FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[Pio425]

I believe so. It just hasn't been announced yet

[bleedpurple]

I believe so. It just hasn't been announced yet

So it's official in an un-announced sort of way? 

[BoBo]

So what does everyone think of UWW hiring UWP's Rob Erickson as an assistant coach?

Is that official?

I believe so. It just hasn't been announced yet

A search of the UWW faculty and staff directory turned up nothing for Rob Erickson - at the same time John Miech, Kyle Supianoski, Pete Kishline, and Kyle Jacobo are in the directory as asst. football coaches. Rob Erickson I believe was D. Coordinator for John Miech while at Stevens Point, for what it's worth.

[bleedpurple]

So what does everyone think of UWW hiring UWP's Rob Erickson as an assistant coach?

Is that official?

I believe so. It just hasn't been announced yet

A search of the UWW faculty and staff directory turned up nothing for Rob Erickson - at the same time John Miech, Kyle Supianoski, Pete Kishline, and Kyle Jacobo are in the directory as asst. football coaches. Rob Erickson I believe was D. Coordinator for John Miech while at Stevens Point, for what it's worth.

Here is the write-up on Rob Erickson from his interview process for the UW-W Head Football Coach position:

http://www.warhawkfootball.com/index.php/blog/archives/finalist-profile-rob-erickson/

[wally_wabash]

This is interesting. A Wesley-UWW matchup regardless of result would be amazing (even though it looks unlikely now). I think it would be worth the risk for both teams.

I agree with emma, the committee may be dumb sometimes but they aren't stupid. I think in their eyes a loss to UWW wouldn't matter much, even if Wesley takes another one on the chin to an NJAC team. They know teams like Mount, Linfield, UWW, Wesley and MHB and a few others are a notch above, so teams that lose to them don't get hurt too bad when it comes to playoffs. We've seen it with 2013 Wesley (getting waxed at MHB and losing to Rowan). Even with their SOS, I thought there was no shot they would make the playoffs. Point is, I dont think taking a loss to UWW week 1 will hurt, as long as they can take care of business with minimal slip-ups the rest of the way.

Kind of a different beast here with 2013 Wesley in Pool B vs. Pool A/C.  Even at 4-2 vs. D3s, Wesley was always pretty safely in the field I think.  Maybe different if they had gotten smoked by Charlotte at the end of the year, but that didn't happen.  In fact, with Millsaps losing in that season's final week, Wesley was probably the first Pool B team in the field.  Take a 2-loss profile into Pool C and the game changes pretty significantly.  In Pool B, you're only being compared to teams in your own region (South) and, in 2013 at least, the East.  There were no viable candidates in other regions.  In Pool C, you'll have viable one-loss teams from every other region- it's a little harder to stand out there than it is in Pool B.

Good explanation Wally.
I believe I'm preaching to the choir here- the current inconsistent selection approach is more than enough reason for good AQ teams to be conservative in who they play non-conference. Perhaps a restructured, transparent and consistent methodology for Pool C would result in better non-conference games.

It's an endlessly interesting topic.  I think we all want to see more marquee games between top 25 teams in September.  Who doesn't like big time games between great teams, right?  But in Division III we have pesky things like budgets and a sincere desire to minimize the amount of time S-As spend out of class.  We also have a selection/seeding process that doesn't exactly reward teams for playing over their skis in the non-league portion of the season.  But is it the job of the championship committee to create a set of rules that encourage teams to schedule the very top teams in the division?  I don't know that it is- or at least I don't know that there is a good way to do it short of guaranteeing not only no penalty for playing the tippy top teams in the division, but giving them extra credit for doing so regardless of result.  Then you'd have teams beating down the Whitewater door for home and homes.  But that opens up a whole host of other issues- where do you draw the line for who you get extra credit for playing?  UMHB?  Linfield?  Hobart?  Wheaton?  And then what happens if somebody schedules a home and home with Whitewater for 2017/2018 only to find that in 2-3 seasons the black hole left by Leipold's departure plus ginormous budget cuts have turned Whitewater into something much less than the 6-in-8 team that they were when the games were agreed to?  Does that team that schedule UWW still get extra credit even if UWW turns into a 7-3 kind of team (relax fellas...not saying that's what is happening, just playing the hypothetical here)? 

I think the side I've settled in on here is that it isn't up to the championship committee to "force" teams to play anybody else.  There are a thousand legitimate noncompetitive reasons why teams can't/won't play UWW or Wesley or UMU.  And honestly, if having a hard time finding a tenth game is the cost of hanging banners, that's a cost that anybody should be happy to pay. 

[SaintsFAN]

I believe so. It just hasn't been announced yet

So it's official in an un-announced sort of way? 

So did Royal Purple News break this story?   

[Bombers798891]

It's an endlessly interesting topic.  I think we all want to see more marquee games between top 25 teams in September.  Who doesn't like big time games between great teams, right?  But in Division III we have pesky things like budgets and a sincere desire to minimize the amount of time S-As spend out of class.  We also have a selection/seeding process that doesn't exactly reward teams for playing over their skis in the non-league portion of the season.  But is it the job of the championship committee to create a set of rules that encourage teams to schedule the very top teams in the division?  I don't know that it is- or at least I don't know that there is a good way to do it short of guaranteeing not only no penalty for playing the tippy top teams in the division, but giving them extra credit for doing so regardless of result.  Then you'd have teams beating down the Whitewater door for home and homes.  But that opens up a whole host of other issues- where do you draw the line for who you get extra credit for playing?  UMHB?  Linfield?  Hobart?  Wheaton?  And then what happens if somebody schedules a home and home with Whitewater for 2017/2018 only to find that in 2-3 seasons the black hole left by Leipold's departure plus ginormous budget cuts have turned Whitewater into something much less than the 6-in-8 team that they were when the games were agreed to?  Does that team that schedule UWW still get extra credit even if UWW turns into a 7-3 kind of team (relax fellas...not saying that's what is happening, just playing the hypothetical here)? 

There are a thousand legitimate noncompetitive reasons why teams can't/won't play UWW or Wesley or UMU

I think the last part hits it. The reality is that scheduling a marquee OOC football game just isn't really that much of a priority for a lot of schools, so I don't think it really matters what the committee does. If you're dealing with a stagnant/shrinking budget, is getting your football team out to Whitewater or Alliance for a butt-kicking high on the priority list? Or maybe you've got the kind of department where, if you do that for football, suddenly, the coach of [insert sport] wants to know why their team can't go to [insert opponent/tournament] and starts complaining about favortism.

Now, if we could imagine a hypothetical world where all that stuff didn't matter, and this was purely a football decision, to me, the system of D-III football simply isn't set up to reward scheduling those games. The top teams are, by and large, too dominant, which means those games are almost always going to wind up as a loss for the non-top team, which means there's a lot of pressure to run the table in conference if you want a playoff bid, given how a shrinking Pool C is eliminating 2-loss at-large teams.

[emma17]

This is interesting. A Wesley-UWW matchup regardless of result would be amazing (even though it looks unlikely now). I think it would be worth the risk for both teams.

I agree with emma, the committee may be dumb sometimes but they aren't stupid. I think in their eyes a loss to UWW wouldn't matter much, even if Wesley takes another one on the chin to an NJAC team. They know teams like Mount, Linfield, UWW, Wesley and MHB and a few others are a notch above, so teams that lose to them don't get hurt too bad when it comes to playoffs. We've seen it with 2013 Wesley (getting waxed at MHB and losing to Rowan). Even with their SOS, I thought there was no shot they would make the playoffs. Point is, I dont think taking a loss to UWW week 1 will hurt, as long as they can take care of business with minimal slip-ups the rest of the way.

Kind of a different beast here with 2013 Wesley in Pool B vs. Pool A/C.  Even at 4-2 vs. D3s, Wesley was always pretty safely in the field I think.  Maybe different if they had gotten smoked by Charlotte at the end of the year, but that didn't happen.  In fact, with Millsaps losing in that season's final week, Wesley was probably the first Pool B team in the field.  Take a 2-loss profile into Pool C and the game changes pretty significantly.  In Pool B, you're only being compared to teams in your own region (South) and, in 2013 at least, the East.  There were no viable candidates in other regions.  In Pool C, you'll have viable one-loss teams from every other region- it's a little harder to stand out there than it is in Pool B.

Good explanation Wally.
I believe I'm preaching to the choir here- the current inconsistent selection approach is more than enough reason for good AQ teams to be conservative in who they play non-conference. Perhaps a restructured, transparent and consistent methodology for Pool C would result in better non-conference games.

It's an endlessly interesting topic.  I think we all want to see more marquee games between top 25 teams in September.  Who doesn't like big time games between great teams, right?  But in Division III we have pesky things like budgets and a sincere desire to minimize the amount of time S-As spend out of class.  We also have a selection/seeding process that doesn't exactly reward teams for playing over their skis in the non-league portion of the season.  But is it the job of the championship committee to create a set of rules that encourage teams to schedule the very top teams in the division? I don't know that it is- or at least I don't know that there is a good way to do it short of guaranteeing not only no penalty for playing the tippy top teams in the division, but giving them extra credit for doing so regardless of result.  Then you'd have teams beating down the Whitewater door for home and homes.  But that opens up a whole host of other issues- where do you draw the line for who you get extra credit for playing?  UMHB?  Linfield?  Hobart?  Wheaton?  And then what happens if somebody schedules a home and home with Whitewater for 2017/2018 only to find that in 2-3 seasons the black hole left by Leipold's departure plus ginormous budget cuts have turned Whitewater into something much less than the 6-in-8 team that they were when the games were agreed to?  Does that team that schedule UWW still get extra credit even if UWW turns into a 7-3 kind of team (relax fellas...not saying that's what is happening, just playing the hypothetical here)? 

I think the side I've settled in on here is that it isn't up to the championship committee to "force" teams to play anybody else.  There are a thousand legitimate noncompetitive reasons why teams can't/won't play UWW or Wesley or UMU.  And honestly, if having a hard time finding a tenth game is the cost of hanging banners, that's a cost that anybody should be happy to pay.

Wally, I get what you're saying, however I think some of your concerns already exist.  Isn't it likely/true that teams already consider the SOS impact of a potential opponent when scheduling into the future, only to find that come game time some number of years into the future that team isn't what it used to be? 

I don't think it's the committee's role to "force" teams to play up nor do I think it's their job to encourage teams to "schedule the very top teams".  I do think it's their job to first establish what the goal of Pool C is and then create sensible criteria and apply it in a transparent and consistent manner. 

If the committee declares it to be the latter, and if they identify by example the sort of criteria they will use in determining their selection, and if they explain their decision in a transparent manner, then I think a by-product of that approach will be an increase in the willingness of top teams to schedule each other in non-con games.   

[badgerwarhawk]

Rob Erickson would have been my second choice behind Bullis for the head coaching position.  I thought he was impressive in the community meet and greet I attended.  He was very articulate in describing his vision and answering the questions that were posed to him.  He also is very familar and has contacts within our recruiting footprint.

[wally_wabash]

Wally, I get what you're saying, however I think some of your concerns already exist.  Isn't it likely/true that teams already consider the SOS impact of a potential opponent when scheduling into the future, only to find that come game time some number of years into the future that team isn't what it used to be? 

I don't think it's the committee's role to "force" teams to play up nor do I think it's their job to encourage teams to "schedule the very top teams".  I do think it's their job to first establish what the goal of Pool C is and then create sensible criteria and apply it in a transparent and consistent manner. 

If the committee declares it to be the latter, and if they identify by example the sort of criteria they will use in determining their selection, and if they explain their decision in a transparent manner, then I think a by-product of that approach will be an increase in the willingness of top teams to schedule each other in non-con games.

I think the issue that you run into here is that when you point to recent examples of what sort of criteria gets you invited, then the very next year something entirely different happens and those examples aren't relevant.  We saw the BCS do this for over a decade- when the formula didn't pick the right teams (and a few times it missed egregiously), then they'd tweak the formula so that that particular injustice wouldn't happen again- but it inevitably leads to another injustice that either wasn't thought of ahead of time or came about as a result of those tweaks- like running out of fingers to plug the leaky dam. 

I don't disagree with your theory- I just don't think there's a practical and fair way to institute that sort of program at the Division III level.  Too many teams, too little regional crossover, and too few games. 

[oshfb]

So what does everyone think of UWW hiring UWP's Rob Erickson as an assistant coach?

Is that official?

I believe so. It just hasn't been announced yet

A search of the UWW faculty and staff directory turned up nothing for Rob Erickson - at the same time John Miech, Kyle Supianoski, Pete Kishline, and Kyle Jacobo are in the directory as asst. football coaches. Rob Erickson I believe was D. Coordinator for John Miech while at Stevens Point, for what it's worth.

I heard a rumor this morning about Craig Smith (OC @ UWO) being in line for an assistant position job at UWW. Anyone hear about this?

Rumor mill in full swing...

[bleedpurple]

I believe so. It just hasn't been announced yet

So it's official in an un-announced sort of way? 

So did Royal Purple News break this story?   

In spite of "information" that might be available on campus, the RP seems to be holding back on this one without confirmation.  Good for them.  It is progress that will serve them and their readers well in the long run.

[bleedpurple]

I heard a rumor this morning about Craig Smith (OC @ UWO) being in line for an assistant position job at UWW. Anyone hear about this?

Rumor mill in full swing...

Interesting.  Until this rumor is confirmed or refuted, I guess Coach Smith's name is out there on these boards now.  Question for you, oshfb:  How familiar are you with Coach Smith? I am not bringing this up to add weight to the rumor, but assistant coaches are understandably rarely mentioned on these boards. Do you have an opinion on Coach Smith's work?

[BoBo]

So what does everyone think of UWW hiring UWP's Rob Erickson as an assistant coach?

Is that official?

I believe so. It just hasn't been announced yet

A search of the UWW faculty and staff directory turned up nothing for Rob Erickson - at the same time John Miech, Kyle Supianoski, Pete Kishline, and Kyle Jacobo are in the directory as asst. football coaches. Rob Erickson I believe was D. Coordinator for John Miech while at Stevens Point, for what it's worth.

I heard a rumor this morning about Craig Smith (OC @ UWO) being in line for an assistant position job at UWW. Anyone hear about this?

Rumor mill in full swing...

You are out-scooping footballscoop.com Oshfb with the rumor!!  They list many assistant coaching rumors/hirings, but nothing about this one. Maybe they need a source if you are willing and able to provide them one!!

[Kira & Jaxon's Dad]

So what does everyone think of UWW hiring UWP's Rob Erickson as an assistant coach?

Is that official?

I believe so. It just hasn't been announced yet

A search of the UWW faculty and staff directory turned up nothing for Rob Erickson - at the same time John Miech, Kyle Supianoski, Pete Kishline, and Kyle Jacobo are in the directory as asst. football coaches. Rob Erickson I believe was D. Coordinator for John Miech while at Stevens Point, for what it's worth.

I heard a rumor this morning about Craig Smith (OC @ UWO) being in line for an assistant position job at UWW. Anyone hear about this?

Rumor mill in full swing...

You are out-scooping footballscoop.com Oshfb with the rumor!!  They list many assistant coaching rumors/hirings, but nothing about this one. Maybe they need a source if you are willing and able to provide them one!!

From coachingsearch.com:

Wisconsin-Whitewater: Per source, Wisconsin-Platteville defensive coordinator / inside linebackers Rob Erickson has been offered the defensive coordinator job at Wisconsin-Whitewater.