FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[Sakman 1111]

Amazing stats Voice.......Hopefully 6 more games will add a pile more......One at a time and Pound the Rock......

[voice]

A question from a casual fan in regards to the WIAC's popular "in-conference/non-conference" games this season.

Why was the first game played designated as the non-conference game with the second go-around designated as the conference game?

Shouldn't the first game have been designated the "conference" game.  I know that was the the way Whitewater's 2008 games with Eau Claire were set up - 1st game conference (UWW 16, UWEC 14 at EC) - second game later in the season at UWW (Hawks 45, EC 10) was the non-conference game.

I don't understand the logic but then again I'm really not that smart!

[Sakman 1111]

Totally agree Voice......first game should be the conference game....makes no real sense.......

[footballfan413]

A question from a casual fan in regards to the WIAC's popular "in-conference/non-conference" games this season.

Why was the first game played designated as the non-conference game with the second go-around designated as the conference game?

Shouldn't the first game have been designated the "conference" game.  I know that was the the way Whitewater's 2008 games with Eau Claire were set up - 1st game conference (UWW 16, UWEC 14 at EC) - second game later in the season at UWW (Hawks 45, EC 10) was the non-conference game.

I don't understand the logic but then again I'm really not that smart!

Absolutely!  The FIRST meeting should be the one that counts in the conference standing. It is a way of comparing apples and apples to put it simply.  A second meeting gives teams a chance to adjust to one another and therefore, an advantage with regards to their conference record.  Maybe the thinking is that the first 3 games need to be NC no matter who they play so a team has time to get everything on the right track before conference play. 

[badgerwarhawk]

I was told that the commissioner designated the second game as the conference game so there would be something to play for and it would make the conference race more interesting.  The difference between this year and previous years is that the out of conference game against conference programs were scheduled by the programs and not mandated by the commissioner's office.  Consequently the programs could decide which of the two meetings to designate as a out of conference game.  That changed when the games were mandated.  Whether it's an out of or in conference game from a practical standpoint it doesn't really matter.  It's inconsequential in the conference standings, they have film of all of our games and it's a game we need to win to maintain our seeding and secure home field for the playoffs.

It was my first trip to Carson Park and I was impressed.  It's a nice facility. 

The EC band was great.  With over 300 members it has to be the largest in the conference.  Their half time show was very good and it was obvious by their antics that they get into the game and come to have a good time.

The fake punt, pooch kick, was strategic genius.  It caught them completely off guard, led to a safety and was a turning point in the second half.  Conversely stopping their fake punt pass two yards short of the first down was also a big play in the game.  It was kind of funny because besides myself half of us in the bleachers were screaming, "Neu is still in the game!"  Like no one on the field noticed. 

[02 Warhawk]

I just figured the first of the two games was nonconference b/c that's when the WIAC (and most other conferences) play their non-conference schedule...early in the year.

Then the second game will be in the middle of their conference play...hence it being a conference game.

[02 Warhawk]

I posted my Inside the Box Scores on my blog for this week.

I think we all can agree that La Crosse is the most unpredictable team in the WIAC this season. They've been on BOTH sides of an upset, in consecuative weeks. First, winning at nationally-ranked Oshkosh. Then, the very next week, losing at home against a winless River Falls team. 

I think I read that River Falls ended an 18-game losing streak to UWL.

Congrats to the Falcons!!!

[bulk19]

I was told that the commissioner designated the second game as the conference game so there would be something to play for and it would make the conference race more interesting.  The difference between this year and previous years is that the out of conference game against conference programs were scheduled by the programs and not mandated by the commissioner's office.  Consequently the programs could decide which of the two meetings to designate as a out of conference game.  That changed when the games were mandated.  Whether it's an out of or in conference game from a practical standpoint it doesn't really matter.  It's inconsequential in the conference standings, they have film of all of our games and it's a game we need to win to maintain our seeding and secure home field for the playoffs.

It was my first trip to Carson Park and I was impressed.  It's a nice facility. 

The EC band was great.  With over 300 members it has to be the largest in the conference.  Their half time show was very good and it was obvious by their antics that they get into the game and come to have a good time.

The fake punt, pooch kick, was strategic genius.  It caught them completely off guard, led to a safety and was a turning point in the second half.  Conversely stopping their fake punt pass two yards short of the first down was also a big play in the game.  It was kind of funny because besides myself half of us in the bleachers were screaming, "Nye is still in the game!"  Like no one on the field noticed. 

+K for the kind words about Carson Park, which is a great facitity; I've witnessed more baseball games there than football over the years, but the atmosphere for a gridiron matchup is always terrific... And win, or lose, the experience and final outcome is always enhanced by having a great band there each week...

Seems like the Warhawks, from what I saw of the clips, were able to complete two rather easy TD passes among the four thrown? Ouch... Blugolds shot themselves in the foot a couple of possessions where they were driving, too...

Just a little sidenote; Neu was able to execute the fake punt against UWL, but it seems like they are only able to use that play but once a season....  By the way, he was punter for the Blugolds when he was a freshman...

And since we're picking on the Blugolds,  , (and I can look ahead, while your Warhawks will rightfully so maintain your one-game-at-a-time philosophy), I'll stir the pot and note that Coppage has 451 yards rushing and 6TDs on 74 carries in three games against another pretty good team, Mount Union!, should we need that stat somewhere down the road...
 

[bulk19]

Holy massive Warhawks kidnapping, Batman...
This board has gone 8 hours since the last posting here? Wow... 

I had the pleasure of kicking off my Packer pregame festivities by watching UWL's Screaming Eagles marching band/poms/color guard give their wrapup performance today in Mitchell Hall... A little Boston, some Ozzy, some Earth, Wind and Fire, with a little Lady Gaga thrown into the mix, too... And the standards that any UWL backer would recognize - Horse, On Wisconsin and Beer Barrel Polka...

Thanks to those kids, who worked hard to add to the college football environment...

A terrific show, and good to see Coach Detwiller and what appeared to be the whole football team in attendance...

[emma17]

A question from a casual fan in regards to the WIAC's popular "in-conference/non-conference" games this season.

Why was the first game played designated as the non-conference game with the second go-around designated as the conference game?

Shouldn't the first game have been designated the "conference" game.  I know that was the the way Whitewater's 2008 games with Eau Claire were set up - 1st game conference (UWW 16, UWEC 14 at EC) - second game later in the season at UWW (Hawks 45, EC 10) was the non-conference game.

I don't understand the logic but then again I'm really not that smart!

I think you can make an arguement either way.  From the perspective of treating the non con games as "pre-season" it does allow a team to experiment more with personnel early in the season without impacting the conference race, which is exactly what UWW did.  As a coach, I would worry about playing a conference opponent in the season's first game if it had conference standing implications- there is just so much unknown yet coming out of camp. 

[bleedpurple]

A question from a casual fan in regards to the WIAC's popular "in-conference/non-conference" games this season.

Why was the first game played designated as the non-conference game with the second go-around designated as the conference game?

Shouldn't the first game have been designated the "conference" game.  I know that was the the way Whitewater's 2008 games with Eau Claire were set up - 1st game conference (UWW 16, UWEC 14 at EC) - second game later in the season at UWW (Hawks 45, EC 10) was the non-conference game.

I don't understand the logic but then again I'm really not that smart!

I think you can make an arguement either way.  From the perspective of treating the non con games as "pre-season" it does allow a team to experiment more with personnel early in the season without impacting the conference race, which is exactly what UWW did.  As a coach, I would worry about playing a conference opponent in the season's first game if it had conference standing implications- there is just so much unknown yet coming out of camp.

The whole concept of a conference mandating a game and then saying the game "doesn't count" within their jurisdiction (conference standings) is conflicted and open to debate no matter how they choose to implement it.  I think almost everyone would agree that if anything were mandated, a "WIAC/CCIW Challenge" would be far preferable.  I know for the northern-most teams, it would involve more travel, which may or may not negate the purpose.  And then there is the small issue of the institutions buying into the idea.  But from a fan's perspective, it would be awesome!

[voice]

A question from a casual fan in regards to the WIAC's popular "in-conference/non-conference" games this season.

Why was the first game played designated as the non-conference game with the second go-around designated as the conference game?

Shouldn't the first game have been designated the "conference" game.  I know that was the the way Whitewater's 2008 games with Eau Claire were set up - 1st game conference (UWW 16, UWEC 14 at EC) - second game later in the season at UWW (Hawks 45, EC 10) was the non-conference game.

I don't understand the logic but then again I'm really not that smart!

I think you can make an arguement either way.  From the perspective of treating the non con games as "pre-season" it does allow a team to experiment more with personnel early in the season without impacting the conference race, which is exactly what UWW did.  As a coach, I would worry about playing a conference opponent in the season's first game if it had conference standing implications- there is just so much unknown yet coming out of camp.

The whole concept of a conference mandating a game and then saying the game "doesn't count" within their jurisdiction (conference standings) is conflicted and open to debate no matter how they choose to implement it.  I think almost everyone would agree that if anything were mandated, a "WIAC/CCIW Challenge" would be far preferable.  I know for the northern-most teams, it would involve more travel, which may or may not negate the purpose.  And then there is the small issue of the institutions buying into the idea.  But from a fan's perspective, it would be awesome!

Amen Brother!!!  +K

[UniqueInsight38]

RF 28, LaX 21 in o.t. for first Falcon win for Matt Walker. Falcons trailed whole game, tying it in the fourth q. Lax q.b. threw his second int. during o.t. after Falcons went up 28-21. It was first RF win in something like 21 years over Lax. I don't think John O. ever beat LaX.

Watch out EC, next week at RF.

1994 was the last UW-RF win against UW-L.  The UW-RF team went 7-3 that year.  Coach Harring was not very happy after that loss and stated in their local paper that River Falls would not win another conference game that year.  UW-RF went on to lose to UWW and UW-SP

[emma17]

"The whole concept of a conference mandating a game and then saying the game "doesn't count" within their jurisdiction (conference standings) is conflicted and open to debate no matter how they choose to implement it.  I think almost everyone would agree that if anything were mandated, a "WIAC/CCIW Challenge" would be far preferable.  I know for the northern-most teams, it would involve more travel, which may or may not negate the purpose.  And then there is the small issue of the institutions buying into the idea.  But from a fan's perspective, it would be awesome!"

Bleed this would be great. Pretending this could happen and travel wasn't part of the equation- how are matchups decided?  Maybe seed each conf 1-8. Then to keep competitive balance, the top 4 of each conf could have a 1 v 4, 2 v 3 format and the bottom 4 could go 5 v 5, 6 v 6, etc 
It sure would be fan friendly and I imagine the players would love it too.

[badgerwarhawk]

We've tried to schedule CCIW programs without any success.  Elmhurst even backed out of our scrimmage arrangement with them a few years ago.