FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[OzJohnnie]

Your at the 10ish yard and you run 3 straight times? Give me a break.

I just had a chance to look back at these posts during the game.

Bobo: Good job staying positive

02: UMHB MUCH better is a stretch. Our turnovers and the punt return were mistakes and inexcusable. But other than that, we averaged 4.2 yards per rush, UMHB averaged 4.3. They averaged 6.0 yards per pass attempt, we averaged 5.9.  They out-gained us by 25 yards on the ground and 26 yards through the air (including 25 meaningless yards on the last play of the first half).  I would agree with the statement, "UMHB deserved to win the game." I think the MUCH better thing is over-stated.

GBMAN: I see two posts that complain of three straight runs. It appears you posted them regarding our possession after Bryce's interception.  That puzzles me.

I am disappointed we are not playing in the Stagg Bowl tomorrow night. But I'm more convinced than ever we will be back there soon.

I got tired of 02WarhawkCrusader telling the world how over talented & supremely superior UMHB athletes are compared to UWW...like he's forgotten that UMHB has always been the faster, stronger, & more talented athletes v UWW since their first meeting - all 5 meetings to be exact, yet UWW was 5-0 against the Cru. To listen to him, we don't belong in the same universe. I don't know why he was even watching the game considering he already knew what the outcome would be. You'd think he had a garage to clean, or a Christmas Tree to chop down and decorate, some poetry to read or a train set in the basement to get off on. Something better than watching a game he already knew the ending. The same reason we won those previous 5 games was going to be the reason we would win this game. It was a pretty even game except for a small number, but vital factors.  We failed to execute a decent game plan on an offense that shot itself in the foot. The errors doomed any chance we had. The table could have easily been turned. I never saw the two teams as anything but pretty even. He wanted to throw in the towel nearly from the start and wanted everybody he could convince to do the same. I march to my own drummer.

UHMB has clearly superior athletes. Not just to UWW but to DIII. They have a breadth and depth of talent that is unrivalled by any other program, particularly in speed positions like the d-backs and wide outs. That’s indisputable.  They also play high school ball and have zero competition until the playoffs get serious.

According to a Title IX analysis we did on the MIAC boards at the beginning of the season, UHMB spend double on football than any other national contender and about five to seven times the budget of a “normal” program.  They sit in a football palace dead set in the middle of football crazy Texas.  In fact, it appears that they spend more on football than all other men’s sports combined at UHMB.

The overflow of talent available for recruiting is unique. In fact, on their roster of 170+ they have only 8 players not from Texas. Two FL and IL and one each from LA, GA, OH, and OK.  I can’t think of any similar situation except for perhaps Gopher hockey in the 80’s but even then Wisconsin was just a couple hours away.

So, it is inarguable that they spend more money and have better athletes.  But I think they very beatable by playing better football.  The challenge for programs like UWW will be to develop  and breadth and depth in play that overcomes UHMB’s money and recruiting pool advantages, which won’t go away any time soon.  And I’ll reckon they will crumble as soon as they are outplayed badly. They won’t know how to step up another notch as they are too dependent on buying and beefing their way to the top.

Or you can shout “Apostate!” at any UWW fan attempting to discuss the issue. Just give me time to pop some popcorn, though.  I hate to miss a good show of people eating their own.

[DFWCrufan]

Your at the 10ish yard and you run 3 straight times? Give me a break.

I just had a chance to look back at these posts during the game.

Bobo: Good job staying positive

02: UMHB MUCH better is a stretch. Our turnovers and the punt return were mistakes and inexcusable. But other than that, we averaged 4.2 yards per rush, UMHB averaged 4.3. They averaged 6.0 yards per pass attempt, we averaged 5.9.  They out-gained us by 25 yards on the ground and 26 yards through the air (including 25 meaningless yards on the last play of the first half).  I would agree with the statement, "UMHB deserved to win the game." I think the MUCH better thing is over-stated.

GBMAN: I see two posts that complain of three straight runs. It appears you posted them regarding our possession after Bryce's interception.  That puzzles me.

I am disappointed we are not playing in the Stagg Bowl tomorrow night. But I'm more convinced than ever we will be back there soon.

I got tired of 02WarhawkCrusader telling the world how over talented & supremely superior UMHB athletes are compared to UWW...like he's forgotten that UMHB has always been the faster, stronger, & more talented athletes v UWW since their first meeting - all 5 meetings to be exact, yet UWW was 5-0 against the Cru. To listen to him, we don't belong in the same universe. I don't know why he was even watching the game considering he already knew what the outcome would be. You'd think he had a garage to clean, or a Christmas Tree to chop down and decorate, some poetry to read or a train set in the basement to get off on. Something better than watching a game he already knew the ending. The same reason we won those previous 5 games was going to be the reason we would win this game. It was a pretty even game except for a small number, but vital factors.  We failed to execute a decent game plan on an offense that shot itself in the foot. The errors doomed any chance we had. The table could have easily been turned. I never saw the two teams as anything but pretty even. He wanted to throw in the towel nearly from the start and wanted everybody he could convince to do the same. I march to my own drummer.

UHMB has clearly superior athletes. Not just to UWW but to DIII. They have a breadth and depth of talent that is unrivalled by any other program, particularly in speed positions like the d-backs and wide outs. That's indisputable.  They also play high school ball and have zero competition until the playoffs get serious.

According to a Title IX analysis we did on the MIAC boards at the beginning of the season, UHMB spend double on football than any other national contender and about five to seven times the budget of a "normal" program.  They sit in a football palace dead set in the middle of football crazy Texas.  In fact, it appears that they spend more on football than all other men's sports combined at UHMB.

The overflow of talent available for recruiting is unique. In fact, on their roster of 170+ they have only 8 players not from Texas. Two FL and IL and one each from LA, GA, OH, and OK.  I can't think of any similar situation except for perhaps Gopher hockey in the 80's but even then Wisconsin was just a couple hours away.

So, it is inarguable that they spend more money and have better athletes.  But I think they very beatable by playing better football.  The challenge for programs like UWW will be to develop  and breadth and depth in play that overcomes UHMB's money and recruiting pool advantages, which won't go away any time soon.  And I'll reckon they will crumble as soon as they are outplayed badly. They won't know how to step up another notch as they are too dependent on buying and beefing their way to the top.

Or you can shout "Apostate!" at any UWW fan attempting to discuss the issue. Just give me time to pop some popcorn, though.  I hate to miss a good show of people eating their own.

An interesting point, if you see Coaches interview on just that question you are spot on, it was decided long ago that the school would invest in the Football program heavily as they were the "NewGuys" and HSU was the big dog of the conference.The Cruthedral was built in the middle of campus making it the center point as the growth moves around it. Coach said they had goals to reach and surpass... De-seat HSU in conference...Check, recruit kids who could play, and local so they could receive support a the local level (family, friends, local HS teams etc etc...) Get into the playoffs consistently...check defeat UMU...Check But if you look at the programs and facilities the other sports are not lacking in fact their Baseball Stadium is quite nice as is the softball complex and mens and womens soccer complex, hell I wish my college program I played in had as nice a complex I would have loved it. The womens volleyball program home is great and the soccer and volleyball programs are on the same development program as football, each year making gains, this year both mens soccer and women's volleyball took the conference.
I think there is an element beyond simply funding as I saw it with two kids graduating from UMHB, there is an expectation of excellence, and that is not just in the sports program but the overall scholastic culture as well. Their Nursing program produces tip top candidates that jump to the top of the list, the local joke is that UMHB and the other little brother Baylor both produce med students, but UMHB students get the nod first. Some day yes, the Cru will fall, not crumble but fall, it wasn't too long ago  we lost a 17-16 game and that one hurt!, we got beat by HSU but it only made the push to be harder and faster even more to the forefront, much like UW-W, who had a stumble and look at them now! It is bound to happen, at one point someone else was the big dog in DIII right now it is the purple powers. UW-W, SJU. ST UMU HSU Linfield will still be the whirling mass of football dominance for awhile until someone out there makes a goals list, learns to find quality players, develops a culture of excellence like these programs listed and then maybe, juuuussstttt maybe we may see a new head of the pack. Right now, my money (and don't you dare tell anyone else) beyond my beloved Cru it's looking like SJU and UW-W are on the rise.

[HScoach]

That's been the ONLY goal at Mount since they won it in 1998 with a bunch of youngsters.   Not saying that's right for everyone,  but in Alliance the measuring stick is clear.

Yeah, but that's because you don't have to play in the WIAC, MIAC, ASC, or even CCIW, NJAC, LL, E8, NWC, etc.  In the last 25 years, have you EVER had more than one semi-legitimate threat to winning the conference title?  The OAC is a one-team league (with some years a good #2); it is NOT a power conference.

NOTE:   I AM NOT CLAIMING THE OAC TO BE A GREAT CONFERENCE TOP TO BOTTOM LIKE THE WIAC.  But writing off the OAC simply because Mount has consistently won the conference is an overly simplistic and incorrect view.  I agree that the bottom 2 or 3 conference teams are horrible but the conference has historically been pretty solid, especially up until the last few years.

Varying teams winning the conference championship is not necessarily a sign of conference strength.  Balance, yes.  But not strength.  You dismiss the OAC simply because they can't beat Mount?  Well then you can dismiss the rest of D3 outside of the Whitewater and MHB.  Since 1993, there have been exactly eight (8) teams that have beaten Mount Union, and only two of them have done it multiple times: Whitewater & MHB which have obviously risen to be elite programs. 
Whitewater (WAIC) – 6 times (2007, '09, '10, '11, '13 and '14)
Mary Hardin Baylor (ASC) – 3 times (2004, '16 and '18)
John Carroll (OAC) – once (2016)
Ohio Northern (OAC) – once (2005)
St John's (MIAC) – once (2003)
Rowan (NJAC) – once (1999)
UW-LaCrosse (WIAC) – once (1995)
Albion (MIAA) – once (1994)

So outside of the UWW and MHB, the OAC has done exactly what the rest of the nation has done against Mount.  Beaten them every once in a while.   


You're asking for instances when the OAC had more than a single competitor to Mount?  The games in bold were teams capable of beating Mount.  The highlighted ones are OAC teams.  I have broadcasted or watched as a fan 99% of Mount's games since before Mount was Mount and I believe that I've more than proven a realistic view of them.  I have NOT bolded/highlighted games simply because the final score was close, but only those that were competitively even on the field.   It's also worth noting the retirement of LK after the 2012 season when evaluating Mount as a whole versus Mount the last few years.

1998 – National Champion (14-0)
Ohio Northern (OAC):  Mount win 42-37
John Carroll (OAC):  Mount win 21-14
Baldwin Wallace (OAC): Mount win 30-21
Albion (MIAA):  Mount win 21-19
Wittenberg (NCAC):  Mount win 21-19
Trinity Tx (ASC):  Mount win 34-29
Beat Rowan (NJAC) by 20 in Stagg

2001 – National Champions (14-0)
John Carroll (OAC):  Mount win 33-30
Baldwin Wallace (OAC):  Mount win 17-3
No other team, including playoffs wins over Augustana (CCIW), Wittenberg (NCAC) and St Johns (MIAC) was closer than 21 pts
Beat Bridgewater (ODAC) in Stagg 30-27


2002 – National Champion (14-0)
Baldwin Wallace (OAC):  Mount win 28-21
John Carroll (OAC):  Mount win 35-16
Capital (OAC):  Mount win 38-22
Ohio Northern (OAC):  Mount win 34-24
No other team, including playoffs, closer than 21 pts.  Beat John Carroll (OAC) in semi-finals.
Beat Trinity TX in Stagg 48-7

2005 – National Champion (14-1)
Ohio Northern (OAC):  Mount loss 21-14 
Baldwin Wallace (OAC):  Mount win 17-3
Capital (OAC) in Round 3:  Mount win 34-31
Rowan (NJAC):  Mount win 19-7
Beat Whitewater (WIAC) in Stagg 31-26

2006 – National Champion (15-0)
Baldwin Wallace (OAC):  Mount win 14-0
Capital (OAC) in Round 3:  Mount win 17-14
St. John Fisher (E-8):  Mount win 26-14
Beat Whitewater (WIAC) by 19 in Stagg

2011 – National Runner-up (14-1)
Ohio Northern (OAC):  Mount win 14-6
Baldwin Wallace (OAC):  Mount win 25-20
Wesley (ind):  Mount win 28-21
Lost to Whitewater (WIAC) 13-10 in Stagg


NOTE:  Larry Kehres retired after the 2012 season.


2013 - National Runner-ups (14-1) / 1st year with Vince Kehres as HC
Franklin (HCAC):  Mount win 30-27
Heidelberg (OAC): Mount win 44-34
John Carroll (OAC):  Mount win 42-34
Wesley (Ind.):  Mount win 62-59
North Central (CCIW):  Mount win 41-40
Lost to Whitewater 52-14 in Stagg
NOTE:  a marginal Mount team with new HC figuring his way.  Could/should have lost multiple times throughout the season.  Had no business playing in the Stagg but kept finding ways to win behind Kevin Burke at QB.

[crufootball]

Your at the 10ish yard and you run 3 straight times? Give me a break.

I just had a chance to look back at these posts during the game.

Bobo: Good job staying positive

02: UMHB MUCH better is a stretch. Our turnovers and the punt return were mistakes and inexcusable. But other than that, we averaged 4.2 yards per rush, UMHB averaged 4.3. They averaged 6.0 yards per pass attempt, we averaged 5.9.  They out-gained us by 25 yards on the ground and 26 yards through the air (including 25 meaningless yards on the last play of the first half).  I would agree with the statement, "UMHB deserved to win the game." I think the MUCH better thing is over-stated.

GBMAN: I see two posts that complain of three straight runs. It appears you posted them regarding our possession after Bryce's interception.  That puzzles me.

I am disappointed we are not playing in the Stagg Bowl tomorrow night. But I'm more convinced than ever we will be back there soon.

I got tired of 02WarhawkCrusader telling the world how over talented & supremely superior UMHB athletes are compared to UWW...like he's forgotten that UMHB has always been the faster, stronger, & more talented athletes v UWW since their first meeting - all 5 meetings to be exact, yet UWW was 5-0 against the Cru. To listen to him, we don't belong in the same universe. I don't know why he was even watching the game considering he already knew what the outcome would be. You'd think he had a garage to clean, or a Christmas Tree to chop down and decorate, some poetry to read or a train set in the basement to get off on. Something better than watching a game he already knew the ending. The same reason we won those previous 5 games was going to be the reason we would win this game. It was a pretty even game except for a small number, but vital factors.  We failed to execute a decent game plan on an offense that shot itself in the foot. The errors doomed any chance we had. The table could have easily been turned. I never saw the two teams as anything but pretty even. He wanted to throw in the towel nearly from the start and wanted everybody he could convince to do the same. I march to my own drummer.

UHMB has clearly superior athletes. Not just to UWW but to DIII. They have a breadth and depth of talent that is unrivalled by any other program, particularly in speed positions like the d-backs and wide outs. That's indisputable.  They also play high school ball and have zero competition until the playoffs get serious.

According to a Title IX analysis we did on the MIAC boards at the beginning of the season, UHMB spend double on football than any other national contender and about five to seven times the budget of a "normal" program.  They sit in a football palace dead set in the middle of football crazy Texas.  In fact, it appears that they spend more on football than all other men's sports combined at UHMB.

The overflow of talent available for recruiting is unique. In fact, on their roster of 170+ they have only 8 players not from Texas. Two FL and IL and one each from LA, GA, OH, and OK.  I can't think of any similar situation except for perhaps Gopher hockey in the 80's but even then Wisconsin was just a couple hours away.

So, it is inarguable that they spend more money and have better athletes.  But I think they very beatable by playing better football.  The challenge for programs like UWW will be to develop  and breadth and depth in play that overcomes UHMB's money and recruiting pool advantages, which won't go away any time soon.  And I'll reckon they will crumble as soon as they are outplayed badly. They won't know how to step up another notch as they are too dependent on buying and beefing their way to the top.

Or you can shout "Apostate!" at any UWW fan attempting to discuss the issue. Just give me time to pop some popcorn, though.  I hate to miss a good show of people eating their own.

Couple of things here.

First in terms of the competition that we face. I will be the first to admit that I don't believe that the ASC is the toughest competition in the country however to say we have zero competition is not fair. Since 2015 the D3 folks have ranked the ASC no lower than 7th and as high as 2nd in their conference rankings. Also over the years we have scheduled as non-conference games Linfield, UW-W, UW- La Crosse, Wesley and a few other teams that were at the time recent or current playoff teams.

Second thing for the discussion on money spent, where did you get that data? I won't even argue that we spend a lot of money on football although I do wonder what affect all the travel we do for non-conference and in conference has.

[WW]

Well, next man up for 2019 as some great seniors will move on. There are some outstanding players in the graduating class.

I'll go back to an old question- does UWW set the national championship as a goal? I know it's been said that LL didn't set it as a goal. Listening to the D3 pregame interview w Cecil Shorts as well as postgame stuff with UMHB, it's pretty clear they are all in on the national championship as The Goal. No conference champion rings or awards are celebrated as I understand it.

Certainly 2018 was another example to this staff that winning and even dominating the WIAC doesn't necessarily get UWW in national championship position.

Let's say they don't write that particular goal on the chalkboard. What exactly would change?

[emma17]

I think there are a couple different but related topics going here. One is conference strength and how that may impact the goals/expectations of the program year in and year out.

The other is whether it makes any difference for a program to actually publicly establish a goal of the national championship.

I'll tackle the latter. It seems to me the importance and benefit of goal setting is pretty well established in society.

WW, in effect, asks what would change if UWW doesn't publicly announce their goal as winning the national championship. I can list a bunch of ideas and hunches, but for now I'd rather ask you WW- as long as the goal is ethical and inspirational, why wouldn't an administration openly acknowledge it?
     

[WW]

I think there are a couple different but related topics going here. One is conference strength and how that may impact the goals/expectations of the program year in and year out.

The other is whether it makes any difference for a program to actually publicly establish a goal of the national championship.

I'll tackle the latter. It seems to me the importance and benefit of goal setting is pretty well established in society.

WW, in effect, asks what would change if UWW doesn't publicly announce their goal as winning the national championship. I can list a bunch of ideas and hunches, but for now I'd rather ask you WW- as long as the goal is ethical and inspirational, why wouldn't an administration openly acknowledge it?
     

I'm not saying I have the right answer, or there is one. But that seems to me the kind of thing that stays in the locker room. Would you then publicly tell the outgoing seniors that they are failures? And exactly how would publicly stating that your singular goal is the national championship (vs not stating it publicly) change your recruiting strategy, your game-planning, your teaching, your execution to the degree that it would have a positive effect on any single play?

I get goal-setting. I don't think you can walk into the Perk, look to the south, and not understand that the team that plays here would like to add another season to the national championship mural. But such a public proclamation could imply that any failure to win a natty would cast a pall of failure on the efforts of every staff member and team member that season. Big picture, that's just not the case.

[emma17]

WW- Do you feel people are "failures" if they don't accomplish a goal? This is a serious question, not trying to be snarky.

If my daughter sets her goal for the lead role in a play or my son sets his goal as a certain score on his LSAT, are both failures if they come up short?

[OzJohnnie]

Second thing for the discussion on money spent, where did you get that data? I won't even argue that we spend a lot of money on football although I do wonder what affect all the travel we do for non-conference and in conference has.

The discussion starts here and runs a couple pages.  Links, etc, in the posts.  It was presented in the context of the pre-season pi$$ing contest so you'll need to ignore the run-of-the-mill Johnnie/Tommie nastiness.

[WW]

WW- Do you feel people are "failures" if they don't accomplish a goal? This is a serious question, not trying to be snarky.

If my daughter sets her goal for the lead role in a play or my son sets his goal as a certain score on his LSAT, are both failures if they come up short?

I don't. That's my point. Besides, a D3 football team should have a lot of goals, including many that have little to do with what they do on the field.

[emma17]

WW- Do you feel people are "failures" if they don't accomplish a goal? This is a serious question, not trying to be snarky.

If my daughter sets her goal for the lead role in a play or my son sets his goal as a certain score on his LSAT, are both failures if they come up short?

I don't. That's my point. Besides, a D3 football team should have a lot of goals, including many that have little to do with what they do on the field.

WW, I really do try to understand you. I'm missing your point and I'm sorry if I'm slow on the uptake.

My position is simple. I believe it is good for the UWW administration to publicly declare their goal is to win the national championship- AND I'm also saying if the team falls short of that goal, neither the program nor the players are failures.

Yes, the program can have lots of goals.

[WW]

WW- Do you feel people are "failures" if they don't accomplish a goal? This is a serious question, not trying to be snarky.

If my daughter sets her goal for the lead role in a play or my son sets his goal as a certain score on his LSAT, are both failures if they come up short?

I don't. That's my point. Besides, a D3 football team should have a lot of goals, including many that have little to do with what they do on the field.

WW, I really do try to understand you. I'm missing your point and I'm sorry if I'm slow on the uptake.

My position is simple. I believe it is good for the UWW administration to publicly declare their goal is to win the national championship- AND I'm also saying if the team falls short of that goal, neither the program nor the players are failures.

Yes, the program can have lots of goals.

I think we're on 2 of 3 possible same pages. But I don't think administration needs to go there, nor should it. Football program people? Hell yeah. And they do.

By the way, administration is in the news plenty lately, for those who think the media ignores Whitewater

[OzJohnnie]

Well, I certainly think that it's a good thing UWW no longer sets a national championship as a goal. 

[emma17]

WW- Do you feel people are "failures" if they don't accomplish a goal? This is a serious question, not trying to be snarky.

If my daughter sets her goal for the lead role in a play or my son sets his goal as a certain score on his LSAT, are both failures if they come up short?

I don't. That's my point. Besides, a D3 football team should have a lot of goals, including many that have little to do with what they do on the field.

WW, I really do try to understand you. I'm missing your point and I'm sorry if I'm slow on the uptake.

My position is simple. I believe it is good for the UWW administration to publicly declare their goal is to win the national championship- AND I'm also saying if the team falls short of that goal, neither the program nor the players are failures.

Yes, the program can have lots of goals.

I think we're on 2 of 3 possible same pages. But I don't think administration needs to go there, nor should it. Football program people? Hell yeah. And they do.

By the way, administration is in the news plenty lately, for those who think the media ignores Whitewater

At first I was reluctant to include administration, but I think there are important reasons to include it. Without administration support, big team/program goals will be hard to achieve.
Here's another reason administration may want to get on board (I have no proof there is causation), from the Gazette:

Last year, UW-W saw its first enrollment drop after years of increases. Before the start of the 2017-18 school year, UW-W had seen record enrollment seven times in the previous eight years.

Now, the campus in Whitewater has seen two consecutive years of lower enrollment.

[badgerwarhawk]

Initially the primary goal is to win the conference championship because it is the only way to guarantee that you have the opportunity to compete for a national title.  First things first. 
Whether it's stated or not we're recruiting to play for national championships.