, but not by particularly large margins.  Teams stayed close.  Wabash counted on defense and wearing down the opposition with a running game that featured about twice as many carries as passes throughout the year.  Previously under Raeburn the ratio was very close to 50/50.  I suppose we could get inside the stats even more, but those halftime scores are telling, but I don't know of what--sluggish offense, conservative tactics, fear of being too offense-minded when the defense would hold down the other team, lack of general offensive firepower, keeping Belton healthy, etc, etc.  But +13 was the LGs largest lead at intermission.  This was unlike the Wabash teams of the recent past when big halftime leads were more common than not.  A footnote factor:  Was the NCAC tightening up in terms of talent, are other teams able to match up better?  Maybe, I don't know given results around the conference. 
     Certainly, the 10-10 and 7-6 scores at the half kept Allegheny and Oberlin in the game, and when Wabash's
still young (however talented) defense faltered and the offense sputtered, well . . .20-17(OT) and 31-16.  The old adage let'em hang around long enough rang true. 

[Dr. Acula]

Much earlier we beat on the upsets of Wabash topic.  Inexplicable, etc.  Can any other Division III team with at least 8 wins have had halftime scores like these (all ten games):  16-6, 14-2, 10-10 (Allegheny loss), 28-21, 13-3, 20-7, 10-0, 0-0 (OWU), 7-6 (Oberlin loss), 9-0 (Bell Game)? What stands out to me, bashbrother et al, is the inability of Wabash to jump to big leads.  True enough, opponents did not score many points and Wabash was ahead at the half, but not by particularly large margins.  Teams stayed close.  Wabash counted on defense and wearing down the opposition with a running game that featured about twice as many carries as passes throughout the year.  Previously under Raeburn the ratio was very close to 50/50.  I suppose we could get inside the stats even more, but those halftime scores are telling, but I don't know of what--sluggish offense, conservative tactics, fear of being too offense-minded when the defense would hold down the other team, lack of general offensive firepower, keeping Belton healthy, etc, etc.  But +13 was the LGs largest lead at intermission.  This was unlike the Wabash teams of the recent past when big halftime leads were more common than not.  A footnote factor:  Was the NCAC tightening up in terms of talent, are other teams able to match up better?  Maybe, I don't know given results around the conference. 
     Certainly, the 10-10 and 7-6 scores at the half kept Allegheny and Oberlin in the game, and when Wabash's
still young (however talented) defense faltered and the offense sputtered, well . . .20-17(OT) and 31-16.  The old adage let'em hang around long enough rang true.

As an outsider I would say it makes some sense.  Holmes emerged as a horse and the WR corps was not that of 2011.  If you can run the ball as well as Holmes was then why not run it early and often?  Rests the D, limits the risk of turnovers, wears down the opposition, etc.  Sure it's conservative, but it also allows you to keep the ball in Belton and Holmes' hands.  Not a bad plan.  The only thing I was wondering was if any part of their problem was lacking a big time WR that could hit big plays off of play action after Holmes had been bruising them regularly?  I saw their top guy had just over 500 yds receiving. 

I didn't see Wabash this season at all...did they run Belton a lot on designed runs?  Or were a lot of them pass plays that he just scrambled?  Just curious since keeping him healthy was mentioned.

[sigma one]

Agree about the wide receivers.  While they were fine, they were not Chamblee, Horn, Lemond, Russell, Summers, Clifton, Walker, Bronaugh, and others from the past.  All this year's WRs return next fall.  In fact, Hodges the younger moved over from defense and started getting more and more snaps as a deep receiver while still playing corner.
     Recall that Holmes did not play in the first couple of games:  injured.  The running game improved remarkably when he started carrying the load.  Until then Wabash tried a three-headed approach with Meyers, Hunt, and Porter.  The LGs gained not quite 30 yards on the ground in the first game v. Hanover.  They were not a whole lost better the next week.  All three of those in the initial rotation (though Holmes would have been there as well) were injured during the season, and a deep position went thin.  Too bad, because Holes and Porter were developing into a Mr Inside and Mr Outside combination. With no proven QB behind Belton, he did not run the ball much on designed plays early in the season.  And when he did start getting more carries, he was injured and out for a game and a half--proving the wisdom of the coaching decision.  While healthy he was a major rushing force--see Carnegie Mellon and Washington U.
     Recall, too, that Wabash began the season with four new offensive linemen and a freshman tight end.
As the year went on this group became efficient as run blockers (more than as pass blockers--thus helping to sustain an old belief).  Excepting Kitley (a big exception), the 0-line returns next year. 
     Finally, recall that either because of the WRs, or the superior defense, or the inexperienced line, or the protecting of Belton--probably all of these--Wabash chose to keep the ball on the ground, play field position with an above-average punter,  and rely more on the defense.
     A less than scintillating offense, a young defense playing late in the games under pressure, and the opponents' ability to take advantage of situations resulted in losses that we still find hard to explain. 
     

[seinfeld]

Kyle Rooker has taken a coaching position at Carthage, joining former Wooster defensive coordinator Mike Yeager. Rooker was the highest remaining assistant coach at Wooster, meaning there will be a pretty blank slate for the new coach to work with. As for now, there isn't a head coach, offensive or defensive coordinator at Wooster, although the new coach will likely hold one of the coordinator positions. From all indications, Rooker was a very good coach and the players liked him. But the silver lining is that it might make the head coach position a little more enticing to someone who might have been on the fence if they have a coordinator already in mind to bring along with them.

[bashbrother]

Agree about the wide receivers.  While they were fine, they were not Chamblee, Horn, Lemond, Russell, Summers, Clifton, Walker, Bronaugh, and others from the past.  All this year's WRs return next fall.  In fact, Hodges the younger moved over from defense and started getting more and more snaps as a deep receiver while still playing corner.

Bottom line for me... and the hardest thing for me personally to understand.....is how a team,  goes toe-to-toe and beats a confident CMU football team,  Beats a very good Witt team in Springfield,  Beats a confident OWU squad on their home field.... only to be somewhat embarrassed by a good, but lets be real - not that good, Oberlin squad at Hollett. 

And with that I am officially left waiting patiently for next August.   

[sigma one]

Me, too.

[smedindy]

The 2012 game films of Allegheny and Oberlin will be played ad nauseum to the 2013 LG squad.

The Bell will stay in our hands. Now, we need to aim for NCAC title and get back to the playoffs. While I rooted for Witt (sad, but true) to represent us well in the playoffs (and they did, since Hobart was a fine squad), it was kind of empty without Wabash being there.

However, part of me thinks that if another NCAC squad besides Witt and Wabash makes the playoffs at some point, and wins a game or two, then we'll have arrived as a conference. Just as long as the other team is a "C" and Wabash is the "A"! (HAH!)

[wally_wabash]

Anything going on in Wooster?  The Daily Record was quick to tell us, over and over, how big a problem Mike Schmitz was, but I haven't seen one word of reporting on who's next...no short list of candidates (other than what was already posted in here), no news of interviews, no news of applicants.  Anybody catch any whispers in the wind up in northern Ohio? 

Oh, and  Happy New Year, everybody.   

[Duster72]

I think you can point to a few oddities about this years Wabash team.  I thought there was some questionable offensive play calls late in games.  The talent wasn't there at a couple positions, and the talent that was out there was sometimes overrated IMO.  I thought weather might have been a factor in one loss (not an excuse). 

But at the end of the day, Wabash proved they had the ability to beat GOOD teams.  When you can beat good teams and then lose to bad teams (no disrespect intended) that tells me you have a lack of concentration and/or poor leadership.  I think there were some kids on that team that wanted to win but didn't give it the amount of focus required to win consistently.

[wally_wabash]

If you pick apart the two deep from game 10, you'll find that of the starting 22, nah I'll go 24 including the kickers, the breakdown by class is 4 FR, 4 SO, 11 JR, 5 SR.  That's heavy on underclassmen.  Of the 11 juniors starting, I count 6-7 that were starting for the first time during 2012 (one was new to the program entirely).  The point is that the team was far younger and inexperienced than I think people realized (certainly moreso than I realized coming into the season).  We saw how good that group could be and we also some of the trap doors young teams can fall through.  I don't think going through the tapes of the games that 2012 Wabash lost helps anything.  The lessons that the players need to take away from from those games have been learned...it wasn't about technique or scheme or anything else that's going to be picked up by infinitesimal dissection of those films and I think we realize that. 

Wabash has 19 starters returning.  19 starters that have been hardened by those two games.  Wittenberg and OWU travel to the Hollett in 2013.  The LGs are your NCAC favorties next year, just as they were in 2012.  The 2013 group will know how to better play with that label of favorite.  I'm looking forward to the coming fall, the round robin schedule, the showdowns with Witt and OWU, DePauw stopping their freefall, and, of course, Wabash getting back to the tournament.   

[sigma one]

Yes, lots of young players out there for Wabash last fall.  I think not Wabash but Wittenberg will go into 2013 as the favorite to win the NCAC, maybe thc co-favorite because I don't think you can ignore OWU.  Witt deserves that placing based on their 2012 record. I'd put Wabash and OWU second.    Wabash has 19 starters, but the old tigers have 15 by my count, including their all-NCAC talent.   If I'm predicting the 2013 season, I'm saying that Wabash loses their multiple-year starting QB, and that alone might make me think twice about putting them at the pre-season top of the league. (By the way--and this comes from a die-hard LG fan:  I don't think that loss will be as significant as most people do.)  Walsh was effective when Belton was injured, and I won't be surprised if another QB is in the mix.  The position is probablly Walsh's to lose, but there is at least one other talent on the roster. The Witt QB, RB, two WRs, and all the LBs come back.   
     Also, OWU returns almost all their offense, with all the WRs, the RB, and QB.  The Kicker returns, as does all but one of the OL.  They lose a great defensive end, but retain their LBs and DBs.  Looking forward, most interesting to me is how OWU handles their success and how the rest of the conference reacts to them--and, of course, how they play v. Wittenbers, which was not on the schedule for 2012.  This might be balanced by the Bishops coach having a year under his belt and his offensive scheme being more threatening than it was last fall when it was plenty threatening enough, save the Wabash game.  Examining the other teams, it appears that Kenyon and Oberlin lose the most talent.  Kenyon graduated most of their skill players and retains only 4/5 on offense, though a lot of the defense returns.  Oberlin loses a great senior class--all their WRs of consequence, the QB, and the once in a generation (for them, maybe for any one) defensive end.  Both teams always struggle with depth and with younger teams could be in trouble.
     As for the others--Wabash will watch closely as Lynch rebuilds DePauw, as he no doubt will.  Allegheny needs help on offense, but they return most of what they had in 2012, with a couple of major defensive losses.  Denison is perpetually hopeful, but usually outgunned by the top of the conference.  Hiram might still be, well, Hiram.  And we await the Wooster coaching appointment and what that might mean.
     I do agree with Duster72 that at a few positions last fall the Wabash team had players that did not remind me of players of the past few years.   But that's not the reason they lost two head scratchers.  And if those players were good enough to beat Witt and OWU on foreign turf, and on Homecoming at both places no less, they will grow up.  I'm looking forward already to a highly competitive year.  While Wittenberg and OWU come to C'ville, Wabash travels to Allegheny (where they have frequently struggled) and DePauw, which with the new coach and the rivalry will be once again unpredictable. 
     I'm assuming that the home/aways will follow form, though with the change to the round-robin format is it possible that the NCAC will adjust schedules and arrange it so that one or more teams will have to play some opponent(s) at the location(s) of last year's games?  Just a thought.   
     

[smedindy]

I think the coaches and wags will vote Witt #1, Wabash #2 and OWU #3. As for the rest, it's a muddled middle with Hiram #10. Almost like hoops this year, with 3 definite favorites and seven also-appearing in this conference teams (though in hoops this year there's no definite bottom feeder.)

[wally_wabash]

I should have clarified about the favorite...I have no doubt that when the preseason coaches poll is released, Wittenberg will be on top of that list.  That's standard procedure for defending champions.  And Wittenberg will no doubt be very good, particularly their offense.  Do remember that Witt's DC left for a HC job in the OAC, so there will be some change there which I think is significant.  And let's also remember that as good as Wittenberg and OWU were in 2012, they both got beat by Wabash in 2012.  It's not like Wabash is playing catch up there. 

As for OWU, they do lose some significant pieces on what was a very good defense.  And now, for the first time since the 80s, Ohio Wesleyan gets to play through a schedule with the label of defending champion and that adds a degree of difficulty. 

The schedule plays a part as well.  Witt and OWU both must play at the Hollett next year.  Never mind that those are the two biggest hurdles between Wabash and the tournament in 2013, but do you think the 2013 Little Giants might have something to prove about defending the home turf?  Those are going to be intense games played with a lot of purpose beyond just a tally on the record.  There's some aura rebuilding that needs to be done at Little Giant Stadium. 

Throw it all in a pot, stir it up, and what I see is Wabash being the favorite.  Not an overwhelming favorite because I do believe that both Witt and OWU are certainly capable of beating Wabash, but a favorite nonetheless.  I would see it differently if Wabash were chasing OWU and Witt after 2012 losses, but that isn't the case.

It's going to be a great race next year and one that will take at least 10 weeks to play out.  Wabash/OWU is on 10/12.  OWU/Witt on 11/2 and Wab/Witt on 11/9.  Buckle up for those last couple of weeks.