Top 25 rankings

[K-Mack]

Option offenses were highly successful long before there was artificial turf.

You gotta like Frank, short and to the point.

[K-Mack]

My question is, how can any publication rank a team with Springfield's mentality in their Top 10??  There are too many external factors for a triple option offense with NO defense to go wrong.  Rain...turnovers...field conditions....injuries to 1 of 3 guys....getting out scored early....any of these factors against a decent team will completely take the Pride out of their game....they can not throw the ball, nor can they stop you.

The above points have been brought up many times on various boards with PP.  Again, with all these negative intangables....how can a team with this many obvious nagative possiblilities be ranked in anyones top 10?

Well, people have their reasons, like for instance if you think SJF is the No. 2 team in the nation this year, and Springfield beat them last year and lost by six in the playoffs ... I'd hope you can understand why someone with limited knowledge of the above issues would slot them in the top 10.

This also sounds a lot like Augustana.

That said, Mary Hardin-Baylor can hardly throw the ball, and they rammed it down Mount Union's throat trailing by double figures in the fourth quarter. In all the years I've been doing this, I've never seen anything like it.

Part of the run it all the time strategy is to wear teams down in the fourth quarter.

Also, most of those factors you listed (weather, injuries to key players) can take teams that play different styles out of their games.

Not completely disagreeing, just throwing that stuff out there.

Never said you had limited knowledge of anything....you said that....maybe you're smarter than you think....

Not to be a plick, but I wasn't referring to myself with that one. 

Then again, I did go to Randolph-Macon, so how smart could I be?

Wait, this isn't the ODAC board anymore, my bad.

[K-Mack]

Anyone else-
What about a passing team?  A team that passes 50-60 times a game.  I don't think it really matters what surface they play on.

You ever hear anyone say the St. Louis Rams were built to play on turf?

And weather seems to affect passing teams more ...

BL: There are external factors like home field, playing surface and weather that have an effect on games, but I don't think any self-respecting player would use those things as an excuse.

But they honestly do make a difference, maybe more to some than others.

In the case of Springfield, this is not just something people have made up. They traditionally have done better on turf, over a number of years. Whether it's a real effect of turf, a psychological thing or just coincidence that they've lost those games and they happened to be on turf ... well, no one really knows.

Makes for good message board fodder though.

So yeah, uh ... top 25s ... I have some thoughts on Lindy's and S&S, both of which I finally looked at last night. Definitely some major curveballs up in there.

Let me catch up on the board first.

[pg04]

I agree, all of our arguments are null and void because we didn't go to "good" colleges.

I also agree that all these boards seem to mix together in my mind sometimes.   

[K-Mack]

Id put Rowan ahead of springfield.

I think the relative playoff scores vs. SJF last season make that really hard to do.

Also, Mike Orihel was damn good ... it's a shame they didn't have more experience around him last year.

Also, Rowan got lucky at Wilkes and probably shouldn't have gone as far as they did. (Was there, knows)

pg04 ... +1 karma, you're funny.

[pg04]

pg04 ... +1 karma, you're funny.

Thanks, <Bows to the Mount Union of the Message Board>  Just let us have the posting title once every 10 years or so???

[K-Mack]

Even Mount Union loses once in a while. I am sure it doesn't matter what playing surface it is when they lose.

Well, I would like to see them play a road playoff game. Just out of curiousity.

I may not live that long, however. (isn't kidding)

sorry, this is a pet peeve I will take to the grave!!

'SCool, as long as you leave your sig line from The Program and Jim Mora behind.

Plus they wont be suprising anyone this year either.  Im sure E8 teams has every single SC offensive game last year with breakdowns, percentages etc ...

Well, it's not like the good season was a shock. They've been good more than not, the 4-6 was the anomaly, not the other way around.

Also, if Springfield's been running the same offense for 1,000 years, you're right, they won't be surprising anyone.

gro I am going to say that offensive teams have a disavantage in bad weather.  They have to handle the ball, fake, throw, catch....much harder.

That is the exact opposite of the conventional wisdom on the matter. In fact, I'm pretty sure offenses run more misdirection and employ more fakes in poor conditions.

As they say, "the offense knows where it's going, the defense has to react."

Also, you know, the offense is running foward, even in a straight line ... that's a pretty big difference from a tackler coming in either way too fast and not being able to break down and drive through with your tackles, or trying to slow it down and keep your balance, and then being slow to the play.

I'm sure there are some offensive corollaries, like O-linemen pass blocking in the mud can't get their footing, but I'm pretty sure it's generally accepted in football circles that bad footing affects defenses more.

Now, overall, maybe the effect of rain might be equal, since wet balls are hard to throw and catch ... but with regard to the footing specifically, what I said above.

[K-Mack]

hscoach-

As for Captial I do agree they lost a lot.  I thought they couldn't be as high as they finished last year at number 3.  Before I went to see who was returning and who wasn't I had them around 4-7 range.  They ended up at number 7.  They may have lost alot, but they haven't had a losing season since 2000.  That tells me they do a good job of replacing players.

It's not the overall number of starters they lost that kills them in '07.  It's the quality of those lost.  See below for info on Capital from the OAC Preview on Ric's site:

Read that preview before doing my rankings, which I stand by (today, anyway)

I have to believe that the extra practice and recruiting playoff games has helped them cull and cultivate enough talent to keep them top 3 in the OAC. If it doesn't happen, I won't be completely shocked, but I'm OK starting them off top 20, since they were top 5 the past 2 years.

Put it to you like this. Say Mount Union loses everyone. Literally every starter.

Do you drop them out of the top 25?

You at least wait for someone to beat them.

I know it's not exactly the same thing, but similar logic.

Would the Mount Union JV start in the top 25?

If yes, that's bad, actually ...

[K-Mack]

Also, I have a lot of problems with this paragraph. Not completely accurate.

Potentially mitigating the lack of returning depth is the quick fix of upper-classmen Division 1 transfers into the open "playmaker" positions.  This is an avenue of talent acquisition that Coach Collins has excelled at the last few years.  As evidence, one needs to look no further than Lewis Howes who only played at Capital for his senior year, yet was Capital's most explosive receiver in 2005.  As well as Derrick Alexander who is on campus for only the 2006 and 2007 seasons.  And this doesn't include the transfer of arguably the best player in the history of the school (Rocky Pentello from Toledo) and one of their best linebackers (Joel Sickmeier from Mount Union).

[K-Mack]

Perhaps the Lindy's "brain trust" had a couple too many drinks on the River Walk.   

That joke never gets old.

Another of the big "ifs" though ... What if Roy Hampton played in Stagg Bowl (whatever number 2002 was) ... probably not a W, but not 48-7 either ... What if Bridgewater guy operated the clock right? Would K.C. and the Profs have their title? Would the Eagles' run still have taken place?

I ramble/digress.

Not even sure you were referring to that.

[K-Mack]

My question is, how can any publication rank a team with Springfield's mentality in their Top 10??

I could see them in the top 10. At this point in the season it's tough to say who would replace them.

To the poster earlier (sorry, too busy to go back and look) that suggested Rowan ... I'm not sold. They have to prove themselves all over to me. Last year's offense never got it together with all the young receivers, and now they lose their quarterback. That's a big load for a second-string quarterback, who struggled with all-star receivers, to carry.

Rowan does have a lot to prove.  Insiders are supporting the second-string QB (Joe Rankin).  I've gotten waivering support info on other players in the past, so I think that is a positive. On defense alone, I'd put Rowan in the top 20, but outside the top 10 somewhere.

Now Rankin looked bigger and stronger in 2006, but Orihel had completed his senior year w/o major injury, so Rankin only mopped up.  The big keys are replacing AA DE Keith Heimerl, QB Orihel, and three DB's (heavy DB rotation in the past will help the transition).  Wr's have real raw talent, but have lacked focus.  Wr's need to play up to ablility and Rankin needs a few more MPH's on his fastball for top 10.  I think Rankin is a good DIII QB.... I've just been spoiled by strong armed Rowan QB's since 1992.  Rankin's arm is equal or better than Rowan's regular season competators, except for the kid from Kean.

When doing my top 25:

Reasons not to like Rowan this year:
Lose Orihel, Heimerl, Whetstone ... eked out a lot of close ones last year

Reasons to like Rowan this year:
(still searching)

Kidding (kind of), but you could say the same thing about Cortland with their QB situation at the end of the year, then losing Haas and Sair.

So I ranked them right behind the Profs.

Chip On Shoulder plus Game At Cortland could flop them though. Plus Kean and maybe Montclair or someone else could be factors. Should be fun.

I like the Wilkes-Rowan regular season game though. Accorsi (and Keeler) were always all about scheduling anyone who would take the game. Nice that Wilkes, CNU and Widener give the Profs an all-D3 schedule for the first time since (doesn't bother to look)

[frank uible]

One factor in Springfield's apparent preference for artificial turf might be that its grass games are away from home.

[Ron Boerger]

Perhaps the Lindy's "brain trust" had a couple too many drinks on the River Walk.   

That joke never gets old.

Another of the big "ifs" though ... What if Roy Hampton played in Stagg Bowl (whatever number 2002 was) ... probably not a W, but not 48-7 either ... What if Bridgewater guy operated the clock right? Would K.C. and the Profs have their title? Would the Eagles' run still have taken place?

I ramble/digress.

Not even sure you were referring to that.

Having seen it in person, I think Hampton makes it 41-21 at best.   The wind that day was hellaceous, and so was MUC. 

And I really don't have any idea what the Lindy's guys were smoking when they put those ratings together.  There seems to have been fairly consistent slippage in SA since the glory days and to put the alma mater at #4 all of a sudden seems odd.   Maybe they got TU confused with Millsaps who with DuBose at coach seems to be poised to be the dominant team in the SCAC for a while. 

Re the clock ... guess we'll never know, but it seems likely, don't it?

[HScoach]

hscoach-

As for Captial I do agree they lost a lot.  I thought they couldn't be as high as they finished last year at number 3.  Before I went to see who was returning and who wasn't I had them around 4-7 range.  They ended up at number 7.  They may have lost alot, but they haven't had a losing season since 2000.  That tells me they do a good job of replacing players.

It's not the overall number of starters they lost that kills them in '07.  It's the quality of those lost.  See below for info on Capital from the OAC Preview on Ric's site:

Read that preview before doing my rankings, which I stand by (today, anyway)

I have to believe that the extra practice and recruiting playoff games has helped them cull and cultivate enough talent to keep them top 3 in the OAC. If it doesn't happen, I won't be completely shocked, but I'm OK starting them off top 20, since they were top 5 the past 2 years.

Put it to you like this. Say Mount Union loses everyone. Literally every starter.

Do you drop them out of the top 25?

You at least wait for someone to beat them.

I know it's not exactly the same thing, but similar logic.

Would the Mount Union JV start in the top 25?

If yes, that's bad, actually ...

K-Mack:  I completely agree that Capital still remains in the Top 25.  Just not Top 10 in my opinion.  But it's just that.  MY OPINION.   I completely respect your opinion, I just disagree with it.   But the beauty of D3 is that we get to settle it on the field with 32 teams fighting for #1!   Thank God D3 isn't set up like D1.

If we were truely looking at strength of the teams and not their records, most years the OAC would have 3 or 4 teams in the top 25 of the nation.  MUC and then a combination of Capital, Ohio Northern, John Carroll and Baldwin Wallace.  In my opinon (darn - there's that word again) what separates the WIAC and OAC from 1st and 2nd rated conferences isn't the top half, it's the bottom half.  I'd put the OAC's top 5 against any conferences top 5 and believe that the OAC teams would finish about 4-1.  The problem with the OAC is that the bottom half is bad.  REALLY BAD.  Heidelberg, Muskingum and Wilmington are just plain horrible with Marietta and Otterbein barely average programs.

And yes, Mount's 2nd string would be in the top 25.   No doubt about it.  We've had this discussion going on and on for years that MUC could leave the starters at home and still finish 8-2 in the OAC as well as beat their usual 1st round playoff opponents.  Want evidence?  The 2006 Stagg MVP was MUC's back-up QB.  And the 2002 Gagliardi winner (Dan Pugh) played 2nd fiddle to Chuck Moore until Chuck graduated in 2001. 

Mount Union has very good talent, but it isn't 2 or 3 great players that makes them the King's of D3.   What makes them so dangerous is 2nd and 3rd string depth that is 95+% quality wise of the starters and every position is manned by a quality player.  No glaring holes to exploit.

[HScoach]

Here's my 2 cents on the Springfield grass vs. turf debate:

If Springfield is happy with scoring a lot of points, looking pretty while they do it and then losing in the playoffs to a balanced team, then continue what they're doing right now.  Otherwise, they need some flexibility on offense and a real defense before they're a legitimate threat nationally.

Not sure who made the analogy (K-Mack?), but the comparison to Washington & Jefferson is accurate.  A great one dimensional offense and no defense is not a recipe for success in December.