FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[emma17]

Looks like I missed some fun posting exchanges. Bummer.

Another subject- I've watched the Stagg Bowl several times thanks to the ol DVR.
The offensive line play from UWW was terrific. The drive after Morang made the beautiful over the shoulder pick was as dominating an O line performance as I've seen.

The other fun thing to watch is the discipline of the D line and backers. Discipline is key to stopping that read option stuff, it was a thing of beauty.

[retagent]

The off-season is a good time to address some issues without too much emotion.

As happened a few times in the recent pages, many people, me included, hold boosters of one team to another of those booster's comments. It's easy to do, since after a few days, things get to be a blur, and we tend not to differentiate among those posts/posters. Let's just acknowledge that happens all around, with, maybe a few exceptional posters who pay more attention.

Second, I wish we could agree that there are any number of advantages that are dispersed to any number of D III schools. To say that public schools have an advantage because of "X" doesn't mean that that advantage guarantees success. One advantage certain schools who are among a number of schools whose football programs have had a record of success, is that they have a record of success. Most people, and athletes are people, want to associate with winners. That is a big draw to successful programs. The bigger advantage is that those schools have a number of factors that have gotten them to that level where they have that advantage.

I'll use UWW as an example here (since I'm on this board). There has to be something that has set them apart from other WIAC schools since they all have that "Public School Advantage." Obviously, they have had a superior coaching staff. They also have a recruiting area that includes a large population center. Unless that coaching staff also is adept at recruiting, that large population means nothing. To point to one thing, ignores many other things that  go into exploiting a POTENTIAL advantage.

Since the Linfield contingent has been weighing in here, let's also acknowledge that being Linfield, and having their record number of consecutive winning seasons is a distinct advantage when they are recruiting. I sincerely doubt that their record is the only thing that gets them to that level every year. So when I, or someone else, points to a perceived advantage, don't assume we are stupid enough to believe that we believe it is singularly responsible for success.

[OzJohnnie]

...don't assume we are stupid...

I think everything you said was utterly reasonable, retagent. Any disagreement is really just a trenchant argument for why one team or another can't beat the best. Congratulations, all, on such good reasoning for mediocrity.

But no words, no matter how fancy or elegantly put, will make me abandon that final assumption.

[bleedpurple]

The off-season is a good time to address some issues without too much emotion.

As happened a few times in the recent pages, many people, me included, hold boosters of one team to another of those booster's comments. It's easy to do, since after a few days, things get to be a blur, and we tend not to differentiate among those posts/posters. Let's just acknowledge that happens all around, with, maybe a few exceptional posters who pay more attention.

Second, I wish we could agree that there are any number of advantages that are dispersed to any number of D III schools. To say that public schools have an advantage because of "X" doesn't mean that that advantage guarantees success. One advantage certain schools who are among a number of schools whose football programs have had a record of success, is that they have a record of success. Most people, and athletes are people, want to associate with winners. That is a big draw to successful programs. The bigger advantage is that those schools have a number of factors that have gotten them to that level where they have that advantage.

I'll use UWW as an example here (since I'm on this board). There has to be something that has set them apart from other WIAC schools since they all have that "Public School Advantage." Obviously, they have had a superior coaching staff. They also have a recruiting area that includes a large population center. Unless that coaching staff also is adept at recruiting, that large population means nothing. To point to one thing, ignores many other things that  go into exploiting a POTENTIAL advantage.

Since the Linfield contingent has been weighing in here, let's also acknowledge that being Linfield, and having their record number of consecutive winning seasons is a distinct advantage when they are recruiting. I sincerely doubt that their record is the only thing that gets them to that level every year. So when I, or someone else, points to a perceived advantage, don't assume we are stupid enough to believe that we believe it is singularly responsible for success.

I would think most people would generally agree with this. But I'm trying to figure out why it matters. This concept of "advantage" you speak of exists within every field, discipline, or industry in the world. The Denver Broncos have the "advantage" of having Peyton Manning at QB. Nike has the "advantage" of name recognition. The United States of America has the "advantage" of possessing the greatest constitution ever written.  My question simply is, "So what"?

I certainly know that people who bring up the "advantages" topic don't necessarily think that the "advantages" are the singular reason for the success. I think what rubs people the wrong way is more that it sounds like you (or others who bring it up) are implying that somehow winning national championships is easier for UW-W than it would be for, let's say, St. John's.  Another inference that could be made from certain comments is that if (let's say) St. John's were to win a national championship,it would somehow be a greater accomplishment than if (let's say) UW-W were to win a national championship. After all, St. John's did it without the "benefit" of those particular advantages.  To the degree that someone is actually implying this (as opposed to it simply being inferred), I would say that's a bunch of crap. 

[OzJohnnie]

The off-season is a good time to address some issues without too much emotion.

As happened a few times in the recent pages, many people, me included, hold boosters of one team to another of those booster's comments. It's easy to do, since after a few days, things get to be a blur, and we tend not to differentiate among those posts/posters. Let's just acknowledge that happens all around, with, maybe a few exceptional posters who pay more attention.

Second, I wish we could agree that there are any number of advantages that are dispersed to any number of D III schools. To say that public schools have an advantage because of "X" doesn't mean that that advantage guarantees success. One advantage certain schools who are among a number of schools whose football programs have had a record of success, is that they have a record of success. Most people, and athletes are people, want to associate with winners. That is a big draw to successful programs. The bigger advantage is that those schools have a number of factors that have gotten them to that level where they have that advantage.

I'll use UWW as an example here (since I'm on this board). There has to be something that has set them apart from other WIAC schools since they all have that "Public School Advantage." Obviously, they have had a superior coaching staff. They also have a recruiting area that includes a large population center. Unless that coaching staff also is adept at recruiting, that large population means nothing. To point to one thing, ignores many other things that  go into exploiting a POTENTIAL advantage.

Since the Linfield contingent has been weighing in here, let's also acknowledge that being Linfield, and having their record number of consecutive winning seasons is a distinct advantage when they are recruiting. I sincerely doubt that their record is the only thing that gets them to that level every year. So when I, or someone else, points to a perceived advantage, don't assume we are stupid enough to believe that we believe it is singularly responsible for success.

I would think most people would generally agree with this. But I'm trying to figure out why it matters. This concept of "advantage" you speak of exists within every field, discipline, or industry in the world. The Denver Broncos have the "advantage" of having Peyton Manning at QB. Nike has the "advantage" of name recognition. The United States of America has the "advantage" of possessing the greatest constitution ever written.  My question simply is, "So what"?

I certainly know that people who bring up the "advantages" topic don't necessarily think that the "advantages" are the singular reason for the success. I think what rubs people the wrong way is more that it sounds like you (or others who bring it up) are implying that somehow winning national championships is easier for UW-W than it would be for, let's say, St. John's.  Another inference that could be made from certain comments is that if (let's say) St. John's were to win a national championship,it would somehow be a greater accomplishment than if (let's say) UW-W were to win a national championship. After all, St. John's did it without the "benefit" of those particular advantages.  To the degree that someone is actually implying this (as opposed to it simply being inferred), I would say that's a bunch of crap. 

You're misunderstanding retagent, I'm afraid.  As I'm enjoying a sun-filled Thai vacation and am particularly relaxed, I won't even throw out a gratuitous insult. He's saying advantages don't equate to winning. Winners still have to win.

I will say that your argument, that those without advantage have no greater claim to achievement, flies in the face of experience and the human spirit. Who doesn't love the movie Hoosiers?  Why do we always cheer for the underdog?

UWW earned every one of its national titles, but it's equally true that when we beat you it will be sweet, sweet, sweet.

[02 Warhawk]

The off-season is a good time to address some issues without too much emotion.

As happened a few times in the recent pages, many people, me included, hold boosters of one team to another of those booster's comments. It's easy to do, since after a few days, things get to be a blur, and we tend not to differentiate among those posts/posters. Let's just acknowledge that happens all around, with, maybe a few exceptional posters who pay more attention.

Second, I wish we could agree that there are any number of advantages that are dispersed to any number of D III schools. To say that public schools have an advantage because of "X" doesn't mean that that advantage guarantees success. One advantage certain schools who are among a number of schools whose football programs have had a record of success, is that they have a record of success. Most people, and athletes are people, want to associate with winners. That is a big draw to successful programs. The bigger advantage is that those schools have a number of factors that have gotten them to that level where they have that advantage.

I'll use UWW as an example here (since I'm on this board). There has to be something that has set them apart from other WIAC schools since they all have that "Public School Advantage." Obviously, they have had a superior coaching staff. They also have a recruiting area that includes a large population center. Unless that coaching staff also is adept at recruiting, that large population means nothing. To point to one thing, ignores many other things that  go into exploiting a POTENTIAL advantage.

Since the Linfield contingent has been weighing in here, let's also acknowledge that being Linfield, and having their record number of consecutive winning seasons is a distinct advantage when they are recruiting. I sincerely doubt that their record is the only thing that gets them to that level every year. So when I, or someone else, points to a perceived advantage, don't assume we are stupid enough to believe that we believe it is singularly responsible for success.

I would think most people would generally agree with this. But I'm trying to figure out why it matters. This concept of "advantage" you speak of exists within every field, discipline, or industry in the world. The Denver Broncos have the "advantage" of having Peyton Manning at QB. Nike has the "advantage" of name recognition. The United States of America has the "advantage" of possessing the greatest constitution ever written.  My question simply is, "So what"?

I certainly know that people who bring up the "advantages" topic don't necessarily think that the "advantages" are the singular reason for the success. I think what rubs people the wrong way is more that it sounds like you (or others who bring it up) are implying that somehow winning national championships is easier for UW-W than it would be for, let's say, St. John's.  Another inference that could be made from certain comments is that if (let's say) St. John's were to win a national championship,it would somehow be a greater accomplishment than if (let's say) UW-W were to win a national championship. After all, St. John's did it without the "benefit" of those particular advantages.  To the degree that someone is actually implying this (as opposed to it simply being inferred), I would say that's a bunch of crap. 

You're misunderstanding retagent, I'm afraid.  As I'm enjoying a sun-filled Thai vacation and am particularly relaxed, I won't even throw out a gratuitous insult. He's saying advantages don't equate to winning. Winners still have to win.
I will say that your argument, that those without advantage have no greater claim to achievement, flies in the face of experience and the human spirit. Who doesn't love the movie Hoosiers?  Why do we always cheer for the underdog?

UWW earned every one of its national titles, but it's equally true that when we beat you it will be sweet, sweet, sweet.

That's how we felt in 2005 when UWW took down the mighty Johnnies in the playoffs.

Also, if these alleged "advantages" don't equate to winning, and winners still have to win...then why is this topic always brought up every other month on this board? Are people just trying to find something to complain about? Trying to justify why Whitewater is winning Stagg Bowls and their program is not? I think that's the point Bleed is trying to get across.

[footballfan413]

The off-season is a good time to address some issues without too much emotion.

As happened a few times in the recent pages, many people, me included, hold boosters of one team to another of those booster's comments. It's easy to do, since after a few days, things get to be a blur, and we tend not to differentiate among those posts/posters. Let's just acknowledge that happens all around, with, maybe a few exceptional posters who pay more attention.

Second, I wish we could agree that there are any number of advantages that are dispersed to any number of D III schools. To say that public schools have an advantage because of "X" doesn't mean that that advantage guarantees success. One advantage certain schools who are among a number of schools whose football programs have had a record of success, is that they have a record of success. Most people, and athletes are people, want to associate with winners. That is a big draw to successful programs. The bigger advantage is that those schools have a number of factors that have gotten them to that level where they have that advantage.

I'll use UWW as an example here (since I'm on this board). There has to be something that has set them apart from other WIAC schools since they all have that "Public School Advantage." Obviously, they have had a superior coaching staff. They also have a recruiting area that includes a large population center. Unless that coaching staff also is adept at recruiting, that large population means nothing. To point to one thing, ignores many other things that  go into exploiting a POTENTIAL advantage.

Since the Linfield contingent has been weighing in here, let's also acknowledge that being Linfield, and having their record number of consecutive winning seasons is a distinct advantage when they are recruiting. I sincerely doubt that their record is the only thing that gets them to that level every year. So when I, or someone else, points to a perceived advantage, don't assume we are stupid enough to believe that we believe it is singularly responsible for success.

I would think most people would generally agree with this. But I'm trying to figure out why it matters. This concept of "advantage" you speak of exists within every field, discipline, or industry in the world. The Denver Broncos have the "advantage" of having Peyton Manning at QB. Nike has the "advantage" of name recognition. The United States of America has the "advantage" of possessing the greatest constitution ever written.  My question simply is, "So what"?

I certainly know that people who bring up the "advantages" topic don't necessarily think that the "advantages" are the singular reason for the success. I think what rubs people the wrong way is more that it sounds like you (or others who bring it up) are implying that somehow winning national championships is easier for UW-W than it would be for, let's say, St. John's.  Another inference that could be made from certain comments is that if (let's say) St. John's were to win a national championship,it would somehow be a greater accomplishment than if (let's say) UW-W were to win a national championship. After all, St. John's did it without the "benefit" of those particular advantages.  To the degree that someone is actually implying this (as opposed to it simply being inferred), I would say that's a bunch of crap. 

You're misunderstanding retagent, I'm afraid.  As I'm enjoying a sun-filled Thai vacation and am particularly relaxed, I won't even throw out a gratuitous insult. He's saying advantages don't equate to winning. Winners still have to win.
I will say that your argument, that those without advantage have no greater claim to achievement, flies in the face of experience and the human spirit. Who doesn't love the movie Hoosiers?  Why do we always cheer for the underdog?

UWW earned every one of its national titles, but it's equally true that when we beat you it will be sweet, sweet, sweet.

That's how we felt in 2005 when UWW took down the mighty Johnnies in the playoffs.

Also, if these alleged "advantages" don't equate to winning, and winners still have to win...then why is this topic always brought up every other month on this board? Are people just trying to find something to complain about? Trying to justify why Whitewater is winning Stagg Bowls and their program is not? I think that's the point Bleed is trying to get across.

And NEVER brought up before 2005 when we heard comments like, "no WIAC team will be playing football in December," instead.   
   

[retagent]

This board is EXACTLY where people should argue about things that have absolutely no redeeming social value.

[footballfan413]

This board is EXACTLY where people should argue about things that have absolutely no redeeming social value.

LOL, + karma.   

[MasterJedi]

The off-season is a good time to address some issues without too much emotion.

As happened a few times in the recent pages, many people, me included, hold boosters of one team to another of those booster's comments. It's easy to do, since after a few days, things get to be a blur, and we tend not to differentiate among those posts/posters. Let's just acknowledge that happens all around, with, maybe a few exceptional posters who pay more attention.

Second, I wish we could agree that there are any number of advantages that are dispersed to any number of D III schools. To say that public schools have an advantage because of "X" doesn't mean that that advantage guarantees success. One advantage certain schools who are among a number of schools whose football programs have had a record of success, is that they have a record of success. Most people, and athletes are people, want to associate with winners. That is a big draw to successful programs. The bigger advantage is that those schools have a number of factors that have gotten them to that level where they have that advantage.

I'll use UWW as an example here (since I'm on this board). There has to be something that has set them apart from other WIAC schools since they all have that "Public School Advantage." Obviously, they have had a superior coaching staff. They also have a recruiting area that includes a large population center. Unless that coaching staff also is adept at recruiting, that large population means nothing. To point to one thing, ignores many other things that  go into exploiting a POTENTIAL advantage.

Since the Linfield contingent has been weighing in here, let's also acknowledge that being Linfield, and having their record number of consecutive winning seasons is a distinct advantage when they are recruiting. I sincerely doubt that their record is the only thing that gets them to that level every year. So when I, or someone else, points to a perceived advantage, don't assume we are stupid enough to believe that we believe it is singularly responsible for success.

I would think most people would generally agree with this. But I'm trying to figure out why it matters. This concept of "advantage" you speak of exists within every field, discipline, or industry in the world. The Denver Broncos have the "advantage" of having Peyton Manning at QB. Nike has the "advantage" of name recognition. The United States of America has the "advantage" of possessing the greatest constitution ever written.  My question simply is, "So what"?

I certainly know that people who bring up the "advantages" topic don't necessarily think that the "advantages" are the singular reason for the success. I think what rubs people the wrong way is more that it sounds like you (or others who bring it up) are implying that somehow winning national championships is easier for UW-W than it would be for, let's say, St. John's.  Another inference that could be made from certain comments is that if (let's say) St. John's were to win a national championship,it would somehow be a greater accomplishment than if (let's say) UW-W were to win a national championship. After all, St. John's did it without the "benefit" of those particular advantages.  To the degree that someone is actually implying this (as opposed to it simply being inferred), I would say that's a bunch of crap. 

You're misunderstanding retagent, I'm afraid.  As I'm enjoying a sun-filled Thai vacation and am particularly relaxed, I won't even throw out a gratuitous insult. He's saying advantages don't equate to winning. Winners still have to win.
I will say that your argument, that those without advantage have no greater claim to achievement, flies in the face of experience and the human spirit. Who doesn't love the movie Hoosiers?  Why do we always cheer for the underdog?

UWW earned every one of its national titles, but it's equally true that when we beat you it will be sweet, sweet, sweet.

That's how we felt in 2005 when UWW took down the mighty Johnnies in the playoffs.

Also, if these alleged "advantages" don't equate to winning, and winners still have to win...then why is this topic always brought up every other month on this board? Are people just trying to find something to complain about? Trying to justify why Whitewater is winning Stagg Bowls and their program is not? I think that's the point Bleed is trying to get across.

And NEVER brought up before 2005 when we heard comments like, "no WIAC team will be playing football in December," instead.   
   

You mean those big, slow, stupid WIAC teams that are not very good and are always one and done? And how the MIAC is God and there were no advantages then?

[retagent]

Some things are just true. Some things change, and are no longer true. At St John's, I was taught to determine which is which.

[emma17]

Some things are just true. Some things change, and are no longer true. At St John's, I was taught to determine which is which.

That's right.
As Bleed pointed out, advantages exist for everyone, everywhere- our job as individuals and groups is to fully develop and utilize those advantages- continuously.

Is the following true?
St. John's was great at football and utilized its advantages fully= True.
St. John's is no longer great at football because it no longer utilizes its advantages fully= True.
St. John's recent decline is not the result of UWW's ability to utilize its advantages fully= True.

[Sakman 1111]

I am proud that this is the first time in the last 8 years or so that I have not taken part in the never ending private/public discussion......feels good.....I will let 413 and 02 carry the ball which they do very well and much less frustrating in the long run......Recruiting going on at present in the Chicago area for UWW and some other publics......Pound the Rock.....

[bleedpurple]

02 and Emma pretty much hit on the main points of my post. For the record, I was not accusing Retagent of implying anything. I was simply explaining why people may be rubbed the wrong way when someone repeatedly chooses to bring up "advantages".  Personally, I think Retagent enjoys pulling the chains of WIAC posters more than he has a need to complain about advantages. 

Oz, I'd imagine it will be sweet, sweet, sweet when you guys beat us. Be sure to tell your great grandchildren to give our great grandchildren a hard time about it when it happens, too! 

[02 Warhawk]

Actually

I wonder how all three unbeated WIAC teams; UWW, UWO and UWP would do against Bethel and North Central, since the MIAC and the CCIW are often considered two of the top conferences.    Out of those six games how many would the WIAC win?

WHD

Very tough to say....maybe 3-3. For some reason Bethel was never a team that really scared me. I went to the Oshkosh/Bethel game last year in the playoffs, and Oshkosh just destroyed them.

The correct answer is zero.  Bethel has improved quite a bit since last season.  They also had a funny way of being destroyed considering they led at the half.  Surely then you'd also say Oshkosh was destroyed the next week by the currently 6th place MIAC team.  Down 21-0 after the first quarter. The WIAC's reign of terror is over. It might start up again in the future, but as of now, the d3 poll doesn't lie.

Looks like it started up sooner than AO thought. Three teams finished in the top 11.