FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[KitchenSink]

Mike Sherman got canned, huh?

I don't think Mike McCarthy will follow him this time.

[bleedpurple]

"Securing Success"

www.uwwfootball.com

Another job well done Bleed, thanks for the article.  Reading about that game makes me realize how mentally strong this team is.  I was at that game and the strange thing is, I never really felt that UWW was in trouble- even though the score at the half certainly suggests the game was in doubt.  Over the years this program has consistently overcome the tough challenges and as a team, they just seem to get done what needs to get done for the victory.

This entire line of thinking pretty much nails on the head one of the major reasons I am continually confident and not particularly nervous about this team's chances of winning.  I attribute their mental strength to the character and ability of both the coaching staffs and the players.  They enter every game KNOWING they can win while other teams come into it hoping or wishing they could win.  And it never wavers regardless of what success the other team is having or not having.  They are absolutely unaffected by a big play by the opposing team, falling behind, a bad call by the referee, or even their own mistakes.  They don't whine, showboat, trash talk, show distress in body language, or back down.  They just keep playing fast, hard, aggressive, and usually smart.  I'm sure you sensed all of this in Oshkosh, which is probably why you never felt they were in trouble. 

This is the factor that some overlook when they try to dissect statistics or performance and suggest UW-W is somehow slipping.  When a team is actually able to beat them on the field, let's talk.  Until that happens, no post or reasoning will convince me because I know it certainly won't convince them.   

Thanks, Emma, Dad, and Dr. Bobo, for your kind words! 

[bleedpurple]

I've read a couple different places that Salisbury either leads the nation in passing efficiency or would if they threw enough passes to qualify.  I maintain their passing game isn't all that efficient regardless of that ranking.  They can certainly hurt a team when they do compete a pass because they throw it down the field to the tune of 23.3 yards per completion and 13.3 yards per attempt.  But that doesn't make them particularly efficient. 

Part of efficiency (not in the ranking, but in reality) is to avoid the negative play. I'll take the efficiency of Blanchard and the Hawks offense myself:

Salisbury
# of times QB dropped back to pass: 102
% of times the play resulted in a completed pass: 50%
Ratio of times the play resulted in either a sack or interception: 1 out of every 8.5 pass plays.

UW-W
# of times QB dropped back to pass: 303
% of times the play resulted in a completed pass: 66.3%
Ratio of times the play resulted in either a sack or interception: 1 out of every 30.3  pass plays.

The figures don't include drop backs that resulted in a positive run by the QB, but I would think Matt would hold his own in that category. 

Not pointing this out to dis Salisbury. I know they are an option team that makes it's living on the ground and has an ability to hurt a defense by striking deep.  IMO, that doesn't mean they are particularly efficient at it, that's all.

[footballfan413]

"Securing Success"

www.uwwfootball.com

Awesome article, BP! 

I just hope you haven't jinxed our boys....... 

[BoBo]

Our boys shouldn't be reading this stuff, don't you think?     

[dlippiel]

I've read a couple different places that Salisbury either leads the nation in passing efficiency or would if they threw enough passes to qualify.  I maintain their passing game isn't all that efficient regardless of that ranking.  They can certainly hurt a team when they do compete a pass because they throw it down the field to the tune of 23.3 yards per completion and 13.3 yards per attempt.  But that doesn't make them particularly efficient. 

Part of efficiency (not in the ranking, but in reality) is to avoid the negative play. I'll take the efficiency of Blanchard and the Hawks offense myself:

Salisbury
# of times QB dropped back to pass: 102
% of times the play resulted in a completed pass: 50%
Ratio of times the play resulted in either a sack or interception: 1 out of every 8.5 pass plays.

UW-W
# of times QB dropped back to pass: 303
% of times the play resulted in a completed pass: 66.3%
Ratio of times the play resulted in either a sack or interception: 1 out of every 30.3  pass plays.

The figures don't include drop backs that resulted in a positive run by the QB, but I would think Matt would hold his own in that category. 

Not pointing this out to dis Salisbury. I know they are an option team that makes it's living on the ground and has an ability to hurt a defense by striking deep.  IMO, that doesn't mean they are particularly efficient at it, that's all.

dlip doesn't think that the Gulls should be able to lead the nation in a category like pass efficiency because of the small number of attempts in comparison to most teams. Yet dlip thinks the key here is that for a triple otpion team, the Gulls can throw the ball quite well. dlip compares them, again, to Springfield. Springfield will often have a passing TD as a result of catching the D off guard. Yet the pass itself looks like a ****ing wounded duck, and their ability to run a pass play when a D has any inclination that a pass is coming is atrocious. The Gulls have shown on a much more consistent basis (again, for a triple option team) that they can hurt teams with the pass, even when the play call isn't a ****ing shock to the world. 

Great blog bleedpurple! dlip looks forward to reading it on a consistent basis, +k

[footballfan413]

Isn't our out of state tuition actually less than Illinois in-state tuition?  I've always heard that was the case and one factor that made our recruiting Illinois athletes a little easier. 

There was discussion not too long ago about establishing reciprosity with Illinois but I don't think it went anywhere.  I know that at a school like Whitewater with a relatively high number of Illinois students the financial hit would be significant.

I was going to make that point actually.  My daughter's in-state tuition/room and board to ISU in 2008 was roughly the same price as we paid for #33's out-of-state/room and board to UWW.  And tuition at all IL state schools has done nothing but go up since then with the increased lack of state funding.  That being said, there were a few CCIW schools that he could have played at for a few grand less than UWW.     I was told that a very long time ago there was once reciprocity between our two states but Illinois put the kibosh on it because our kids keep heading to Wiscy but we didn't get too many coming our way.

FWIW, back in my day, just after the birth of dirt, when I was selecting a graduate school to attend, I shockingly discovered that it was more expensive attending UW-La Crosse as an in-state resident than going to Texas A&M as an non-resident (don't remember the exact #'s but it was  >$90/credit hour vs <$20/credit hour). I heard it was because of oil revenues of university-owned oil wells. UW-L didn't have any  ; A&M did!! It may've all been a myth, I don't know. I ended up going to La Crosse for my M.S., but later went to A&M for my PhD. It was cheaper at A&M. Don't know what it's like today, but I'm sure it's changed considerably. 

BoBo,

That explains why so are so elequent in all your posts, you are a Dr.! +K

On the other hand, he's still an Aggie!

And an EAGLE!         

The Eagle mascot didn't come around until 1989 so DR. BOBO was either an Indian, Red Raider, Hurricane, Racqueteer, Ped or Maroon.  Wow thats a lot of mascot changes for UWL.

Ya, not surprised at this.  I knew they had been the Indians at one time, just not sure how long ago.  But whether they call themselves Eagles, Indians or Roonies, etc., they are still LaCrosse so again, I say................

[skunks_sidekick]

WOW!  And at times Mount fans get accused of "paralysis by analysis".   

Let me break it down for you......

UWW - big, strong, baddest team on the planet
Salisbury - nice, fun, interesting team

Results

UWW - 42
Salisbury - 14

You heard it here first!   

[thewaterboy]

No horse in this fight but I will say that when I saw Salisbury play Wesley in those bad weather conditions in Dover, their QB only completed 3 passes in 10 attempts for 75 yards. One of which was a 50-some yarder. Seems like it will be cold and rainy in Wisconsin on Saturday as well. IMO, if the weather is bad. The pass game of Salisbury wont matter much allowing UWW to shut down the option. But if Salisbury wants to have a chance in this one, they need the pass to keep the Warhawks D honest.

[footballfan413]

Our boys shouldn't be reading this stuff, don't you think?     

Oh and I'm sure.........none of them ever do!

Besides, the jinx is on just by saying the words.  It is negative energy being put into the atmosphere.
Geeze, I sound like a hippie nutcase.     Well, just to be safe, everyone repeat after me:

"Protect the ball......protect the ball............protect the ball!!"

[retagent]

"Securing Success"

www.uwwfootball.com

Another job well done Bleed, thanks for the article.  Reading about that game makes me realize how mentally strong this team is.  I was at that game and the strange thing is, I never really felt that UWW was in trouble- even though the score at the half certainly suggests the game was in doubt.  Over the years this program has consistently overcome the tough challenges and as a team, they just seem to get done what needs to get done for the victory.

This entire line of thinking pretty much nails on the head one of the major reasons I am continually confident and not particularly nervous about this team's chances of winning.  I attribute their mental strength to the character and ability of both the coaching staffs and the players.  They enter every game KNOWING they can win while other teams come into it hoping or wishing they could win.  And it never wavers regardless of what success the other team is having or not having.  They are absolutely unaffected by a big play by the opposing team, falling behind, a bad call by the referee, or even their own mistakes.  They don't whine, showboat, trash talk, show distress in body language, or back down.  They just keep playing fast, hard, aggressive, and usually smart.  I'm sure you sensed all of this in Oshkosh, which is probably why you never felt they were in trouble. 

This is the factor that some overlook when they try to dissect statistics or performance and suggest UW-W is somehow slipping.  When a team is actually able to beat them on the field, let's talk.  Until that happens, no post or reasoning will convince me because I know it certainly won't convince them.   

Thanks, Emma, Dad, and Dr. Bobo, for your kind words! 

So you're saying, they CAN'T be beaten?

[BoBo]

"Securing Success"

www.uwwfootball.com

Another job well done Bleed, thanks for the article.  Reading about that game makes me realize how mentally strong this team is.  I was at that game and the strange thing is, I never really felt that UWW was in trouble- even though the score at the half certainly suggests the game was in doubt.  Over the years this program has consistently overcome the tough challenges and as a team, they just seem to get done what needs to get done for the victory.

This entire line of thinking pretty much nails on the head one of the major reasons I am continually confident and not particularly nervous about this team's chances of winning.  I attribute their mental strength to the character and ability of both the coaching staffs and the players.  They enter every game KNOWING they can win while other teams come into it hoping or wishing they could win.  And it never wavers regardless of what success the other team is having or not having.  They are absolutely unaffected by a big play by the opposing team, falling behind, a bad call by the referee, or even their own mistakes.  They don't whine, showboat, trash talk, show distress in body language, or back down.  They just keep playing fast, hard, aggressive, and usually smart.  I'm sure you sensed all of this in Oshkosh, which is probably why you never felt they were in trouble. 

This is the factor that some overlook when they try to dissect statistics or performance and suggest UW-W is somehow slipping.  When a team is actually able to beat them on the field, let's talk.  Until that happens, no post or reasoning will convince me because I know it certainly won't convince them.   

Thanks, Emma, Dad, and Dr. Bobo, for your kind words! 

So you're saying, they CAN'T be beaten?

(no arrogance intended - for entertainment purposes only)

[BoBo]

UWW - big, strong, baddest team on the planet
Salisbury - nice, fun, interesting team

In the spirit of the PhD - another comment that is Piled high and Deep - get out your hip-waders!!

[02 Warhawk]

We're looking at a 70% chance of rain to tomorrow now.

Cold and wet!

[wesleydad]

I agree with Skunks on this one.  I saw Salisbury play twice, the loss to Wesley and the win against Fisher.  They are a nice team and will beat most teams based on the triple option.  A team needs the athletes and discipline to stop it, UWW has both.  If the weather is bad they will be limited to running.  They hit 1 big pass play and 1 big run against Wesley.  They gave up plenty of yards to Fisher and the game would have been much closer had Fisher scored when they were in the red zone.  So if UWW has as good a defense as Wesley, stats say yes, and as good an offense as Fisher, stats say better, then this game will likely not be close.  Salisbury will need to play a near perfect game and UWW will have to make some mistakes which it sounds like they have not done in some time for the game to be close.  I would love to see the Gulls give the Warhawks a game and so would the Warhawk fans more than likely, but just dont see it happening.