FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[BashBacker#16]

"Matt Hunt should be in the conversation as the best QB in the conference"

*disclaimers:  I am sure he's a good kid, I don't know him, this isn't personal.

What am I missing?

Total Offense = 6th
Passing Yards = 5th
Passing Yards/Attempt = 7th
Pass Completion % = 10th, yes last in the league
Pass TD's = tied for 6th with 2 others
Pass Efficiency = 6th

Intangibles?  Signature win for the program?  (He beat Kenyon 24-0)

[Kira & Jaxon's Dad]

I did not make the claim about John Carroll to ruffle any feathers, and I have nothing but respect and admiration for the Mount Union football program. But I have been around football my entire life, and the John Carroll roster carries significantly more talent than does Mount Union, this year. I also believe that they have a coach that won't be out schemed in Arth, but hey we'll see.

Until that point comes, I'm all about the NCAC, not the OAC. The Patriot League to our Ivy

This is comical.  A good game is brewing for sure, but that statement is ludicrous.

We shall see, good man.

JCU 17 - ONU 10  (Total Offense JCU 445 - ONU 269) 17-10 Victory over ONU???
MTU 62 - ONU 0  (Total Offense MTU 656 - ONU 130)

JCU 43 - HEID 16 (Total Offense JCU 572 - HEID 259)
MTU 58  - HEID 17 (Total Offense MTU 746 - HEID 407)

JCU 80 - MAR 0 (Total Offense JCU 415 - MAR 34)  (Yeah I did a double take, 34 Yards Allowed...)
MTU 63 - MAR 7 (Total Offense MTU 583 - MAR 157)

I'll take MTU with the Gagliardi Winner, Stable of RBs, Much Improved Defense (funny to say after a trip to the Stagg Bowl) and Best Corps of WR in the Country over JCU.  Especially with the game at LK Field.

Getting into comparative analysis is always a dangerous road to go down in football, lad.

Lad?  Haven't been called that before.  Especially in my advanced age.

[formerd3db]

There is no truth to the rumor that NCAC refs were the crew working the Florida State / Notre Dame game...

Well, that's because the end of game call was correct....

Just for the sake of discussion, would you mind explaining to some here why the call was correct?  We understand the "no pick" rule, however, some people might argue that there were 3 receivers and 3 defenders out on the wing; the player called for the penalty blocked the man straight in front of him "head to head".  One could claim that all three defenders had (or certainly could have) people "man for man", so the defender behind the one being blocked would have then been responsible for the flare back.  He wasn't actually caught up in the blocking action directly in front of him, so he could move freely; froze for a second.  I'm not saying the call wasn't correct, rather just putting out there how some could interpret that it wasn't (like Kelly).  Your thoughts?

[BashBacker#16]

Regarding the ND penalty - could you not also argue that the defensive guy jammed the ND receiver?  I could see defensive holding.  You could even make a claim that he held #20, both hands are on the receiver.  Regardless, you can't tell me the guy that got "picked" wasn't going to cover Robinson.  Being an Indiana guy I am sure I may be a little biased but it was a ballsy call for sure.  Herbstreit was adamant that they made the right call.  .?

Jimbo's post game interview was painful to watch.  Barf.

[Li'l Giant]

There is no truth to the rumor that NCAC refs were the crew working the Florida State / Notre Dame game...

Well, that's because the end of game call was correct....

Just for the sake of discussion, would you mind explaining to some here why the call was correct?  We understand the "no pick" rule, however, some people might argue that there were 3 receivers and 3 defenders out on the wing; the player called for the penalty blocked the man straight in front of him "head to head".  One could claim that all three defenders had (or certainly could have) people "man for man", so the defender behind the one being blocked would have then been responsible for the flare back.  He wasn't actually caught up in the blocking action directly in front of him, so he could move freely; froze for a second.  I'm not saying the call wasn't correct, rather just putting out there how some could interpret that it wasn't (like Kelly).  Your thoughts?

Those WRs don't look like they're even pretending to run a route. The ball leaves Golson's hand a split second after this picture and the ND WRs are blocking like they're on the OL. I know some ND fans were saying the DBs were pulling the WRs into them, but that's not what it looks like to me. 

[BashBacker#16]

LilGiant,

Excellent photo.  What if the defenders were told to jam the hell out of the receivers?  Does that change anything?  I don't know - honest question.

[Li'l Giant]

I think that would have been DPI since the DBs would have initiated contact with the intent to impede.

However, check this photo. There you see the ND WRs not running routes, but impeding the DBs who are trying to get to the ball. I didn't see anything to convince me its the wrong call.

[Kira & Jaxon's Dad]

From the NCAA Rulebook:

ARTICLE 8.
a. During a down in which a legal forward pass crosses the neutral
zone, illegal contact by Team A and Team B players is prohibited from the time
the ball is snapped until it is touched by any player or an official (A.R. 7-3-8-II).

b. Offensive pass interference by a Team A player beyond the neutral zone
during a legal forward pass play in which a forward pass crosses the
neutral zone is contact that interferes with a Team B eligible player. It is
the responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponents.

[formerd3db]

I think that would have been DPI since the DBs would have initiated contact with the intent to impede.

However, check this photo. There you see the ND WRs not running routes, but impeding the DBs who are trying to get to the ball. I didn't see anything to convince me its the wrong call.

There are some who would disagree with you-certainly DPI could have been called.  One can't really say the WRs were not running routes-those could have been straight routes.  In addition, contact is allowed within the 5 yard "jamming zone" as long as the ball was not in the air (which it was not at that time) and which the DB's initiated by coming forward.  Also, the other defender didn't even make any effort to try and cover the open receiver-he was not impeded, he wasn't even touched and made no effort, as I recall, to try and get over there.  So in that regard, one could argue it couldn't have been a pick play (again, considering the other two defenders were taking head on the receivers-this is not like a pick play in basketball in that usual sense.  I think that DPI could have just as easily been called as the pick penalty was.  While it is the responsibility of the offensive players to avoid the opponents, they can't do that very well if the defensive players are engaging them.  The bottom line is that it isn't as clear cut as Herbstriet makes it out to be.  And being a former db, I should be biased for them!      Overall, an interesting happening and another controversial call in an exciting game.   

[Li'l Giant]

5 yard rule is an NFL rule. This DPI argument is akin to saying it's DPI because the DBs were in position to defend the WRs. Just because one wasn't picked doesn't mean the others weren't.

Most of what I've seen from ND fans is conceding its a penalty and complaining more that the refs didn't swallow the whistle because it's the final minute.

[formerd3db]

5 yard rule is an NFL rule. This DPI argument is akin to saying it's DPI because the DBs were in position to defend the WRs. Just because one wasn't picked doesn't mean the others weren't.

Most of what I've seen from ND fans is conceding its a penalty and complaining more that the refs didn't swallow the whistle because it's the final minute.

DBs can still jam somebody off the line in college, which is in essence, within 5 yards and I think most people will agree that officials usually will allow that and won't call it.  It happens all the time everywhere.  As to your second assertion, not really.  It is highly unlikely those defenders were not in anything but a man-to-man being it was a "red-zone" situation, yet that doesn't mean that the others were necessarily picked.  I also think it unlikely there would be two designed picks (in fact, I doubt it was a designed pick play anyway); more likely, it just happened that way.  I still believe the call could have gone either way, but it didn't and it's history.  I'm not a fan of either of those teams, so I don't have an allegiance either way.  Regardless, when those types of plays happen and potentially controversial calls occur, it obviously makes for interesting debate on specific interpretation of the rules. 

[wabndy]

Perhaps to bring this discussion around to something closer to the subject line. Have I heard before that the stagg bowl uses instant replay?  Is there anything prohibiting a d3 conference from allowing or mandating some form of instant replay?

I ask this also because I continue to be amazed at the quality of available video in a large percentage of d3 games. It wasn't that long ago that getting an audio broadcast off the internet was a rare treat for most games. Where are we going to be in another 5-10 years with cheaper and better quality cameras that require less and less of a production commitment. Technology wise, adding an extra official to the crew and giving him access to video feeds wouldn't seem like much of a technical leap by today's standards.

[formerd3db]

wabndy:

Well, perhaps someday it might trickle down to the DIII level for games other than the championship (or playoffs), it is difficult to say.  Yet, IMO, probably will still be quite some time if it were to happen.  As you mention, technology and video availability for DIII games has expanded tremendously in recent years and many DIII schools now have regional live broadcasts.  That is amazing.  My wife did not attend the home games this year, yet saw them via the broadcasts.  Overall, I think that is a good thing since it helps with more awareness of DIII to many people who might not be aware of this division of football and/or not to forget mentioning about those who can't attend the game in person for whatever reason. 

[BashDad]

"Matt Hunt should be in the conversation as the best QB in the conference"

*disclaimers:  I am sure he's a good kid, I don't know him, this isn't personal.

What am I missing?

Total Offense = 6th
Passing Yards = 5th
Passing Yards/Attempt = 7th
Pass Completion % = 10th, yes last in the league
Pass TD's = tied for 6th with 2 others
Pass Efficiency = 6th

Intangibles?  Signature win for the program?  (He beat Kenyon 24-0)

This is a dangerous stance for you to be taking, Krock. I hope you're knocking on wood with the force of two Monon Bells. The dude is totally talented -- period.  I hope he keeps putting up mediocre numbers for the rest of the time he's in school, but I don't think he will. He's made throws -- as a sophomore -- that make me want to watch Depauw football games. There's no stat for that. And really no other QB in the NCAC that makes me really want to turn on a game (Barnes did for a hot second. The Witt QB has my attention after Saturday. That's kind of it). DPU has never had a QB that I found to be as compelling. Spud looked like an infant, Weitoff and Yoder were... [redacted]... , and Jason Lee had the disadvantage of being the Not Knott. I think Hunt actually looks like he has some magic about him. And you know what? I want him to be great so bad. I'm so tired of Depauw not being good. It's boring.

I think you should watch him play. I think you'll get excited too.

[HCAlum86]

I think two very good QBs in the conference will have a go at it on Saturday in OWU v. Hiram. The conference standings should really start to sort themselves out after this week's games.