FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[02 Warhawk]

I admit it's a slow process for me to assimilate to the new UWW offensive style. Over time, there's a chance I'll just settle in and watch the game without thinking "how will this style hold up against Mt, UMHB, St. John, UWO and the likes?"

QB Oles was the leading rusher, 14 carries for 114 yards. Passing he was 8-18. I wonder how many of those carries were designed runs/read options and how many were tucking and running.

Me thinks the new offensive style sucks. I think it goes back to my premise that UWW now lacks the elite talent that LL had at his disposal. I always felt that if the other conference teams were to be competitive & close the talent gap, they would have show remarkable improvement. Yet what seems to have happened is UWW's talent level across the board has slip back to the rest of the field ever since Bullis took over as HC. It's been slowly eroding year after year and (unfortunately) shows no signs of bouncing back to those once, glory-filled days. We'll still be a quarter or semi-final team, but that's where we will hit the wall.

I have to think that most of the Oles runs were designed. With Peete having a difficult time getting anything going again and UWW not really using the tight end anymore in short/medium length middle of the field routes, that area was left wide open by the Platteville D. Oles took advantage of it & picked up a few yards.

So, with talent that has been eroding year after year and an offensive style that sucks, how did UW-W manage to score  more points per game last year than every year since 2009 (which includes four National Championship teams)?

Or could it be that you are just impatient and grumpy?

Our last OC did receive the Joe Maddon treatment. So it hasn't been all sunshine and rainbows of late. It's been really good (at times) but something has been a little off since the LL days.

[bleedpurple]

Our last OC did receive the Joe Maddon treatment. So it hasn't been all sunshine and rainbows of late. It's been really good (at times) but something has been a little off since the LL days.

Reminds me of Al McGuire's old quote about seashells and balloons.  But my favorite Al quote:

"The only mystery in life is why the kamikaze pilots wore helmets."

[BoBo]

I admit it's a slow process for me to assimilate to the new UWW offensive style. Over time, there's a chance I'll just settle in and watch the game without thinking "how will this style hold up against Mt, UMHB, St. John, UWO and the likes?"

QB Oles was the leading rusher, 14 carries for 114 yards. Passing he was 8-18. I wonder how many of those carries were designed runs/read options and how many were tucking and running.

Me thinks the new offensive style sucks. I think it goes back to my premise that UWW now lacks the elite talent that LL had at his disposal. I always felt that if the other conference teams were to be competitive & close the talent gap, they would have show remarkable improvement. Yet what seems to have happened is UWW's talent level across the board has slip back to the rest of the field ever since Bullis took over as HC. It's been slowly eroding year after year and (unfortunately) shows no signs of bouncing back to those once, glory-filled days. We'll still be a quarter or semi-final team, but that's where we will hit the wall.

I have to think that most of the Oles runs were designed. With Peete having a difficult time getting anything going again and UWW not really using the tight end anymore in short/medium length middle of the field routes, that area was left wide open by the Platteville D. Oles took advantage of it & picked up a few yards.

So, with talent that has been eroding year after year and an offensive style that sucks, how did UW-W manage to score  more points per game last year than every year since 2009 (which includes four National Championship teams)?

Or could it be that you are just impatient and grumpy?

You forgot old bp! But 2 of three ain't bad. 

[bleedpurple]

I admit it's a slow process for me to assimilate to the new UWW offensive style. Over time, there's a chance I'll just settle in and watch the game without thinking "how will this style hold up against Mt, UMHB, St. John, UWO and the likes?"

QB Oles was the leading rusher, 14 carries for 114 yards. Passing he was 8-18. I wonder how many of those carries were designed runs/read options and how many were tucking and running.

Me thinks the new offensive style sucks. I think it goes back to my premise that UWW now lacks the elite talent that LL had at his disposal. I always felt that if the other conference teams were to be competitive & close the talent gap, they would have show remarkable improvement. Yet what seems to have happened is UWW's talent level across the board has slip back to the rest of the field ever since Bullis took over as HC. It's been slowly eroding year after year and (unfortunately) shows no signs of bouncing back to those once, glory-filled days. We'll still be a quarter or semi-final team, but that's where we will hit the wall.

I have to think that most of the Oles runs were designed. With Peete having a difficult time getting anything going again and UWW not really using the tight end anymore in short/medium length middle of the field routes, that area was left wide open by the Platteville D. Oles took advantage of it & picked up a few yards.

So, with talent that has been eroding year after year and an offensive style that sucks, how did UW-W manage to score  more points per game last year than every year since 2009 (which includes four National Championship teams)?

Or could it be that you are just impatient and grumpy?

You forgot old bp! But 2 of three ain't bad. 

I've stopped referring to people's age. If you are old, then I'm...close to old! 

[WW]

@WW

I'm not sure why you contradict EVERY thing I say, but this thread isnt just for Whitewater fans. Guessing WW stands for Whitewater?
I have pretty good knowledge of the game of football. Do you actually go to the UWO games? Or you just reporting what you're reading?
Both teams aren't very flawed. Both teams have some issues. BUT WHO DOESNT?!?! The juggernaut that is UWW? From what I read, their offense is struggling to find a groove.
Guessing you are (or trying to be) the alpha dog on this thread.
I mean, you can agree or disagree with me. But tell me why.

Neither friend nor foe of the UWW program, at least until later in the season when they're often the last WIAC team standing, at which point I'm all in. I have friends, family, connections in athletics at most WIAC schools, plus a few MWC and CCIWs. I root for kids I know and like mostly. "WW"  has nothing to do with Whitewater... suppose I should've considered that potential confusion before I claimed that moniker. I'm a generally neutral but highly interested observer at every WIAC event I attend, which in the fall is usually one or more per weekend.

In fact, i've seen more UWO football than any other WIAC team this season. I don't know where you see so much contradiction of your takes. I think they're young too. That's obvious. They're not physical, or at least as physical as they need to be to challenge UWW, IMO. Expected more pop out of MacCudden so far but he usually doesn't have room to do much. This team is a year (or more) away.

Nothing personal. No alpha dog agenda, no Pom Pom waving. Seriously, who the hell needs to be alpha dog of the WIAC board? Just call it like I see it.

[emma17]

I admit it's a slow process for me to assimilate to the new UWW offensive style. Over time, there's a chance I'll just settle in and watch the game without thinking "how will this style hold up against Mt, UMHB, St. John, UWO and the likes?"

QB Oles was the leading rusher, 14 carries for 114 yards. Passing he was 8-18. I wonder how many of those carries were designed runs/read options and how many were tucking and running.

Me thinks the new offensive style sucks. I think it goes back to my premise that UWW now lacks the elite talent that LL had at his disposal. I always felt that if the other conference teams were to be competitive & close the talent gap, they would have show remarkable improvement. Yet what seems to have happened is UWW's talent level across the board has slip back to the rest of the field ever since Bullis took over as HC. It's been slowly eroding year after year and (unfortunately) shows no signs of bouncing back to those once, glory-filled days. We'll still be a quarter or semi-final team, but that's where we will hit the wall.

I have to think that most of the Oles runs were designed. With Peete having a difficult time getting anything going again and UWW not really using the tight end anymore in short/medium length middle of the field routes, that area was left wide open by the Platteville D. Oles took advantage of it & picked up a few yards.

So, with talent that has been eroding year after year and an offensive style that sucks, how did UW-W manage to score  more points per game last year than every year since 2009 (which includes four National Championship teams)?

Or could it be that you are just impatient and grumpy?

Dangerous stat to hang your hat on Bleed. Wesley was great at scoring tons of points in the regular season and early playoff rounds, but it didn't get them to where they wanted to be. If we are all being reasonable, the question isn't "is this offense of the last 5 years different than the Stagg run?" (we all know it is), but can this offensive style get UWW to where it wants to be?
If conference championships are the ultimate goal, I'd say UWW has it right. If winning the Stagg is the goal, it seems the talent of the team this season provides a great opportunity for the new style to succeed deep in the playoffs.

[bleedpurple]

I admit it's a slow process for me to assimilate to the new UWW offensive style. Over time, there's a chance I'll just settle in and watch the game without thinking "how will this style hold up against Mt, UMHB, St. John, UWO and the likes?"

QB Oles was the leading rusher, 14 carries for 114 yards. Passing he was 8-18. I wonder how many of those carries were designed runs/read options and how many were tucking and running.

Me thinks the new offensive style sucks. I think it goes back to my premise that UWW now lacks the elite talent that LL had at his disposal. I always felt that if the other conference teams were to be competitive & close the talent gap, they would have show remarkable improvement. Yet what seems to have happened is UWW's talent level across the board has slip back to the rest of the field ever since Bullis took over as HC. It's been slowly eroding year after year and (unfortunately) shows no signs of bouncing back to those once, glory-filled days. We'll still be a quarter or semi-final team, but that's where we will hit the wall.

I have to think that most of the Oles runs were designed. With Peete having a difficult time getting anything going again and UWW not really using the tight end anymore in short/medium length middle of the field routes, that area was left wide open by the Platteville D. Oles took advantage of it & picked up a few yards.

So, with talent that has been eroding year after year and an offensive style that sucks, how did UW-W manage to score  more points per game last year than every year since 2009 (which includes four National Championship teams)?

Or could it be that you are just impatient and grumpy?

Dangerous stat to hang your hat on Bleed. Wesley was great at scoring tons of points in the regular season and early playoff rounds, but it didn't get them to where they wanted to be. If we are all being reasonable, the question isn't "is this offense of the last 5 years different than the Stagg run?" (we all know it is), but can this offensive style get UWW to where it wants to be?
If conference championships are the ultimate goal, I'd say UWW has it right. If winning the Stagg is the goal, it seems the talent of the team this season provides a great opportunity for the new style to succeed deep in the playoffs.

So you agree with me.  Bobo's contention was an erosion of talent. Mine was not. You don't like the evidence I site, but ultimately, you agree with me.

Or are you just impatient and grumpy.

[palum]

Platteville loses to WW but moves up one spot in top 25. Does the WIAC strength  of schedule (SOS) have any bearing. As of now the WIAC has 5 teams in the top 50 SOS (EC is 51st).

d3football.com/seasons/2019/schedule?tmpl=sos-template 

[bleedpurple]

Platteville loses to WW but moves up one spot in top 25. Does the WIAC strength  of schedule (SOS) have any bearing. As of now the WIAC has 5 teams in the top 50 SOS (EC is 51st).

d3football.com/seasons/2019/schedule?tmpl=sos-template

Apparently the voters liked the way the Pioneers held it close. St. John's gained significant ground on UW-W in the poll. I'm glad UW-P rose. I think they deserve it.  But I'm never going to apologize for a WIAC victory. They are far harder to achieve than most people understand, even for UW-W.

[Pat Coleman]

Platteville loses to WW but moves up one spot in top 25. Does the WIAC strength  of schedule (SOS) have any bearing. As of now the WIAC has 5 teams in the top 50 SOS (EC is 51st).

d3football.com/seasons/2019/schedule?tmpl=sos-template

Yes -- but I don't think our Top 25 voters are paying a lot of heed to the NCAA's strength of schedule numbers, which are what is at that link.

[02 Warhawk]

Platteville loses to WW but moves up one spot in top 25. Does the WIAC strength  of schedule (SOS) have any bearing. As of now the WIAC has 5 teams in the top 50 SOS (EC is 51st).

d3football.com/seasons/2019/schedule?tmpl=sos-template

Apparently the voters liked the way the Pioneers held it close. St. John's gained significant ground on UW-W in the poll. I'm glad UW-P rose. I think they deserve it.  But I'm never going to apologize for a WIAC victory. They are far harder to achieve than most people understand, even for UW-W.

For sure. If your only loss is to a top 5 team by just 7 points - on the road - you deserve to be in the middle of the Top 25.

It doesn't hurt your resume playing in the WIAC either 

[emma17]

I admit it's a slow process for me to assimilate to the new UWW offensive style. Over time, there's a chance I'll just settle in and watch the game without thinking "how will this style hold up against Mt, UMHB, St. John, UWO and the likes?"

QB Oles was the leading rusher, 14 carries for 114 yards. Passing he was 8-18. I wonder how many of those carries were designed runs/read options and how many were tucking and running.

Me thinks the new offensive style sucks. I think it goes back to my premise that UWW now lacks the elite talent that LL had at his disposal. I always felt that if the other conference teams were to be competitive & close the talent gap, they would have show remarkable improvement. Yet what seems to have happened is UWW's talent level across the board has slip back to the rest of the field ever since Bullis took over as HC. It's been slowly eroding year after year and (unfortunately) shows no signs of bouncing back to those once, glory-filled days. We'll still be a quarter or semi-final team, but that's where we will hit the wall.

I have to think that most of the Oles runs were designed. With Peete having a difficult time getting anything going again and UWW not really using the tight end anymore in short/medium length middle of the field routes, that area was left wide open by the Platteville D. Oles took advantage of it & picked up a few yards.

So, with talent that has been eroding year after year and an offensive style that sucks, how did UW-W manage to score  more points per game last year than every year since 2009 (which includes four National Championship teams)?

Or could it be that you are just impatient and grumpy?

Dangerous stat to hang your hat on Bleed. Wesley was great at scoring tons of points in the regular season and early playoff rounds, but it didn't get them to where they wanted to be. If we are all being reasonable, the question isn't "is this offense of the last 5 years different than the Stagg run?" (we all know it is), but can this offensive style get UWW to where it wants to be?
If conference championships are the ultimate goal, I'd say UWW has it right. If winning the Stagg is the goal, it seems the talent of the team this season provides a great opportunity for the new style to succeed deep in the playoffs.

So you agree with me.  Bobo's contention was an erosion of talent. Mine was not. You don't like the evidence I site, but ultimately, you agree with me.

Or are you just impatient and grumpy.

Before I agree with you that I'm agreeing with you, I need to better understand what is in consideration here.
I agree there has not been a significant erosion of talent and it's possible I'd even agree there hasn't been any erosion of talent (I'd have that conversation separately). This becomes a slippery slope for you of the purple shaded hemoglobin. If the talent hasn't eroded, why did the Stagg Bowl run come to an end so abruptly and in particular, why did UWW's post seasons in 2015, 2016 and 2018 end with such poor offensive performance?

I certainly agree I don't like the evidence, as it's empty of meaningful results based on historical program performance.

[OzJohnnie]

Platteville loses to WW but moves up one spot in top 25. Does the WIAC strength  of schedule (SOS) have any bearing. As of now the WIAC has 5 teams in the top 50 SOS (EC is 51st).

d3football.com/seasons/2019/schedule?tmpl=sos-template 

I've always wondered how a SoS based on opponent winning percentage tells anything about the quality of a team.  Across the entire set of games all SoS scores must average to .5, and the same is true within a conference.  The only variable to a conference's average score are out of conference games.  If St John's plays St Scholastica then SJU ends up with a higher SoS than if they play Stout, but it's quite clear which is the better competition.  The rating has the appearance of discriminating but, it seems to me, is a quirk of happenstance instead.

My last example is Redlands who is rated with the second toughest schedule in country.  There's no way they play the second toughest schedule, they merely play the winning teams in a closed bubble and then are compared to a larger population.  Hansen, on the other hand, has Redlands somewhere near the 100th toughest schedule and the WIAC taking the top 8 spots.  I don't know what methodology he uses to set his SoS but he has a much better grip on actual schedule strength than what simple winning percentage provides.

[02 Warhawk]

I admit it's a slow process for me to assimilate to the new UWW offensive style. Over time, there's a chance I'll just settle in and watch the game without thinking "how will this style hold up against Mt, UMHB, St. John, UWO and the likes?"

QB Oles was the leading rusher, 14 carries for 114 yards. Passing he was 8-18. I wonder how many of those carries were designed runs/read options and how many were tucking and running.

Me thinks the new offensive style sucks. I think it goes back to my premise that UWW now lacks the elite talent that LL had at his disposal. I always felt that if the other conference teams were to be competitive & close the talent gap, they would have show remarkable improvement. Yet what seems to have happened is UWW's talent level across the board has slip back to the rest of the field ever since Bullis took over as HC. It's been slowly eroding year after year and (unfortunately) shows no signs of bouncing back to those once, glory-filled days. We'll still be a quarter or semi-final team, but that's where we will hit the wall.

I have to think that most of the Oles runs were designed. With Peete having a difficult time getting anything going again and UWW not really using the tight end anymore in short/medium length middle of the field routes, that area was left wide open by the Platteville D. Oles took advantage of it & picked up a few yards.

So, with talent that has been eroding year after year and an offensive style that sucks, how did UW-W manage to score  more points per game last year than every year since 2009 (which includes four National Championship teams)?

Or could it be that you are just impatient and grumpy?

Dangerous stat to hang your hat on Bleed. Wesley was great at scoring tons of points in the regular season and early playoff rounds, but it didn't get them to where they wanted to be. If we are all being reasonable, the question isn't "is this offense of the last 5 years different than the Stagg run?" (we all know it is), but can this offensive style get UWW to where it wants to be?
If conference championships are the ultimate goal, I'd say UWW has it right. If winning the Stagg is the goal, it seems the talent of the team this season provides a great opportunity for the new style to succeed deep in the playoffs.

So you agree with me.  Bobo's contention was an erosion of talent. Mine was not. You don't like the evidence I site, but ultimately, you agree with me.

Or are you just impatient and grumpy.

Before I agree with you that I'm agreeing with you, I need to better understand what is in consideration here.
I agree there has not been a significant erosion of talent and it's possible I'd even agree there hasn't been any erosion of talent (I'd have that conversation separately). This becomes a slippery slope for you of the purple shaded hemoglobin. If the talent hasn't eroded, why did the Stagg Bowl run come to an end so abruptly and in particular, why did UWW's post seasons in 2015, 2016 and 2018 end with such poor offensive performance?

I certainly agree I don't like the evidence, as it's empty of meaningful results based on historical program performance.

I'm on the side of the coaching staff being the obvious variable here. LL takes everything but the kitchen sink (as well as KitchenSink) with him to Buffalo after 2014. No coincidence UWW's Stagg Bowl runs ends when this occurs. I think the talent is there for the most part, but it's too darn tough to replace all the coaches and expect the Stagg Bowl runs to continue.

[WW]

Platteville loses to WW but moves up one spot in top 25. Does the WIAC strength  of schedule (SOS) have any bearing. As of now the WIAC has 5 teams in the top 50 SOS (EC is 51st).

d3football.com/seasons/2019/schedule?tmpl=sos-template 

I've always wondered how a SoS based on opponent winning percentage tells anything about the quality of a team.  Across the entire set of games all SoS scores must average to .5, and the same is true within a conference.  The only variable to a conference's average score are out of conference games.  If St John's plays St Scholastica then SJU ends up with a higher SoS than if they play Stout, but it's quite clear which is the better competition.  The rating has the appearance of discriminating but, it seems to me, is a quirk of happenstance instead.

My last example is Redlands who is rated with the second toughest schedule in country.  There's no way they play the second toughest schedule, they merely play the winning teams in a closed bubble and then are compared to a larger population.  Hansen, on the other hand, has Redlands somewhere near the 100th toughest schedule and the WIAC taking the top 8 spots.  I don't know what methodology he uses to set his SoS but he has a much better grip on actual schedule strength than what simple winning percentage provides.

Hansen produces some head scratchers. St Thomas, for example, at 6, one place ahead of UWW, despite a loss to UWEC (32) which lost to St Norbert (68), which is a member of the third-worst conference in all of D3, per Hansen. I'll have to do a deeper dive into Hansen methodology but on the surface, the only way that makes any sense is if there's historical bias based on other seasons. And even then it may not make sense.

That said, the Tommies might be the 6th best team in the country. Just not seeing how you get there in purely results-based analysis.