FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[WarhawkDad]

They are excellent in their own conferences, but when have any of them got past the quarter-finals.   I do not think you can measure a defense on a national level until it has played against a top 5 team.

Hey -- listen, the number of teams that have gotten past the quarterfinals is really small. Give me a break.

So how do you measure a quality defense nationally?  National statistics?   Don't think so, because that all depends upon who you play. 

WHD

[02 Warhawk]

I would say this: It's not just about making sure you win this game, but the next one. Mount Union's starters have played in the fourth quarter twice all season so for them to play 40 minutes on Saturday doesn't seem out of line heading into the national championship game.

This kind of shocks me...but I suppose it shouldn't if I think about it. I wonder how they can hold up playing an entire 4-quarter (physical) game.

UWW is purely built for wearing down opponents late in the game. We saw it in the fourth quarter two weeks ago with UWW's offense against Wartburg's defense. Along with some huge 4th quarter runs by Ratliff and Moore against Linfield last week. Before that, scoring 28 points in the second half to pull away from Wabash. UWW may start off slow, but they'll pretty much wear any team down and take control late in the game. #poundtherock

[wildcat11]

Late on to the party but congrats UWW on the victory this past Saturday. Great ball game and UWW made the plays they had to in the end.  I'll be rooting for you this Friday.

[D O.C.]

LINFIELD vs. University of Wisconsin (Whitewater) slideshow

http://wildcatville.blogspot.com/2014/12/linfield-football-at-whitewater.html

[Bombers798891]

They are excellent in their own conferences, but when have any of them got past the quarter-finals.   I do not think you can measure a defense on a national level until it has played against a top 5 team.

I mean, I agree that being a "great" offense and defense means something different against most of the country than it does against the big 5-6 teams, but using your criteria means we literally cannot evaluate 2/3 of the teams in Division III. Ever.

Here's something you may not realize: For 98% of the teams in D-III football, how they are in their own conference and in the first two rounds matters. They're not in the "national championship or bust" bus with you guys. Wesley may consider the season a disappointment because this was possibly their best team ever and Mount curb-stomped them. I can almost guarantee you that MIT is not going to suddenly downgrade how they feel about their best-ever team because Wesley did the same to them.

See, that's the nice thing about being a fan of one of the 98%. There's a lot more enjoyment of the stuff some of you guys take for granted. Having the best defense in your conference, which helps you win your conference, is great, because we don't view conference titles and playoff bids as a birthright and the regular season like some absurd two-month warmup. (I know the WIAC is a fantastic, challenging conference. I'm talking more about Mount with that part). Sure, it doesn't lead to titles. But it also doesn't reduce the season to a 1-2 game sample, and that's awesome.

[emma17]

I'm so thankful that I can honestly say there isn't a single UWW fan I know that takes anything about UWW's success for granted, and that is one of the reasons I'm so proud of the program.

I remember being a 98%er very well and I am in awe each time UWW finds a way to win and advance.

[retagent]

Just look at what happened to the Badgers against Ohio State. I doubt that anyone would say that UW was a bad team. They proved their worth over the season, but stank it up in one game. No one thought that they were in the Top 5, but if they played OSU 10 more times, I think you would see 10 much closer games. That being said, I had much higher hope that Wesley could make it a game, as they did in the recent past.

[WarhawkDad]

They are excellent in their own conferences, but when have any of them got past the quarter-finals.   I do not think you can measure a defense on a national level until it has played against a top 5 team.

I mean, I agree that being a "great" offense and defense means something different against most of the country than it does against the big 5-6 teams, but using your criteria means we literally cannot evaluate 2/3 of the teams in Division III. Ever.

Here's something you may not realize: For 98% of the teams in D-III football, how they are in their own conference and in the first two rounds matters. They're not in the "national championship or bust" bus with you guys. Wesley may consider the season a disappointment because this was possibly their best team ever and Mount curb-stomped them. I can almost guarantee you that MIT is not going to suddenly downgrade how they feel about their best-ever team because Wesley did the same to them.

See, that's the nice thing about being a fan of one of the 98%. There's a lot more enjoyment of the stuff some of you guys take for granted. Having the best defense in your conference, which helps you win your conference, is great, because we don't view conference titles and playoff bids as a birthright and the regular season like some absurd two-month warmup. (I know the WIAC is a fantastic, challenging conference. I'm talking more about Mount with that part). Sure, it doesn't lead to titles. But it also doesn't reduce the season to a 1-2 game sample, and that's awesome.

Bombers

I do not disagree with your comments, but we are not in the middle of the regular season now.  We are in the playoffs and the discussion was related to Wesley's defense in relation to the national stage.    The post I was responding to validated the Wesley defense based upon the results against MIT, Hampton-Sydney and Hobart.   And, my point solely has to do with the issue of the Wesley defense in relation to the teams they played (above) and then what happened against Mount Union.     On the national stage, in the playoffs, no matter how good you are in your conference and region, until you have played a national contender and performed at the same high level, the results you had in conference mean very little from a comparison standpoint.

WHD

[NewHawk]

First trip to Salem, should we buy tickets on line or just wait until we  get there?  Looking forward to the game and a new ring for the Warhawks.

[02 Warhawk]

First trip to Salem, should we buy tickets on line or just wait until we  get there?  Looking forward to the game and a new ring for the Warhawks.

I think I saw on the UWW website that you will save a few bucks buying in advance, verse buying at the gate.

$12.50 vs. $15.00

[MasterJedi]

First trip to Salem, should we buy tickets on line or just wait until we  get there?  Looking forward to the game and a new ring for the Warhawks.

The trip is worth it once (I went last year) but once you get back to WW you'll never want to go on that bus again. 

[jknezek]

First trip to Salem, should we buy tickets on line or just wait until we  get there?  Looking forward to the game and a new ring for the Warhawks.

The trip is worth it once (I went last year) but once you get back to WW you'll never want to go on that bus again. 

You start talking about 14 hours plus (including stops) and I don't care how nice the bus is, that is a long, long trip.

[02 Warhawk]

First trip to Salem, should we buy tickets on line or just wait until we  get there?  Looking forward to the game and a new ring for the Warhawks.

The trip is worth it once (I went last year) but once you get back to WW you'll never want to go on that bus again. 

I have a couple of options on getting to the game, but the bus is my last resort. Hope it doesn't come to that though.

I suppose riding in a car isn't much better.

[Bombers798891]

They are excellent in their own conferences, but when have any of them got past the quarter-finals.   I do not think you can measure a defense on a national level until it has played against a top 5 team.

I mean, I agree that being a "great" offense and defense means something different against most of the country than it does against the big 5-6 teams, but using your criteria means we literally cannot evaluate 2/3 of the teams in Division III. Ever.

Here's something you may not realize: For 98% of the teams in D-III football, how they are in their own conference and in the first two rounds matters. They're not in the "national championship or bust" bus with you guys. Wesley may consider the season a disappointment because this was possibly their best team ever and Mount curb-stomped them. I can almost guarantee you that MIT is not going to suddenly downgrade how they feel about their best-ever team because Wesley did the same to them.

See, that's the nice thing about being a fan of one of the 98%. There's a lot more enjoyment of the stuff some of you guys take for granted. Having the best defense in your conference, which helps you win your conference, is great, because we don't view conference titles and playoff bids as a birthright and the regular season like some absurd two-month warmup. (I know the WIAC is a fantastic, challenging conference. I'm talking more about Mount with that part). Sure, it doesn't lead to titles. But it also doesn't reduce the season to a 1-2 game sample, and that's awesome.

Bombers

I do not disagree with your comments, but we are not in the middle of the regular season now.  We are in the playoffs and the discussion was related to Wesley's defense in relation to the national stage.    The post I was responding to validated the Wesley defense based upon the results against MIT, Hampton-Sydney and Hobart.   And, my point solely has to do with the issue of the Wesley defense in relation to the teams they played (above) and then what happened against Mount Union.     On the national stage, in the playoffs, no matter how good you are in your conference and region, until you have played a national contender and performed at the same high level, the results you had in conference mean very little from a comparison standpoint.

WHD

Here's where I think I got a bit...rankled. I know this was in response to a specific post about Wesley and Mount, and you're using the comparisons you have based on the games that have been played. But you know what I got from reading that? That for teams like Wesley, Mount,  Whitewater, and the other powers, the games against everyone else provide nothing of value. It's not just that you don't lose to us, it's you feel you can't even take any lessons from playing us. We're just the 11/12/13 game preview you have to sit through before the main attraction.

And regardless of whether or not that's true for you guys, it's kind of annoying to hear fans of these elite 4-5 teams be so dismissive to the rest of us. Hobart's performance does mean a lot, to a lot of people, and a lot of teams. So does MIT's, and Hampden Sydney's. It's not all just noise because a specific 4-5 teams can't use it for "comparative" purposes. They may dominate the sport, but we don't have to run every other team through the Mount/UWW/Linfield/MHB/Wesley equation to glean information about how good they are.

[rlk]

They are excellent in their own conferences, but when have any of them got past the quarter-finals.   I do not think you can measure a defense on a national level until it has played against a top 5 team.

I mean, I agree that being a "great" offense and defense means something different against most of the country than it does against the big 5-6 teams, but using your criteria means we literally cannot evaluate 2/3 of the teams in Division III. Ever.

Here's something you may not realize: For 98% of the teams in D-III football, how they are in their own conference and in the first two rounds matters. They're not in the "national championship or bust" bus with you guys. Wesley may consider the season a disappointment because this was possibly their best team ever and Mount curb-stomped them. I can almost guarantee you that MIT is not going to suddenly downgrade how they feel about their best-ever team because Wesley did the same to them.

Get rid of that "almost".  I wasn't there in person, but everyone from MIT who cares at all about sports was absolutely thrilled beyond description about this season, and losing 59-0 to Wesley didn't change that one bit.  Some Wesley fans who were there (like wesleydad) were commenting on how energized the MIT team and fans were right up to the end and that they had never seen the visitor's stands packed the way we did.