FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[bleedpurple]

RATING THE WARHAWKS

www.uwwfootball.blogspot.com

[BoBo]

When was the last time the championship committee used the directional regions when setting the playoff structure?       Did the brackets even say north,west, etc. on them the last couple years?

But, only in-region games count?  Something has to be done to change that, IMO. That doesn't make much sense (but this is the NCAA  ).

[Stagg Again!!]

As I have mentioned a few times the past couple days, at least vs UWW last saturday, that was about as soft of a defense as I can ever remember a WIAC school fielding.

If you thought the UWEC defense was soft last weekend, you should take a look at the UWL, UWO, UWP, and UWRF national defense rankings.  The following chart shows national ranking for the four primary defensive categories for each of the WIAC teams through week 7 in order by Total Defense:

                   Rush          Pass          Total           Scoring
UWW           #3              #39           #3              #1
UWS            #50            #124         #67            #49
UWSP          #76            #127         #86            #64
UWEC          #176          #46           #108          #148
UWL            #184          #101         #147          #135
UWO            #146          #164         #153          #159
UWP             #87           #222          #177          #109
UWRF           #207          #145          #193         #194

[Stagg Again!!]

For WIAC fans, I thought I'd throw in the CCIW defensive statistics as well.  The following chart shows national ranking for the four primary defensive categories for each of the CCIW teams through week 7 in order by Total Defense:

                   Rush          Pass          Total           Scoring
NCC            #5              #83           #7              #5           (Most similar to UWW)
WC              #45            #117         #62            #31         (Most similar to UWS)
AUG             #62            #94           #65            #67         (Most similar to UWS)
IWU             #68            #112         #78            #44         (Most similar to UWSP)
EC               #102          #98           #91             #42        (Most similar to UWEC)
MU              #138          #159         #149           #173       (Most similar to UWL)
NP               #187          #108        #153           #162        (Most similar to UWO)
CC               #83            #223         #182           #159       (Most similar to UWP)

[BoBo]

As I have mentioned a few times the past couple days, at least vs UWW last saturday, that was about as soft of a defense as I can ever remember a WIAC school fielding.

If you thought the UWEC defense was soft last weekend, you should take a look at the UWL, UWO, UWP, and UWRF national defense rankings.  The following chart shows national ranking for the four primary defensive categories for each of the WIAC teams through week 7 in order by Total Defense:

                  Rush          Pass          Total           Scoring
UWW           #3              #39           #3              #1
UWS            #50            #124         #67            #49
UWSP          #76            #127         #86            #64
UWEC          #176          #46           #108          #148
UWL            #184          #101         #147          #135
UWO            #146          #164         #153          #159
UWP             #87           #222          #177          #109
UWRF           #207          #145          #193         #194

I thought that was rather clear, which is why I said this:

at least vs UWW last saturday

Level of competition played is not factored in these stats, so national numbers are not the tell all stat that you want them to be. My guess is if EC continues their slide, those numbers will also.

[Stagg Again!!]

Level of competition played is not factored in these stats, so national numbers are not the tell all stat that you want them to be. My guess is if EC continues their slide, those numbers will also.

To quote Yogi... "It ain't over 'til its over".  Clearly, any data inputs could change during the last four weeks of the season for UWEC or any of the other 235 ranked teams in the nation, so, yes, the Blugolds rankings could slide.  The same could be said of any school's statistics.  That said, I do believe that we have statistically significant data sets for UWEC, the other WIAC schools, and the rest of the 228 ranked schools in the nation.  Without a change in an external driver (injury, extreme change in weather beyond what would be normal, etc.), it would be hard for me to believe that the Blugolds overall statistics for the last four games would be significantly different (say worse) than they were against UWW, NCC, STJ, and UWSP.  Additionally, your comment regarding quality of competition not being factored into the national numbers is also true, but that doesn't change the ordinal rankings IMO as it relates to the WIAC schools in relation to each other or the ordinal rankings of the CCIW schools in relation to each other given similarities in strength of schedule.

[Barber Greene]

RATING THE WARHAWKS

www.uwwfootball.blogspot.com

Michael Pirtle got his 49 yards when there was no possibility of WW passing the ball.  Some tough running on his part. The young man took a beating!

[badgerwarhawk]

He also did it behind backup linemen. 

[retagent]

I guess I also assumed that everyone would know that one of the primary concerns when assigning seedings to regions, was the REGION concept. Over the past several years, the West Region had a number of teams that were seeded #4, #5, #6, or thereabouts, who would have been ranked higher in other regions. (That I am sure is not a West Region peculiarity if we look at all the Regions - it is, however, the one I am most familiar with).

It may be that NCC  might be looked at as a "stronger" team than , maybe Linfield, Bethel, or even St Thomas, but could be seeded lower in their Region, because their are "stronger" teams than NCC in that Region. I thought I was careful not to denegrate NCC, or the CCIW, maybe I didn't want a long post as this one is becoming.

[Barber Greene]

He also did it behind backup linemen. 

Pirtle hits the hole very quickly....not sure if that is a good or bad thing.  Maybe he needs to slow down and let the blocking develop. Clearly he has good quickness and speed. If Booker is still out this week he'll probably see some more time.

[ncc58]

Bobo,

Against UWEC, North Central lined up Crackel, Stanek, Tassio, and Hicks at some points at QB. Stanek started the first game but was replaced by Crackel after he threw a couple quick interceptions in the second game against Olivet. Stanek is a better runner than Crackel, but Crackel is making better decisions right now. The UWEC game was Crackel's first start since high school. He looked shaky at times. Crackel looked like he didn't want to run, and when he did he ran like a statue. He also threw the ball away several times instead of trying to squeeze a ball in. Tassio was All State as a quarterback in high school, and is used mostly as a running back although he did take a number of snaps at QB. Hicks lines up at QB when they run the Wildcat. North Central has gone from throwing 40 times a game in 2009 to 25 this year.

[usee]

I guess I also assumed that everyone would know that one of the primary concerns when assigning seedings to regions, was the REGION concept. Over the past several years, the West Region had a number of teams that were seeded #4, #5, #6, or thereabouts, who would have been ranked higher in other regions. (That I am sure is not a West Region peculiarity if we look at all the Regions - it is, however, the one I am most familiar with).

It may be that NCC  might be looked at as a "stronger" team than , maybe Linfield, Bethel, or even St Thomas, but could be seeded lower in their Region, because their are "stronger" teams than NCC in that Region. I thought I was careful not to denegrate NCC, or the CCIW, maybe I didn't want a long post as this one is becoming.

I am not sure completely understand your post but it is clear the committee now looks at trying to get the top 4 teams as #1 seeds with a strong bias toward geographic proximity. That both eliminates the REGION concept and binds them to it. It is what allows them to move Mt Union and/or UWW to their own bracket and bring other teams based on geography more than region. Where it's unclear is how they wil seed brackets with multiple undefeated teams in proximity. It doesn't make much sense to move UWW North and Mt Union East if there are 3-4 other undefeated teams sitting there. It really depends on what happens in the East and the South. It's tough to look at St Thomas and/or NCC in a vacuum without considering the other undefeated teams.

[BoBo]

He also did it behind backup linemen. 

Pirtle hits the hole very quickly....not sure if that is a good or bad thing.  Maybe he needs to slow down and let the blocking develop. Clearly he has good quickness and speed. If Booker is still out this week he'll probably see some more time.

Isn't that the idea of the zone blocking technique? Let your o-line create the running lane, identify it and then bust through it? Pirtle's got some real giddy-up to his stride. He probably needs to learn to be a little patient, but he's trying to make a play every time he has a touch. The good thing is he's got three backs with a lot of talent ahead of him to learn from.

I think it would be wise to keep Booker off the field completely this week & rest Coppage as much as possible, too. With UW-RF coming in at #207 in rush defense according to those stats S or B provided, it shouldn't be too difficult to mount a successful rushing afternoon with AA, Pirtle and anybody else they decide to use. No reason to risk further injury to anybody.

[Pat Coleman]

He also did it behind backup linemen. 

Against the first-string defense.

[BoBo]

Curious minds want to know, Pat...are you the voter who changed the first place vote from UMU to UWW?