FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[wooscot]

nike,

i agree 100% that recruiting is directly related to a great coach's skill set.  you need to be able to sell your program, or in most cases, sell the dream or idea of what you see your program becoming to recruits (and it CANNOT be done withour their help of course ).

however, if you don't have an administration willing to allow a coach the freedom to recruit kids that will get admitted even if they are borderline for that institutions standards, it doesn't matter how bad a kid wants to come play for you or how great of a recruiter you are.  if the kid cannot get admitted, its end of story.  this then puts the coach in the situation of "selectively recruiting" which is difficult b/c now not only are you targeting kids with above average academics, you are also pitted against a greater number of institutions competing for this kid b/c he is an easy admit(as a result, you NEED more to offer this kid in regards to playing time, facilities, etc...because he has more options).  on the flip side, the kids you cannot get into your school are now left with a shorter list of institutions recruiting him and willing to admit him.  this shrinks the competition making the job easier for those coaches.  so when you combine a great coach who is a great recruiter with an institution that grants the coach this freedom, you end up with a great situation.  icing on the cake is when the institution i just described also has nice facilities, a winning tradition, and a decent academic reputation aside from some suspect student-athlete admits. 

of course, the eternal question is which comes first?  truly, its coaching/recruiting first, but to be the type of competitive program I think we're all talking about here, you need a little help from your school's admissions department unless your respective institution that sticks to its guns regarding admissions standards just does a phenomenal job "selectively recruiting" in beating out the sheer greater number of schools after your same kids.  I don't think we've seen this yet, at least when you look at the results on the football field.  Maybe I'm wrong b/c i don't know a whole lot about St. Johns, Pac Lute, Rowan, Mary Hardin, etc...

[wally_wabash]

Regarding the UWW games - isn't bad weather supposed to be an equalizer, creating low scoring, defensive struggles?  I suppose Bash should be lucky the game wasn't played in sunny skies with 60 degree weather.  UWW may have had 47 by halftime.  Cap lost by 20, Bash lost by FORTY POINTS!  I don't care who you are or what the weather is, that is getting crushed.  Perhaps with better conditions, the game would have been closer.  Who knows.

How about another comparison - Cap beats Witt out the gate 13-0 at Witt.  Witt travels to Bash mid season and loses 24-17 on the road.  UWW plays both Cap and Bash - beats Cap by 20, beats Bash by 40 in terrible weather.  What does this suggest?

Now, I agree to a point that comparative scores do not tell the whole story and sometimes, game results are anamolies.  However, when you look at the results vs two common oppononets as noted above, I think its safe to say Cap is likely two touchdowns better than Bash.  This is the NCAC champion who rolled through the conference against the OAC runner up who lost TWO conference games , one to MUC and one to cross town rival Otterbein at Otterbein.  For arguments sake, Bash would have finished no higher than 3rd this season if it played in the OAC and in all liklihood, probably would have lost at least one more conference game somewhere on the road.  And this, my friends, is why this comparison is so upsetting.

The weather is an equalizer when one team has a big speed advantage over another team...bad field conditions on which one team can't utilize that speed evens things out for a team that can't.  Wabash's offensive strength this season was speed, particularly at the WR position.  Wabash's wideouts couldn't run in the powder and it killed them offensively.  On a better day with even decent playing conditions, Wabash certainly could have had more of a chance offensively. 

This seems like a good time to mention that I'm not using the weather as an excuse.  Whitewater is the better team and probably wins the game by a couple of scores (at least).  It's unfair to Whitewater to use the snow as the solitary reason for Wabash's offensive impotence Saturday.  Whitewater has a helluva defense that is playing lights out right now.  But in this case we'd all be ignorant to see that a field like that isn't crippling to a team whose offense is designed on stretching the field and letting the wide receivers get loose and run with the ball, particularly in the absence of a bruising running game which Whitewater had. 

We've really got to get away from the comparative scores....it's pointless and you can't draw any real conclusions from it.  I hear what you're saying...there's a gap between the NCAC's best and the elite playoff teams.  This much is clear.  What you can't say is that there is a huge gap between the NCAC's best and the middle tier OAC teams...there isn't any evidence to support that.  And it doesn't matter anyway because the middle tier OAC teams aren't the teams the NCAC playoff representative has to beat to get deeper into the tournament. 

[wooscot]

wally,

I hear what you are saying.  You are right,  every game I ever played in high school and college or coached in, the weather always equalized the teams with one exception - spread, vertical passing teams generally cannot move the ball in rainy/muddy/snowy weather.  I didn't realize Wabash was that one dimensional this year that they couldn't run the ball effectively in rough weather.  I guess there is a lesson to be learned here .... to make a run in the playoffs at any leve, you need balance.  I see it all the time in high school ball here in ohio - spread offense teams (generally speaking) have trouble in November b/c of weather.  However, the great teams that run the spread also usually have a great running game that compliments the spread along with a stout defense.  You see, its the effectiveness of your run offense and defense that is exposed in inclement weather games.  Our guys up front against yours.  Sounds like UWW just simply dominated the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball, to be honest.  If this were the case, a 70 degree sunny day wouldn't have stopped UWW from hanging 40+ on Bash if their line was that dominating on both sides of the ball.  Bash probably, like you said, would have put up some more points than 7, but again, with a team that simply dominates the LOS, time of possession becomes critical leading to fewer opportunities for a fast paced vertical passing offense to score. 

Was Wabash really that much faster the UWW?  I'd be surprised if a team of that caliber didn't have some burners on both sides of the ball.  I know they pound the rock with their stud RB, but I'm certain they have played teams (like Capital) that have speed on both sides of the ball and handled them pretty well.  Plus, a passing offense in this type of weather actually does have one advantage - the WRs know where they are going with ther routes.  I've played in "snowbowls" before believe me, if teh WR is athletic enough and runs good routes, he is uncoverable with an accurate QB.  But again, that QB must be deadly accurate and have time through.  Plus, the WRs must be mentally tough enough not to think its too slipperly to run good routes.  Its tough and obviously the routes won't be as crisp or tight, but you can create seperation. 

Also, I'm not comparing the top tier NCAC teams to middle tier OAC teams.  I didn't say that.  I'm comparing the best of the NCAC to the best of the OAC and I think its a comparison you and mostly everybody else would agree with.  Clearly, over the last few years, top NCAC teams have beaten middle and low tier OAC teams consistently, with some exceptions.  However, again, its the top tier OAC teams that the NCAC has trouble handling.

[nike]

Did not realize how bad the weather was till I saw pictures today. Wow!
Saw Wabash a couple times and their passing game was great and opened things up for the run.  Win at  CWRU  was a bit strange for Wabash because the running game was so dominant(Sobecki especially).  But Whitewater must have been a beast.  And with wideouts unable to keep their footing, well...
Let us see how Wooster's new man deals with football in the overall scheme of things.  Basketball program is fine, save for a championship.
Used to travel to Alliance a lot in the 70's and their games and teams were no big deal then.  When Kehres took over, everything changed.

[wooscot]

i guess UWW is just that good then.  should be a good game if they play MUC. 

In all seriousness, before it gets started, I'm not dogging Wabash or trying to downplay the great season they had.  I just think when you look at teams like MUC and UWW, you are dealing with different animals all around.  I believe the game with Bash would have been a little closer if the weather were decent, but as I stated earlier, you need to be able to win the battle up front in all types of weather.  i'm just amazed UWW could put up that many points actually knowing how slow things usually progress is weather like that. 

New topic - i've always been curious as to how Wabash targets its recruits.  Any insight?

[BashBacker#16]

Nike,

The weather conditions last Saturday were unbelievable to put it lightly.  There was not a flake of snow until about 10 am - and you can see by kickoff how bad it was.  No matter the score, its hard to not think of how the came would have gone with better conditions.  Especially knowing our team's strength was the passing game and the spread offense.  The other thing I didn't realize until later was the size of some of the key UW-W guys.  Their middle linebacker, AJ Raebel is 6'5 240, their NoseGuard was 6'4 310, their guard that they pulled often for Beaver was 6'7 314, their TE was 6'5 240, their Free Safety was 6'5 200, etc.

Even though it did not work out, seeing Dustin Huff take the field again was pretty cool.  It was a remarkable story that he could come back after severely injuring his ankle.  To put it in perspective, the docs said it was much, much worse once they went in for surgery (torn ligaments - multiple, damaged tendon, etc.).  I had heard as long as 4-6 months that he would be out.  He's been rehabbing and this past Monday (I know he was on the treadmill as far back as Denison) - the docs cleared him after he went through extensive progression tests.   Apparently his first practice back was Tuesday and he lit it up.  People couldn't believe what they were watching and how good he looked.  CC was quoted in the C-ville paper that he hadn't missed a beat.  While that was going on, Hudson was battling the flu during the week (along with a bunch of others).  I, for one, was really excited to see #4 and felt he would have a very good game.  Once I saw the weather as kickoff approached (did you see the photo of the plow/snow blower kicking it off the field!)...I realized it would likely be a very tough day, especially on a suspect ankle.  Personally, I still think CC did what he had to do and that was play his 5th year guy because he thought (I assume) he gave Bash the best chance to win.  I know this has been mentioned in some prior posts.  Tough call for Huff too knowing if he played, it would be his last shot & could be his final game.  If he held out, he could have applied for a 6th year of eligibility.  Unfortunately, I don't think the outcome of the game would have changed regardless which QB was under center.  That start for Wabash was as bad as I have ever seen (the weather, the coin toss, the 4 INTs, Peterman's injury (2nd leading tackler, 1st team All NCAC), Lange's injury (1st team All NCAC) both early in the 1st Quarter, then the bottom just fell out. 

Matt Hudson had a tremendous year and was a great story himself.  He has 2 good years left and it still worked out that he got experience (significant time) playing in a NCAA quarterfinal game and earned 2 playoff wins.  Hopefully that will pay big dividends down the road...

Bashbro - tough call, who wears the #1 jersey next season?  Does it have to be a Senior?  Andrew Rode seemed to battle injuries most of the year but he may be the guy.  I have also heard Bash has some very talentd young WRs to help fill the void left by our seniors.

How about the Bash D front next year if Lange & Kennon both return?  Yikes.

Rooting for UW-W now.  Go Warhawks...road to Salem!!!

[nike]

Bashbacker16,
Great insight and info on game.  That snow would greatly hamper any passing game.
Thought you only had 10 semesters to play 8 semesters in d3, unless you were not in school?  So how could Huff get a sixth year?

[bashbrother]

#3 & I asked that same question on the drive (or sled) back South.

As far as I understand it, the team picks that honor, so we shall see.  I wouldn't mind seeing the year start without a #1 and have it be an earned honor.  The #1 has been worn by many of the best and shouldn't be given lightly.

Can a J-Back wear #1?  Because we have one that is something special.

[BashDad]

I think actually Mike gets to pick, but, yeah, my guess would be Rode.

[BashBacker#16]

BashBro/BashDad,

Excellent call on Brock Graham, hadn't thought of that one.  BTW:  Graham not making the All NCAC team was a bummer but because of his position, apparently had to be considered a Running Back.  Hopefully he will continue to become even more involved in the Bash O.  I'd also like to see him add some weight too.

Nike - not sure on the specifics with Huff.  Not sure if he would have had to lay out the Spring semester or not.  Water under the bridge now though.

[wabco]

Wooscot

This has been snowed upon by others ... but I have never (since perhaps watching replays of the Green Bay game of years ago) experienced weather like was experienced at Whitewater.  You simply do not know of what you speak when going comparative score and not being there for the weather.  Would Wabash have matched Capital and perhaps done better verses Whitewater if not under Siberian storm conditions?  I think so... but then again that comes from watching Wabash all year, knowing its speed and O strengths,  and then experiencing first hand the weather attack.

Nike

Will Wabash root for Whitewater?  Their people were very nice and fun to spend time with, their team is outstanding (and yes ... as I said in earlier posts ... shy some real pointed ball bounces ... would win and they did beat us.)  To the extent I can speak for others, yes Wabash will root for Whitewater ... they beat us, they are a very fine team, and they are not MUC or DePauw.

[wally_wabash]

Nike

Will Wabash root for Whitewater?  Their people were very nice and fun to spend time with, their team is outstanding (and yes ... as I said in earlier posts ... shy some real pointed ball bounces ... would win and they did beat us.)  To the extent I can speak for others, yes Wabash will root for Whitewater ... they beat us, they are a very fine team, and they are not MUC or DePauw.

Ditto this...I'm temporarily wally_warhawk for the next 10 days.  Despite the outcome of the game last Saturday, I had a blast up there in Whitewater and their fans were all cool to tailgate with and were very respectful after the game.  It's easy for a lot of fans to throw sportsmanship out the window after a lopsided win like that, but the Warhawk fans I met up there were first class. 

[Li'l Giant]

Another theory is that it is better to have lost to the eventual champ. That said, go Warhawks!

[aueagle]

If all things being equal; and most of us are in the NCAC (re: football stadiums, academics, so on & so forth)...it all  comes down to the Head Coach. Is he the personality that can promote the school over-all, can he inspire the students, alumni, administration and the town they exist in...can he interface with high school coaches effectively...and, can he coach, and... the reason we play...can he win. Stadium upgrades and open door admissions can help...but, if your guy isn't THE MAN....then you don't win.

[nike]

If all things being equal; and most of us are in the NCAC (re: football stadiums, academics, so on & so forth)...it all  comes down to the Head Coach. Is he the personality that can promote the school over-all, can he inspire the students, alumni, administration and the town they exist in...can he interface with high school coaches effectively...and, can he coach, and... the reason we play...can he win. Stadium upgrades and open door admissions can help...but, if your guy isn't THE MAN....then you don't win.

So, do you have THE MAN at OWU?  In Sots land, I would say I do not think so, at least not to do what has been done in Crawfordsville.  Not to say someone is not a good coach, but as far as getting to level of Wabash or even Witt, year in and year out, well........don't think so.