FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[BashDad]

They did beat Augsburg and Bethel more decisively in the opening stanzas last year, but I don't think that I would read into a pair of tougher-than-expected early wins against a midpack and an upper-tier MIAC team as a problem.

What are we calling "a problem," though?

While Warburg may still be very good, these early games do take some of the shine off fairly lofty expectations for the Knights heading into 2015. After two weeks, 2015 Wartburg is not as good as 2014 Wartburg. Maybe Augsburg and Bethel are better, but if we're having this conversation in the context of Walnut and Bronze -- which we are when a.) we're talking about a team this high up the pecking order and b.) we're talking about a team whose previous year version shouldah couldah wouldah beat the National Champion-- then I would label any indication that Wartburg is not-as-good in 2015 as "problematic."

A one point lead late in the 4th against Augsburg? Problem.  Schrader throwing more picks than TDs in his first two games? Problem.

The Knights may rebound for the rest of the schedule (they have opportunities to impress this week against Stout and in a month against Coe), though if we were handicapping a Wartburg/UWW game this week, we'd probably be adding a couple touchdowns to the imaginary line we got all excited about in the off season. And this is really what we're talking about when we're talking about teams sniffing the Top 5 -- can they legitimately challenge for the title?

After two weeks, I think they're probably closer to the #10-12 area of the Top 25 than the top 5. I'd have Wheaton above them for sure and I can't say  that I'd be super, duper confidant picking the Knights in a game, as I move down the poll, until I got to W&J at #14.

Anyway, that's a pretty major swing of expectation for a team that I was ready to drive the bandwagon for entering 2015.

[Pat Coleman]

Not exactly NCAC related, though I was excited to learn (I think) something gossip-y about the 2015 season in last Friday's TripleTake. Pat Coleman seems to obliquely suggest that he's one of the two voters throwing a #1 vote to Linfield:

"I just think Linfield is helmet and shoulder pads above Chapman, if not perhaps the best team in all of D-III football."

This is fun! I don't remember the oft-reserved PC tiptoeing (even this lightly) out on a limb in a long while. And the wildcats made him look good on Saturday, destroying #22 Chapman 52-14.

Anyway, between that and Wartburg / Schrader raising some question marks to begin their season, there's intriguing stuff happening in front of Wabash in the Top 10.

Actually, listen to the podcast this morning. It gets even more clear.

[ExTartanPlayer]

They did beat Augsburg and Bethel more decisively in the opening stanzas last year, but I don't think that I would read into a pair of tougher-than-expected early wins against a midpack and an upper-tier MIAC team as a problem.

What are we calling "a problem," though?

While Warburg may still be very good, these early games do take some of the shine off fairly lofty expectations for the Knights heading into 2015. After two weeks, 2015 Wartburg is not as good as 2014 Wartburg. Maybe Augsburg and Bethel are better, but if we're having this conversation in the context of Walnut and Bronze -- which we are when a.) we're talking about a team this high up the pecking order and b.) we're talking about a team whose previous year version shouldah couldah wouldah beat the National Champion-- then I would label any indication that Wartburg is not-as-good in 2015 as "problematic."

A one point lead late in the 4th against Augsburg? Problem.  Schrader throwing more picks than TDs in his first two games? Problem.

The Knights may rebound for the rest of the schedule (they have opportunities to impress this week against Stout and in a month against Coe), though if we were handicapping a Wartburg/UWW game this week, we'd probably be adding a couple touchdowns to the imaginary line we got all excited about in the off season. And this is really what we're talking about when we're talking about teams sniffing the Top 5 -- can they legitimately challenge for the title?

After two weeks, I think they're probably closer to the #10-12 area of the Top 25 than the top 5. I'd have Wheaton above them for sure and I can't say  that I'd be super, duper confidant picking the Knights in a game, as I move down the poll, until I got to W&J at #14.

Anyway, that's a pretty major swing of expectation for a team that I was ready to drive the bandwagon for entering 2015.

Hey, that's all fair.  As I said in my initial post - "I can appreciate the desire for actually being hard on teams at the top of the rankings; I dislike the attitude of "It's not fair that (Team X) dropped in the rankings, they won this week" when applied to teams in the top 10-15.  We should have high standards for the teams up there."  I was just in a discussion about John Carroll last week with a similar vibe.  You're absolutely right that by the top 5-6 in the rankings, we should be looking at realistic Stagg Bowl candidates, and the Wartburg team that came this-close to knocking of UWW in 2014 has not shown up yet in early 2015.  We're pretty much of the same mind here.

[Schwami]

The non-conference schedule is now complete for the NCAC, and the conference finishes with a rather mediocre 4-6 record.

The Good:  2-0 against the OAC --- more evidence that the Upper Half of the NCAC is better than the Bottom Half of the OAC, FWIW.

The Bad:  0-3 against the PAC.  While the Wooster loss to W&J is understandable, the Bottom Half of the NCAC underwhelmed against the Bottom Half of the PAC.

The Ugly:  DePauw 53, Earlham 0.  Why did they even schedule this game?  Oh, maybe to see what it feels like to beat somebody by something like, say, 47-0.

[Pat Coleman]

The Ugly:  DePauw 53, Earlham 0.  Why did they even schedule this game?  Oh, maybe to see what it feels like to beat somebody by something like, say, 47-0.

I looked at this before the game last week and it appears that it replaced a game with Sewanee. Similar opponent but less expensive?

[wally_wabash]

The Ugly:  DePauw 53, Earlham 0.  Why did they even schedule this game?  Oh, maybe to see what it feels like to beat somebody by something like, say, 47-0.

ZING. 

The non-conference schedule is now complete for the NCAC, and the conference finishes with a rather mediocre 4-6 record.

I think 4-6 kind of meets expectations here.  Most of these matchups were really one-sided to begin with.  Digging deeper than just the win/loss designation, I think Wabash and Denison maybe did a shade better than expected, and Witt a bit worse than expected.  If you want to find positives from the OWU/UMHB game, you can (namely, they hung in there and got blown out late as opposed to getting blown out early). 

Really, I think if the NCAC was ever going to do better than 4-6, they would have needed Hiram, Kenyon, or Allegheny to win one of their games, and that group went 0-3 (all against mildly favored opponents) and so 4-6 is what we get. 

[BashDad]

The OWU/UMHB game is Extrapolator's Galore in a fun week for it.

[bashbrother]

While starting the week off with hopes of a close game or maybe even an upset in Springfield this Saturday,  I took a look at the last 5 meetings between Witt and OWU and am now a little less optimistic...

2014 -  42-6
2013 -  55-17
2011 -  34-13
2010 - 52-0
2009 - 20-0

Hard for both Wabash and Witt to not fall victim to looking ahead, even a little bit....  10/26 is a very big game... maybe the season for one of the teams.

[Bishopleftiesdad]

Yeah I agree, I was a little more hopeful until Witt had a bye week the same as OWU. OWU's offense really struggled as well against UMHB. Plus with Cap keeping it close, I have to imagine they will be less likely to be looking ahead.

[wally_wabash]

Hard for both Wabash and Witt to not fall victim to looking ahead, even a little bit

Yeah I agree, I was a little more hopeful until Witt had a bye week the same as OWU. OWU's offense really struggled as well against UMHB. Plus with Cap keeping it close, I have to imagine they will be less likely to be looking ahead.

RE: looking ahead...I think the difference is that this week one team can get away with looking ahead and one team maybe can't.  As long as the bus makes it to Meadville, I don't think Allegheny can win.  They've got a two year starting QB over there- one of the few players with legit experience and at the most important position- and they're playing rotating QBs.  I will fully admit to not being quite aware of just how much Allegheny was starting over (again) this year.  I won't go as far (yet) as to say that they won't win this year, but I can't find a spot where they'll be favored through the remainder of conference play. 

Definitely understand that OWU had trouble moving the ball against UMHB.  That'll happen.  The Cru is (are?) really good.  Witt doesn't have UMHB's defense.  Not even a little bit.  I saw enough positive things from OWU vs. UMHB to make me believe that if Witt is looking past this game, they may quite literally lose their head. 

[BashDad]

OWU's offense sucked against UMHB but you can scavenge for some Witt-specific silver linings in the box score.

Namely, that the Bishops held UMHB to 126 yards passing on 6-19 (which is gross), picked them off once, and sacked the QB 4 times, all by the defensive line. UMHB doesn't have super solid QB play (they played three different QBs last week), but still -- those are quality numbers against an elite team.

Witt will have a better quarterback, but the Tigers only ran for a little bit (119) against a mediocre-at-best Capital team. If OWU's defensive front is as good as "four sacks against UMHB" then I'm saying they're as good against the run as Capital. The question then, for me, is how much will OWU disrupt Jenkins? And how much will Witt be forced to throw? And how successful will that be?

I can imagine OWU giving Witt fits up front defensively, which might actually turn this into a game if Jenkins tosses some picks, takes some sacks, or otherwise can't get settled.

[sigma one]

On how DePauw and Earlham got together.  For several years on the Board we have speculated on why Team A and Team B schedule one another, or don't.  We want to see good teams play, and so why not A and B getting together.
     Before last Saturday, DPU and Earlham had played against one another 38X.  The only teams DPU has played more than that are Butler, Franklin, Rose-Hulman (by whatever name R-H was going by at the time.), and Wabash.  They and Wabash have played 121X.  But the last time the Tigers and Quakers played was 1967; that's a long hiatus.
      For this year, a home game vs. DePauw gives Earlham a fifth home game.  Maybe getting that fifth home contest was important to Earlham, and DePauw agreed.  Maybe they wanted the old in-state rivalry back.  Maybe both teams liked the idea of two near-to-one-another quality liberal arts colleges getting back together.  Maybe budget was a factor.  No overnight for DPU this year, I would guess, although I don't know that for a fact.  But certainly a short bus trip.  When this game was scheduled, and that has to be several years ago, DePauw wasn't looking too strong itself, suffering through coaching changes and poor results, and generally in a down period when the financial situation everywhere was problematic.   
     Anyway, those are just a few factors that might have influenced their decision to play. It turns out that Earlham is really, really in bad shape, and Billy L. has DePauw in probable contention in the NCAC.  A mismatch ensued.  I remember a series Wabash vs. Hanover, that ended up looking terrible for the Panthers, and seeming like Wabash was taking advantage of playing a poor team.  But when the game was scheduled Hanover was respectable, Wabash was searching for a first game vs. an Indiana rival, and the two both had the open date.  Also, the economy was squeezing athletic budgets.  So, home and home.
     I can't fault DPU on this one.  Several years ago, in addition to everything else, they were looking to schedule a team they thought they could beat, and at a time when then were not beating too many other teams. 

[wally_wabash]

Jenkins can throw picks.  We know this much. 

[sigma one]

Yes, Wittenberg/OWU is intriguing.  I'll throw a few more ideas at the game.  It's easy to fault Witt for not stopping the Capital running game in week 1.  But even with a 3-7 record in 2014 Cap was the 7th most successful rushing team in the country.  Most teams had difficulty stopping them.  I see that Jimmy Dehnke had all the first-group carries for the Tigers.  Where was Sean Gary?  Last year the two shared the, admittedly anemic, running game, with Gary getting more rushes, 179 to 97.  His name is still on the roster, so I'd think that he was injured (or disciplined, but I don't want to think that).  Will he return for OWU?  Will Finchem hold him out, save him for Wabash?  Etc.  With the new OC last year,  Witt struggled to run the ball even with two experienced backs.  Dehnke was newcomer of the year as a freshman as I recall, and Gary was a force the year before last . . so one would think they will want get some balance back in their attack.  Of course, with Jenkins, Culvahouse, Stump, Landis, all back who knows.  And Dehnke is a receiving threat as well.
     Last week, Witt faced that potent running game, the only time this year they will see that kind of offense.  The triple option is tough to prepare for, and I think Witt just wasn't ready for what Cap could do.  This week they face a more conventional offense, or at least one of the kind they are used to defending. 
     All that said, we agree that OWU played MH-B tougher than we thought they would.  The search for a QB may have hampered the Cru in the year's first game, but just maybe the OWU defense is going to be terrific.  This Saturday will tell us a lot more about Witt and OWU.  It will iikely tell us nothing about Wabash unless the LGs don't do what we expect them to do.  Looking ahead, maybe a caution for both teams.  (I am not saying I expect Allegheny to stay close to Wabash.)
     

[bashbrother]

Jenkins can throw picks.  We know this much.

He threw 8 picks and still recorded 393 yards passing, completing 28 of 56.   Talk about getting back on the horse.

He was very consistent....  4 picks in each half and.... had a string of 3 consecutive possessions in the 2nd qtr. that ended in INT's