FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[bleedpurple]

I don't know who wins this game Thursday, but I doubt that Morningside is going to wilt under the pressure of playing in a competitive game.

I agree with this and I certainly hope it's true. Because I know Platteville won't and Oshkosh won't. It will serve UW-W best if Morningside doesn't wilt. Having said that, "wilt under the pressure of playing a competitive game" is certainly different than eventually wilting under the pounding of playing an offensive line that outweighs your D-line by an average of 56 pounds per man or eventually wilting under the defensive pressure that is created by defensive line that rotates in 9 players to keep all legs fresh for 4 quarters. 

Their two losses last year were both oddities in a sense. In their first loss, they blew a 27-7 lead after one quarter. In the second, they got outscored 27-0 in the second half by Marian to be eliminated from the playoffs by 20.  I also looked up turnover data because they are so often key to a result. Since the beginning of 2014, Morningside has turned the ball over 31 times (Including 6 times in 3 games this year).  UW-W has turned it over 14 times (Including 1 time in 2 games this year). Mitigating that is the fact that UW-W has a new QB with keys to the car.  If he continues UW-W's tradition of taking care of the ball, I'm guessing we will be fine.  If not, well, things could get crazy.

[02 Warhawk]

Massey Ratings has UWW winning 44-28 on Thursday.

So take that for what it's worth.

I've seen a few people suspect on Morningside's defense against good offenses. If they're defense can be suspect then it's winnable for UWW. If it's a shootout I don't particularly like our chances. Hope the RBs can pound the rock, control clock and keep their offense off the field.

Who are these few people you speak of?

Games like this, like the Mount contests, are going to be won by the team who win and control the line of scrimmage. Everything happens because of that. I like our chances against ANYBODY in that regard. I also think we can win with their defense suspect or not. We will control the clock with our pound the rock philosophy and our discipline. I have yet to see an NAIA team with good team discipline. Our guys have been battle tested in close games and nearly always come out on top. I can see Morningside crumbling when the going gets tough since they have really never faced that kind of pressure for a complete game. Just my IMO. Now, go pick it apart.

This sounds a lot like a Wesley team to me. A lot of flash and skill with little foundation or discipline. We'll find out tomorrow if Morningside fits this mold or not. I think many of us UWW fans are hoping that's the case, but I have a feeling though this will be the toughest game on our schedule.

[retagent]

My prediction is that the team that scores more points will win this tilt.

[BoBo]

I have yet to see an NAIA team with good team discipline. Our guys have been battle tested in close games and nearly always come out on top. I can see Morningside crumbling when the going gets tough since they have really never faced that kind of pressure for a complete game. Just my IMO. Now, go pick it apart.

This is ignorant uninformed.  Morningside has been a national semifinalist for three straight years.  I realize that doesn't mesh with the standards you all keep, but they've played in big games.  I don't know who wins this game Thursday, but I doubt that Morningside is going to wilt under the pressure of playing in a competitive game.

Oh, you again? I had a feeling you would have something to say about this, but, Capt. Wally Obvious, everyone knows Morningside has been a national semifinalist for three straight years in the NAIA (including this ignorant uninformed UWW fan).  We also all know the Mustangs -that's their mascot BTW - are on an epic 11 year run of participating in the NAIA Championship round, currently unmatched by any other school. And my answer to that is woopidoo. But that in of itself doesn't prove they will wilt or crumble, but it also doesn't prove that they won't under the pressure of a competive game. But instead of explaining the basis of your opinion, you choose to call me ignorant because I hold a differing opinion. That seems to be your modus operandi whenever you come on this board. You call us uninformed and proceed to argue your way to the finish line. But here, you just call me a name, offer nothing (as usual) and hi-tail outta here. Cute.  Maybe before you shoot your mouth off, you should check out a few, hard, cold facts.

It's custom for MornCollege during this time to beat up on their non-conference and conference teams by an average of about 40+ points per game (no hard data, just an eye ball test looking through their records), with maybe one upset loss every year or two to a conference foe and a NC loss here and there against a higher ranked NAIA opponent. Bottom line is that they don't play in many competitive games, until those semi games and guess what? They have lost them all for the past three years. That's right bud, when they're playing in that most important, supposedly competitive game of their year and they've gone out to lose it. Last year they lost by 20, the year before, shut out by 35. Only in '12 did they play a competive game when they lost in OT by three when they were the favorite (rated #3, lost to #5). These aren't games that happen 10 years ago, many of their current roster played on one, two, maybe all three of those games (including their 6th year QB). Their history has shown that they have a difficult time closing out important, competitive games - making them look competive at the end has been difficult for them. That's not my opinion, just a fact. If you don't want to acknowledge that, and just call me names - fine.

On the flip side, UWW has made it a habit of winning every close, high stakes, game since going back to @Linfield in '05, La Crosse and St. John's in '06, UMHB in '07, @Willamette, @ UMHB '08, Linfield '09, @ NCC, @ Wesley in '10 - the beat goes on and on including the Wartburg game last season. They've done it at home or on on the road - hasn't mattered. I'm not making this stuff up, man, it's a fact, not an opinion. You want to dispute that - fine, go ahead, I'm all ears. Name another team at this level that has this kind of record over this period of time. Of course I didn't mention the Stagg Bowl losses to Mount, which all occured '08 and before. But, most of the current players were in middle or elementary school when those games were played. 

I have watched MornCollege's three games this year online, and they look like any other good team playing against 3 cream-filled donuts covered in chocolate w/ a generous amount of sprinkles added for crunch. They're not superman because they played in 3 straight national semi-finals. They have good speed and attact the ball on defense. Their lines are really much smaller than you would expect, but seem to work well together. UWW is in that similar-styled mega-yacht, only they played 2 cream puffs. There is more to wonder about the Wawhawks because I believe their starters have actually played less than MornCollege's considering the crazy scores of their games.  Can UWW lose? Of course they could (which would surprise me), but I wouldn't be surprised if they win, either, and I will come looking for you when they do!!

I don't expect you, oz or any other fisherman to agree with anything I write on here. In fact, having you agree with me would prove you to be reasonable and intelligent, IMO...and we can't have that!! These boards are for bickering only, without name calling - not agreeing with or supporting anybody's observations/opinions. Anything else and we'd have to get you permanently banned. 

Hint: Get over yourself Wally. You want to voice your opinion. You want to disagree with our opinion. Please, I beg you to do so. But, if all you want to do is throw your elbows around when you come in this room - that's not cool. I'm sure you expect the same if we come to your hangout. I may or may not seem like it but I'm extremely old, competitive & if you challenge me to something I will slaughter you & destroy any pride you have.

I hate how I let the most stupid things annoy me.

[d-train]

My prediction is that the team that scores more points will win this tilt.

That's some solid analysis. I was going with better players and coaching. But you make a strong case to be considered.

[jknezek]

Morningside One Score Games
2014 -- lost to Doane 49-48
2013 -- beat Baker 36-28, regular season
2012 -- beat Southern Oregon 47-44 and beat Montana Tech 40-35, one or both might have been playoff games.  Lost to Marion in OT in the NAIA Championship 30-27

Not going back any further, but clearly not a lot to work with here....

[ExTartanPlayer]

Bottom line is that they don't play in many competitive games, until those semi games and guess what? They have lost them all for the past three years. That's right bud, when they're playing in that most important, supposedly competitive game of their year and they've gone out to lose it. Last year they lost by 20, the year before, shut out by 35. Only in '12 did they play a competive game when they lost in OT by three when they were the favorite (rated #3, lost to #5).

See, this entire line of thinking for pretty much every program in Division III besides Whitewater, though.  Somebody has to lose once we get deep into the playoffs.  Unless you win national titles more often than not, you can apply this whole "they lost the most important game of the year" to just about every team that makes the playoffs.

Let's try your wording on a few other teams:

"Mount Union has not played in many competitive games until they get to the Stagg Bowl, and guess what?  They've lost it five of the last six years.  That's right bud, when they're playing in that most important, supposedly competitive game of their year and they've gone out to lose it."

Mount Union, clearly, just not cut out for playing competitive games, amiright?

Mary-Hardin Baylor:

"Mary-Hardin Baylor has not played in many competitive games until they get to the playoffs, and guess what?  They've lost in the quarters/semis four of the last five years.  That's right bud, when they're playing in that most important, supposedly competitive game of their year and they've gone out to lose it."

Or how about Linfield:

"Linfield has not played in many competitive games until they play WIAC teams a couple rounds into the playoffs, and guess what?  They've lost it there the last three years.  That's right bud, when they're playing in that most important, supposedly competitive game of their year and they've gone out to lose it."

You're holding the team to an absurd standard.  Only teams that win the national title every year get a free pass by this line of thinking.

[hazzben]

Third, it should be a great atmosphere, playing an opponent at night who is ranked #1 in the Nation, on their home turf.  They got the Schollys, we got the Warhawks.  This will be fun! 

I'd love to hear the report about their field & facilities. When I did my recruiting visit there it was crazy how bad both of those things were. For an NCC school, their weight room was a bunch of really worn out weights, in what amounted to a glorified storage room (that's maybe being overly critical to storage rooms). I remember one of their players, embarrassingly assuring me, 'hey, the weights the same, just a more 'rustic' environment.' 

I'm guessing/hoping they've upgraded since then. They've been putting a lot of emphasis on athletics since then, especially after the jump to the NAIA, but I'm guessing the Warhawks players and fans will be a bit surprised by the difference in facilities. Also, Sewer City isn't much to brag about (I'm from NW Iowa, so I'm allowed to rag on Sioux City, I took a few girls to the ole Southern Hills Mall for dinner and a movie back in the day) 

[ExTartanPlayer]

I may or may not seem like it but I'm extremely old, competitive & if you challenge me to something I will slaughter you & destroy any pride you have.

Tough guy, huh?

Should we get boxing gloves and a referee, or would you prefer bare knuckles in the alley?

I really don't understand what wally said that was so inflammatory to you.  It's an Internet forum, dude.  People will express their opinions.  Where's that quote from emma that I kept posting during the Blanchard discussion...

My preference is that people should feel free to post whatever opinion they want to post on whatever board they wish to post it on- as long as it's a true opinion to them and they have every intention to support it.

...and somehow wally is "throwing elbows" ?  What does that even mean?

[hazzben]

I have yet to see an NAIA team with good team discipline. Our guys have been battle tested in close games and nearly always come out on top. I can see Morningside crumbling when the going gets tough since they have really never faced that kind of pressure for a complete game. Just my IMO. Now, go pick it apart.

Just stop BoBo.

On second thought, all those good Whitewater and LaCrosse teams in the 70's and 80's were really, very undisciplined. Those UWL teams that won NAIA titles, they were just the Wisconsin version of 'the U.'  See how that broad brush stroke works...kinda stings doesn't it. NB: that's not actually my take, I'm just trying to show the faulty logic

It's custom for MornCollege during this time to beat up on their non-conference and conference teams by an average of about 40+ points per game (no hard data, just an eye ball test looking through their records), with maybe one upset loss every year or two to a conference foe and a NC loss here and there against a higher ranked NAIA opponent.

The bolded portion is the issue. You've been interested in Morningside for all of 5 minutes BoBo, and now you're pontificating like you're the anecdotal expert. Keep in mind, part of the road block for Morningside in the early part of that playoff streak were some excellent USF teams. You know, the currently unbeaten and 5th ranked Cougars, in D2. During that run of dominence between Carroll (MT) and USF, those two teams were pretty incredible (I've said before, I wish we could have seen Mount and UWW play those USF and Carroll teams). One version of the Cougars couldn't find anyone else to play them in non-conference (sound similar), so they jumped up a few divisions and played FCS UND...and beat them something like 28-14. One of UND's captains was interviewed after the loss and admitted: that 'undisciplined' (see what I did there  ) NAIA team was just flat out better than us. They deserved to win.

When you get a little context, you realize that yes, Morningside has lost some of their toughest games. But they've come against great competition. Some of those playoff bound NAIA teams (aka, Robert Morris) have also faired pretty well against WIAC foes.

All that to say, I hope UWW wins. I want D3 bragging rights, bad! But I just can't stand when people drop uninformed analysis, especially the lazy kind that snidely says, 'well, of course we'll win, they're just a good NAIA school. We all know all their athletes are criminals and wouldn't even be eligible at a D3 school.' Again, just like those great WIAC teams of the 80's, right? Believe me, I could tell you some stories about how some of those boys behaved in the playoffs. It wasn't a great example of the D3 ethos. But you know what, I like to think it was a couple of knuckleheads, not the norm. And I'm certainly not going to broad brush the entire 2015 version of the WIAC because of it.

[/endRant] 

For a week, Go Whitewater...Go D3

[ExTartanPlayer]

This is a key point...

All that to say, I hope UWW wins. I want D3 bragging rights, bad!

...because somehow in these types of discussions, anything that doesn't agree with certain poster's opinion gets taken as "you're rooting for UWW to lose" which is just silly.  Lines like this...

Can UWW lose? Of course they could (which would surprise me), but I wouldn't be surprised if they win, either, and I will come looking for you when they do!!

...suggest that somehow a UWW victory means that BoBo will "come looking for" wally to brag about how he was right and wally was wrong.

Which would make sense...except that wally never said UWW would lose the game.  He said:

I don't know who wins this game Thursday, but I doubt that Morningside is going to wilt under the pressure of playing in a competitive game.

...which doesn't say anything about UWW losing.  He speculated that Morningside has played in high-stakes games of their own and will not fold solely because they're playing a good team.  They might lose because UWW is a better team, but it won't be because they've never played a good team before.  Just like Mount Union in the Stagg the last five times UWW has been on the other side.  UWW won because they were better, not because Mount folds up against good teams.

wally is one of the biggest supporters of Division III sports this side of Pat Coleman.  Why would he want Whitewater to lose?  I'm guessing that he wants Whitewater to win, and win big, for the sake of Division III pride.  So I don't really understand why you would "come looking for" him if Whitewater wins big.  He'll be happy about it, just like you.

It's kind of funny how any dissenting opinion in here about literally anything gets turned into the perception that someone is rooting against you.  I should express an opinion about my favorite cut of turkey meat at Thanksgiving dinner and see how long it takes to get accused of not supporting the Warhawks.  What's the over/under, 3.5 posts?

[bleedpurple]

This is ignorant uninformed.  Morningside has been a national semifinalist for three straight years.  I realize that doesn't mesh with the standards you all keep, but they've played in big games.  I don't know who wins this game Thursday, but I doubt that Morningside is going to wilt under the pressure of playing in a competitive game.

Oh, you again?

LOL. You had me laughing after three words... 

[Pat Coleman]

I think there's one thing we should keep in mind when talking about the NAIA and it's not characterizations of their teams on the field (or champions of character). It's the fact that their world is a lot different than ours.

There are just 85 playoff-eligible teams participating in NAIA football this year. There are 16 playoff spots. If Division III had the same ratio, we would have a 44-team playoff.

That's the first point -- it's a lot easier to make their playoffs.

Second point -- since it's a smaller playoff, it's one game easier to make the semifinals. Just facts. Their playoff's first round may be just as unbalanced as ours, meaning a good program has to win one competitive game to make the semis. (First round, if the No. 3 team is playing No. 17, that's like a top 10 team in D-III playing a team that probably isn't getting votes in our poll.)

Just some food for thought here.

[hazzben]

I think there's one thing we should keep in mind when talking about the NAIA and it's not characterizations of their teams on the field (or champions of character). It's the fact that their world is a lot different than ours.

There are just 85 playoff-eligible teams participating in NAIA football this year. There are 16 playoff spots. If Division III had the same ratio, we would have a 44-team playoff.

That's the first point -- it's a lot easier to make their playoffs.

Second point -- since it's a smaller playoff, it's one game easier to make the semifinals. Just facts. Their playoff's first round may be just as unbalanced as ours, meaning a good program has to win one competitive game to make the semis. (First round, if the No. 3 team is playing No. 17, that's like a top 10 team in D-III playing a team that probably isn't getting votes in our poll.)

Just some food for thought here.

I think those are really good points.

To put them in historical context, in the 60's and 70's (and even the 80's to a lesser extent) there were far a greater number of NAIA teams than there are today. It was much harder to make the playoffs, and the rounds were much more limited. Part of what made D3 attractive to schools was the NCAA guaranteeing conference champs playoff access.

There are still very good teams in the NAIA, but it's number and depth of quality teams isn't nearly what it used to be (I still think their top 25 is solid). At the same time, I think the general caliber of college football players is much better today than it was 30-40 years ago. Title IX and more limited scholarship levels at the FBS level have had a trickle down affect. The reduction of scholarship to 85 artificially 'pushed down' players who prior to 1972 would have received D1 scholarship. Those players then took FCS scholarship and similarly pushed down talent into the D2/D3/NAIA levels.

Combine that with the increased complexity of HS schemes, more rigorous weight training and increased participation levels (which may not hold, given all the concussion-frenzy), more HS students are playing better football now than in say 1971, for fewer D1 scholarships. Result: we get to see some really skilled players playing small college football. But their teams also have greater access to the post season than their fore-runners of yester-year.

That's a win-win for current small college football, IMO.

[badgerwarhawk]

There are two axioms by which the WARHAWKS staff and players live.

1.  Respect your opponent.
2.  Don't say anything that may end up on someone else's bulletin board.

Just sayin'.......

PS: I like the drumstick.

Have a great day everyone.