FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[wally_wabash]

wally_wabash,

Where you at the Wooster-Carthage game in 2004?

Nope...I wasn't able to make the trip for that one. 

[wabco]

BB16   ... agree with 78

Beating Depauw (the larger the beat down the better) is a foundation measuring stick.

Carlson ... not only had his signals stolen by Depauw ... typical behavior by the Dannies ... but lost the next game in the 4th Q when entering up 2 TDs.  It was my understanding that winning that game was a river crossing ... and when the bridge fell in ... too much water.

As you know, alumni at Wabash occupy a special place ... especially where Depauw is concerned.  It is an article of faith that badness happening to DePauw ... if administered by Little Giants ... is the best.  If administered by others ... is also very very acceptable.  There are no teams in the NCAC which generate this amount of alumni heat.  Good to great rivalries developing and lots of respect ... but no down and ugly DePauw-esk stuff.

Now back to regular programing. 

[seinfeld]

The reason I say that is that you are arguing (for a lack of a better word) about this game with people who were actually there based on what you see in the box score. Most of your posts are very informative, but without being at a specific game in question, it doesn't make much sense to try and dissect what happened.

I could go on about that game for a whole page, but I'll conclude with 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. Carthage had a very good defense, but they weren't the '85 Bears.

And that Sutton fumble, it occurred when a Carthage safety, in an extremely athletic play, came from across the field and from behind to strip the ball without Sutton even knowing he was there. Of course Wooster had the ball two more times and did nothing with it.

[wally_wabash]

I understand what you're saying and because I don't have a first hand account of the game (unless you count the very detailed box score I'm looking at), there is a limit to how far I can go with this.  But a couple of things have been happening here that I think are very debatable whether somebody was at the game or not.  First, the assertion was made very plainly that a backup quarterback would have won the game.  The backup quarterback had five drives in the fourth quarter and (statistically) was every bit as lost and confused and ineffective as the starting quarterback (injury status is irrelevant...healthy backup did no better than experienced, injured starter). 

And the second thing...from about the time the CWRU game clock hit zeroes, the board has lit up with Wooster posters calling into question just how good Coach Schmitz is.  This playoff game has been used as a central piece of evidence against him.  I question how much you can really put on the coach when a team turns the ball over seven times.  Surely the coach didn't plan to have his kids put the ball on the ground all day, did he?  6-32 passing...how much of that is bad coaching and how much of it is poor throws, dropped passes, etc.?  Or the one thing that hasn't really been discussed is that maybe Wooster simply played a superior team with superior athletes (particularly on defense) and were overwhelmed by the jump in competition.  Isn't it possible that Schmitz did a great coaching job to have only lost to Carthage 14-7? 

In 2005, Wabash lost at home in the second round to Capital.  It was an uncharacteristically bad game for that Wabash team...Wabash fumbled (on the way in for a TD no less) and Wabash hadn't fumbled a ball in almost two months prior to that.  Harbaugh (Gagliardi finalist in '05) who was Captain Accuracy that season was missing receivers.  Was the game plan bad or did the players just have an off day?  And you also had to give Capital credit...they were an outstanding defense (and they went on to nearly take Mount out in the next round).  Was it the game plan that failed?  Was it the players being unable to adjust to the speedier defenses you see in the later rounds of the playoffs and execute the plays?  The point is that while I wasn't at the Wooster game specifically, I have seen similar things in the past. 

I really think Schmitz is getting an unfair amount of heat here...from some of the other posts I've seen this week, it would seem to me that Wooster's problems stem largely from institutional policies that will inherently hold back a football program.  Without institutional support, Lombardi wouldn't be able to coach a successful college team. 

[nike]

Honestly did not remember Reiff being in the Carthage game so much.
I guess that game lingers because any school has so very few opportunities to have a shot at winning it all.  Unless of course you are talking about Mt. Union, which is a whole different thread.  But againt Mt. Union, Carthage was losing 24-17 going into the third quarter. Wooster had a better defense than Carthage, at least from what I saw in Wooster the week before and I just think Sutton could have lit Mt. Union up.  Washington had 150+ yds for Carthage.   
Would Woo have beaten Mt. Union? Don't know. Maybe. I know they did not beat Carthage.
But thought they should have beaten Carthage and periodically in discussions with my Wooster people, we wonder hpothetically if a different coach could have gotten it done.
Coach Schmitz is a good, good guy, his kids go to class and they graduate. And it is not div1 football.  But that Wooster team was a once in a lifetime team, at least for us at Wooster. And it was a great ride. Just ended too soon.
Ok, therapy over. A win tomorrow at Witt would certainly help ease the pain of yesteryear.

[aueagle]

nike, ScotLass & wooscot: I believe football programs rise to the levels of expectation. If Presidents, administration, alumni, fans are happy with or tolerate the product on the field, then that program, to me, just exists. There is a state of inertia. If "College" has not been a consistent winner and the alumni are happy to go back to campus for Homecoming once a year and see the "Old College Try", then two things occur, apathy & frustration. The programs that have been historically "winners" will only tolerate the downside for only so long. The Wittenbergs and Baldwin-Wallaces come to mind. BW pepole were very frustrated with their string of down seasons. The Tigers just have (and pardon me Men of Wabash), the aura. They have been there & done that. To have the successful program year in & year out, as we all know, takes a multitude of components working together. Coaches, financial aid, alumni, faculty, recruiting, etc...As Patton once said, "Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser." We are all football people, and we all want to win...some programs find a way to do that. Some programs, like Mount, were so-so for many years and then made the commitment to win, graduated people and serve their school...it can happen & change on the turn of a dime....But, the parts need to work together. I have been in locker rooms where no passion exists...to me ...why play, why practice...go play pick-up flag football on the weekends and get out of my game. Many of our NCAC schools need this "passion"..we all know who they are. Maybe, it was foreshadowed in the NCAC doctrine. To compare with COW: OWU Football: "H" bats .581..19 yrs..Farkasovsky bats .190 3 yrs...Fouts bats  .453 20 yrs...Fraser bats .632 17 yrs....All I want at OWU is Championships and if your not aggressively pursuing that objective, get out of my way...Good Luck to all....let's play......

[medicine man]

Look at the classes Mt. Union hauls every year.  Unbelievable

Hate to pull out the "academic card" but come on, we know Woo will not accept what Mount does academically.

[Li'l Giant]

Look at the classes Mt. Union hauls every year.  Unbelievable

Hate to pull out the "academic card" but come on, we know Woo will not accept what Mount does academically.

You obviously don't hate pulling out that tired old card enough to keep it in your pocket. That's where it belongs.

[wally_wabash]

Look at the classes Mt. Union hauls every year.  Unbelievable

Hate to pull out the "academic card" but come on, we know Woo will not accept what Mount does academically.

[medicine man]

Okay, I will rephrase it then, I will pull it out, I don't mind pulling it out and there is absolutely NO comparison and I will decide if it belongs in my pocket and it does not on this one.

[Li'l Giant]

Okay, I will rephrase it then, I will pull it out, I don't mind pulling it out and there is absolutely NO comparison and I will decide if it belongs in my pocket and it does not on this one.

Good. If you're gonna start a flame war you ought to not pull your punches on it. Go right ahead and jump. Nobody is gonna defend you because this conversation has happened too many times on this and other boards and it gets nowhere.

[medicine man]

You certainly may have your opinion and I am not going to start any war. Everyone just about anywhere knows it is true. I have had children in the NCAC and in the OAC and believe it was much easier to get into the OAC. I am not implying anything other than it makes recruiting easier. There are great schools in both leagues but to compare recruiting for Mount and Wooster is apples to oranges.  Where did I ask for anyone to defend me?  I may have may opinion just as you have yours. Is that not what this board is for to voice your opinions and support your teams?

[Li'l Giant]

You certainly may have your opinion and I am not going to start any war. Everyone just about anywhere knows it is true. I have had children in the NCAC and in the OAC and believe it was much easier to get into the OAC. I am not implying anything other than it makes recruiting easier. There are great schools in both leagues but to compare recruiting for Mount and Wooster is apples to oranges.  Where did I ask for anyone to defend me?  I may have may opinion just as you have yours. Is that not what this board is for to voice your opinions and support your teams?

Absolutely it is. Just say what you mean. That first post of yours was disingenuous. You know exactly what you wanted to say but chose to just lob a grenade and act like it pained you to do so.

My opinion is that this academic card creates more trouble than it's worth. It's a tired argument. That's all I was trying to say.

[ScotLass]

wally et al,

I am trying to fairly view what's happening at Woo from what I know as factual input. I have no input into ancient history versus Carthage as I wasn't there that day. Some frustration is from previously expressed issues relating to administrative support (or lack thereof) for the football team. I am also a firm believer in seeking excellence in all you do from academics to athletics to community service.....all aspects of the Woo experience.....none of which should exclude the other. I have sent out positive vibes for the Witt game as I 100% believe with all the aspects I posted earlier, Woo would have the capacity to win that game.

Sometimes seeing the score, listening to the game via audio, and seeing the statistics in the box score just doesn't do complete justice to the tale. An example outside the NCAC would be seeing the Mount scores and statistics and knowing they are undoubtly, without question, a cut above the competition.  Knowing that in no way prepared me for how truly stunning that machine is when I have seen them, in person, against some very good teams. Not until then could I completely appreciate their dominance.

In no way are Woo's woes all on the coaches.  The coaches aren't fumbling and having kicks blocked, throwing interceptions, and missing tackles. The players aren't just learning the game; most have played for years before coming to Woo. Better execution by the players is a must. But, here's the rub:

Box scores and statistics show Woo is having difficulty, but without seeing each play of the game, just like with the Mount example, one can't possibly see the complete picture. While fans might be frustrated if fundamentals were intact, the players on the field were playing their hearts out, and both the offensive and defensive schemes made sense and we were still 0-3.....then I'd cheer with the best of them (as I still am by the way) and applaud the stick to it attitude of the team. But fundamentals are a coaching responsibility (and they are lacking...still...entering the 4th game), some of the team motivation factor is a coaching responsibility, and offensive and defensive adjustments are a coaching responsibility (and some glaring ones haven't happened as of the end of the CWRU game).

I've never played the game and I've never coached football and I'm a girl. But I am diligent about trying to understand the game. I watch all levels; I ask questions, I have a highlighted and dog eared copy of "Football for Dummies". Even with all of that diligence, there is a problem when, at the Case game, I am thinking about taking a shot somewhere as a defensive coordinator since my percentage of accurate recognition of Woo's upcoming offensive plays were astonishingly high. That has to be corrected ASAP. 

[nike]

Does Wabash have SRO crowds at every hame game?
What about Witt?
Lets go Scots! Let's whup us some Tigers. It could happen!
Kenyon, soften the Bishops up for us next week.