FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[Wabash Hokie]

What was the lowest combined rankings of these teams in a previous matchup?

I read this the other way. I assumed HCAlum meant the lowest number (ie the highest combined ranking - so #7 and #10 being 17 would be "lower" than #10 vs #18 being 28).

Me too ETP - I just don't have the data to answer his question.  At a combined ranking of 23 (Wabash #9 and Witt #14), I think this might be the lowest combined ranking of the two teams at their meeting.  I would bet that Wally or Sigma1 have that information.

[wally_wabash]

Here's what I found...

2010- Witt 9, Wabash 25
2013- Wabash 13, Witt 16

And it looks like that's the only two times, shockingly, that both teams have been in the top 25 at the time of the game.  This year's 9 vs. 14 game might actually be the highest ranked these two teams have been collectively for this game.  Ever...in a world where "ever" goes back to 2003. 

[1837Tigers]

Not to jump ahead, but this just came in - promo for the you-know-what next week https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8BULcuCglg

[bashbrother]

Here is the Full Scoop back to 2003

Ranking heading into the game:

2014 -  Wabash 9th -  Witt 14th
2013 -  Wabash 13th - Witt 16th
2012 -  Wabash 16th - Witt N/R
2011 -  Wabash 10th -  Witt N/R
2010 -  Wabash 25th -  Witt 9th
2009 -  Wabash 10th -  Witt N/R
2008 -  Wabash 6th -    Witt N/R  (Win over Witt kept Wabash #6)
2007 -  Wabash 14th -  Witt N/R
2006 -  Wabash N/R -   Witt N/R
2005 -  Wabash N/R -   Witt  N/R  (Win over Witt sent Wabash to #22)
2004 -  Wabash N/R -   Witt N/R  (Wooster #11) (Wabash #22 the week prior but lost to Woo)
2003 -  Wabash N/R -  Witt 10th 

Notes:
- Only one game in the years listed above when Witt was ranked and Wabash was not (2003)
-  Lowest ranking for either team heading into the game -  6th (2008)
-  Wabash has been ranked the last 8 years the week of the game.

[SaintsFAN]

And it looks like that's the only two times, shockingly, that both teams have been in the top 25 at the time of the game.  This year's 9 vs. 14 game might actually be the highest ranked these two teams have been collectively for this game.  Ever...in a world where "ever" goes back to 2003.

Definitely feels like they've been playing this game annually longer than that.

[wally_wabash]

And it looks like that's the only two times, shockingly, that both teams have been in the top 25 at the time of the game.  This year's 9 vs. 14 game might actually be the highest ranked these two teams have been collectively for this game.  Ever...in a world where "ever" goes back to 2003.

Definitely feels like they've been playing this game annually longer than that.

The annual series goes back to 2000.  The 2003 reference is the start of the D3football.com top 25.  I think had there been a D3football.com Top 25 at the conclusion of the 2002 season, then the second round playoff matchup between Wabash and Witt might have featured rankings close to (or maybe a little better) than what they are this week. 

The final regular season AFCA poll in 2002 had Wabash 9 and Witt 10, which would have been their rankings in that second round tournament game. 

[HCAlum86]

Here is the Full Scoop back to 2003

Ranking heading into the game:

2014 -  Wabash 9th -  Witt 14th
2013 -  Wabash 13th - Witt 16th
2012 -  Wabash 16th - Witt N/R
2011 -  Wabash 10th -  Witt N/R
2010 -  Wabash 25th -  Witt 9th
2009 -  Wabash 10th -  Witt N/R
2008 -  Wabash 6th -    Witt N/R  (Win over Witt kept Wabash #6)
2007 -  Wabash 14th -  Witt N/R
2006 -  Wabash N/R -   Witt N/R
2005 -  Wabash N/R -   Witt  N/R  (Win over Witt sent Wabash to #22)
2004 -  Wabash N/R -   Witt N/R  (Wooster #11) (Wabash #22 the week prior but lost to Woo)
2003 -  Wabash N/R -  Witt 10th 

Notes:
- Only one game in the years listed above when Witt was ranked and Wabash was not (2003)
-  Lowest ranking for either team heading into the game -  6th (2008)
-  Wabash has been ranked the last 8 years the week of the game.

Great stuff, as always

[Wabash Hokie]

The game notes for the DePauw v Hiram game are available below.


http://depauwtigers.com/sports/fball/2014-15/files/DePauw_FB__Notes_vs._Hiram.pdf


Should be a win for the new Tigers who will roll into the Bell game with a respectable 7-2 record and then leave with an "O for 6" - yet another class of DePauw seniors graduating without counting coup. That has to suck.

[1837Tigers]

 

The game notes for the DePauw v Hiram game are available below.


http://depauwtigers.com/sports/fball/2014-15/files/DePauw_FB__Notes_vs._Hiram.pdf


Should be a win for the new Tigers who will roll into the Bell game with a respectable 7-2 record and then leave with an "O for 6" - yet another class of DePauw seniors graduating without counting coup. That has to suck.

Glad to see The Amazing Kreskin is still among us.  If you have tomorrow's winning lottery #'s, we'll take those, too. 

See you next weekend. 

[BashDad]

THE MONSTER OF CRAWFORDSVILLE


1.

"I think I'm running out of time for a big Witt post."

I say this to my brother, Barry, as we struggle to configure a system allowing us to watch—from my computer to his wall-mounted television—a college football game from twelve years ago.

"Shut up," he says. "Just do it."

The game is the 2002 matchup that ushered in #wittweek and #wabashweek and a whole decade of dominating defenses. On the television we have sound, but no image — the tin, rapid enunciations of an announcer:

A matchup of unbeatens in Springfield today. Time Warner's college football game of the week finds unbeaten Wittenberg at 4-0 taking on unbeaten Wabash also at 4-0 here in Springfield at Edward-Mauer field.

An electric guitar riff burns through a pre-game graphics set we can't see.

"Damn," Barry says.

We're both excited for the game on Saturday as we've come to be every season. But not even in the years since 2010—when the game was moved and we were all made to wait nine weeks for a marquee match up—not even since then have we gathered to watch the 2002 game that started everything. Something feels different. And I think I know what it is.

One of us, every couple of weeks this season, will very carefully bring up this year's Wabash team in relation to the teams before it — we've never had this much depth or I've never seen them do x or y or I don't think there's a single team in the country that we can't compete with. You see where this is going. The something that feels different is that we're beginning to believe that this is the best Wabash football team we've ever had. And though we don't say it, when we finally get the game on his television and adjust the aspect ratio to the 4:3 square of the pre-streaming age, what my brother and I are interested in isn't just nostalgia. We're checking the source.

Is Wabash better now than we were then?


2.

Barry calls: "What's taking so long?"
"I had to go buy a power cord. I left mine on the plane."
"Okay. What's taking so long?"
"I'm writing it now."
"Well hurry."
"I'm not gonna hurry. It'll be done when it's done."
"You're just sitting there, staring into the distance trying to think up some dumb line."

He hangs up. Five minutes later, he sends me an email:

"The premise of the Springfield News article about the Witt victory in 2009 being some kind of second sea-change in the rivalry--the three straight wins by Wabash in 2002-03 being obviously the first--is practically Homeric in what it says about the favor and bias of a local sports section. Pure exaggeration. The factual error about this being Witt's opportunity to win three straight against Wabash for the first time belies the fact that Witt hasn't ever done to Wabash what Wabash has done to Witt. There has not been a second sea-change. The first isn't even over."

Wittenberg in 2002 hadn't lost a conference home game in ten years. Ten. Years. They were ranked 4th in the country. They had the nation's leading rusher. And they were playing at home on homecoming against an unranked team who had last played a post-season game 25 years prior. And if that weren't enough, Wabash spotted them 14 points and an entire quarter of football.

There is the unspoken belief that each subsequent reunion of Wabash/Wittenberg has the potential to replicate the feeling of this game. That is absurd. The years since that game have seen some similarly close contests—field goals separated the teams in 2006, 2008, 2009, and 20012—but the 2002 game is never happening again, at least not between these two schools. It can't. Wabash's defeat of North Central in 2012, the second largest milestone in contemporary Wabash football history, is the only win that comes close. But that doesn't mean, clearly, that Wabash has moved on. Where once stood a conference game, now stands a rivalry.

Barry continued:

"... you can trace the arc of [Wabash's] ascension to the national stage back to this game. The tradition of the Little Giants is a living tradition (just ask Tyler Burke), and that's a big part of how an all-male small college with academic rigor can get these guys. We went from recruiting talent based on the opportunity to play in the Bell Game, to recruiting based on the chance to play in the Bell Game and against Wittenberg. Then to play in the Bell Game, against Wittenberg, and into the playoffs."

And this is the best point anyone will ever make about Wabash vs. Wittenberg. The games between them are, now and forever, rematches. To be a fan of Wabash is to be a fan of the program that beat Wittenberg in 2002. Period. That is the narrative. That is our cornerstone.


3.

Last year, Florence and Cunningham were far and away the best offensive players on the field. In fact, if we were to rank the best offensive players from either team last year we might get something like this:

1. Florence - Wittenberg
2. Cunningham - Wittenberg
3. Gary - Wittenberg
4. Dehnke - Wittenberg
5. Hodges - Wabash

If you're a Wabash fan, that's not good. Our best offensive threat was a player who was going to touch the ball, what, ten times? You look at a list like that, as a Wabash fan, and you say boy, I hope our defense is good. Which is, basically, what we all said last year.

This year is different. The list looks something like this:

1. Holmes - Wabash
2. Zureck - Wabash

And then some combination of:

-Putko/Rice - Wabash
-Hodges - Wabash
-Christen - Wabash
-Gary - Witt
-Dehnke - Witt
-Jenkins - Witt
-Culvahouse - Witt

Wabash has at least the two best offensive players—Holmes and Zureck, both of whom didn't play last year—along with Drake and Hodges who are definitely on this year's best-of list and we have Dickerson too, and Putko who is way better and then Connor-every-third-series-Rice (who might, actually, be the most talented offensive player to step on the field tomorrow).

So here's the thing -- this has to have a significant impact on the game, doesn't it? That swing of, like, "star power" can't not matter.

My hunch about the two teams has been all year that they're basically the same as they were last season, except: Witt's offense is going to be worse and Wabash's offense is going to be better. But how much?

Because they played a similar schedule this year (Hampden-Sydney being the only exception) as they did last year, we can unscientifically cross-check the stats in Witt's game preview. See below:




You have basically the same Wabash defense, the same Wittenberg defense--which by the way no-one talks about and they should--a different Witt offense, and a different Wabash offense.

Wittenberg's offense averages less throwing the ball, almost a hundred yards less running the ball, and scores about ten points less. And Wabash? Wabash is better in every single offensive category than they were a season ago.

Last year we wondered if Witt's offense would have success against Wabash's defense. We kind of knew the Wabash offense was--ahem--below par.  The question was — can they smother Florence? They couldn't. And Wabash's own offense couldn't keep up. So they lost.

The question this year is: can the Wabash offense score points on the Wittenberg defense? The answer, to me, is clear.

I think Wabash blows them out 35-7.

Fear the Flock. WAF.

[ExTartanPlayer]

The big-game BashDad post always delivers.

[Wabash Hokie]

The game notes for the DePauw v Hiram game are available below.


http://depauwtigers.com/sports/fball/2014-15/files/DePauw_FB__Notes_vs._Hiram.pdf


Should be a win for the new Tigers who will roll into the Bell game with a respectable 7-2 record and then leave with an "O for 6" - yet another class of DePauw seniors graduating without counting coup. That has to suck.

Glad to see The Amazing Kreskin is still among us.  If you have tomorrow's winning lottery #'s, we'll take those, too. 

See you next weekend. 

Note:  I am editing my original post as its content was more appropriate for the Monon Bell thread.

No psychic skills needed for this no-brainer, sort of like predicting that the sun is going to rise in the east.  If picking the lottery was as easy as forecasting this Wabash win,then we would all be millionaires.


Yes - see you next weekend.

[sigma one]

Bravo, BashDad.  Best summation of the Wabash-Wittenberg rivalry beginning with that 46-43 OT thriller, and best analysis of the rise of Wabash football over the past dozen or more years that I've read anywhere or heard discussed anywhere.  I agree about the North Central game, and on a different level would throw in the 47-0 thrashing of a DPU team headed for the playoffs.  This last not because of the final score but as the biggest surprise v. a DPU team that came in undefeated and going to the playoffs.

[BashDad]

BashDad.

[bashbrother]

One of the greatest fans Wabash College will ever have...  Awesome!