FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[bulk19]

I believe a team can start off the season slow, or have a bad span, and still be good enough to win the Stagg Bowl.

I'm sorry, but seeings this is the WIAC board, this post just isn't going to cut it. You should know by now that you must provide facts to back up your opinion...

Sincerely,
bulk19, who's been challenged here and had any pride I have destroyed...

[Mr. Ypsi]

I believe a team can start off the season slow, or have a bad span, and still be good enough to win the Stagg Bowl.

I'm sorry, but seeings this is the WIAC board, this post just isn't going to cut it. You should know by now that you must provide facts to back up your opinion...

Sincerely,
bulk19, who's been challenged here and had any pride I have destroyed...

I realize that baseball and football are very different sports with very different paths, but how about this: in 2010, IWU had a losing record with two weeks left in the regular season.  They went on to win the D3 version of the World Series.

[jknezek]

I believe a team can start off the season slow, or have a bad span, and still be good enough to win the Stagg Bowl.

Kind of vague. Start the season slow or have a bad span could mean a lot of things. In simple measurables in the AQ era there has never been a 2 loss team make the Stagg Bowl and a 1 loss team has only won the Stagg Bowl twice. Of those two, only UMU in 2005 had a D3 loss (ONU), because UWW's loss in 2007 came out of division (St. Cloud State).

So yeah, if you define a slow start or a bad span as winning ugly some games that should be won easily, I would agree 100%. If you define it as dropping a game or two you shouldn't, well, that would be pretty rare.

[wally_wabash]

I believe a team can start off the season slow, or have a bad span, and still be good enough to win the Stagg Bowl.

I agree with this in theory, unfortunately for teams that start slow in the way I take your meaning, there aren't enough games to lose early on and still get an at-large bid.  If you start slow, you'll need to come back and win your league to have that shot.  I think it's gone now, but there used to be a provision in the criteria that committees could consider results over the last something like 25% of a season.  It's a provision that I think has more usefulness in sports like basketball or baseball, but the idea of giving preference to teams that are "hot" later in the season has been around previously.  Now, specifically in the case of North Central who I think is about to "start slow", they'll need to win the CCIW to qualify for the tournament.  They can't lose Saturday and then lose to Wheaton or IWU and really be considered for invitation. And I don't think that's a major crime because this North Central team isn't winning a Stagg Bowl whether they are in the tournament or not. 

Sincerely,
bulk19, who's been challenged here and had any pride I have destroyed...

Can you let me know how that is?  I'm next and would appreciate any advice or tips you might have. 

[emma17]

I believe a team can start off the season slow, or have a bad span, and still be good enough to win the Stagg Bowl.

Kind of vague. Start the season slow or have a bad span could mean a lot of things. In simple measurables in the AQ era there has never been a 2 loss team make the Stagg Bowl and a 1 loss team has only won the Stagg Bowl twice. Of those two, only UMU in 2005 had a D3 loss (ONU), because UWW's loss in 2007 came out of division (St. Cloud State).

So yeah, if you define a slow start or a bad span as winning ugly some games that should be won easily, I would agree 100%. If you define it as dropping a game or two you shouldn't, well, that would be pretty rare.

It's game day for me, so I'm not going to let your silliness get to me.
Surely it's possible for a really good team to lose a critical player for a couple of games during the season. 
Surely it's possible a really good team can start the season with an inexperienced QB and lose to a couple good teams early, and then develop throughout the season. 

Is it common?  No.  Would it be an unusual occurrence?  Yes.  Can it happen, absolutely.
As far as a 2-loss team not making the Stagg Bowl, surely some of that could be the result of the rotating Pez Dispenser method of selecting Pool C teams.

 

[jknezek]

I believe a team can start off the season slow, or have a bad span, and still be good enough to win the Stagg Bowl.

Kind of vague. Start the season slow or have a bad span could mean a lot of things. In simple measurables in the AQ era there has never been a 2 loss team make the Stagg Bowl and a 1 loss team has only won the Stagg Bowl twice. Of those two, only UMU in 2005 had a D3 loss (ONU), because UWW's loss in 2007 came out of division (St. Cloud State).

So yeah, if you define a slow start or a bad span as winning ugly some games that should be won easily, I would agree 100%. If you define it as dropping a game or two you shouldn't, well, that would be pretty rare.

It's game day for me, so I'm not going to let your silliness get to me.
Surely it's possible for a really good team to lose a critical player for a couple of games during the season. 
Surely it's possible a really good team can start the season with an inexperienced QB and lose to a couple good teams early, and then develop throughout the season. 

Is it common?  No.  Would it be an unusual occurrence?  Yes.  Can it happen, absolutely.
As far as a 2-loss team not making the Stagg Bowl, surely some of that could be the result of the rotating Pez Dispenser method of selecting Pool C teams.

It's got to be me right? I post that something hasn't happened providing historical facts and allow it would be rare to happen in the future and somehow this sets you off. You proceed to call it silly and then say EXACTLY the same thing. Anyone with the ability to think logically instead of just lashing out like a small child would read the two bolded parts above to be pretty much the same, right, except one is full of facts and one is full of conjecture? Is it a reading comprehension problem or just the simple need to exacerbate and irritate everyone?

And just for the heck of it.... I really, really want UWW to win tonight, so go Warhawks!

[wally_wabash]

As far as a 2-loss team not making the Stagg Bowl, surely some of that could be the result of the rotating Pez Dispenser method of selecting Pool C teams.

I think there are legitimate criticisms of the regional rankings based selection process, but this probably isn't one of them.  In the AQ era (1999-present) not one team has been left out of the tournament that maybe coulda woulda won it.  That's got nothing to do with the selection process and everything to do with Mount Union and UWW being better than everybody else by a lot. 

[Teamski]

Wishing the Warhawks luck tonight in beating that NAIA opponent you guys got.  I will be cheering you on so kick their cabooses!    As an ex-pat cheesehead from Milwaukee, Wisconsin teams are always near and dear to my heart.  Make DIII proud.  This is going to be one fascinating game.

-Ski

[retagent]

I believe a team can start off the season slow, or have a bad span, and still be good enough to win the Stagg Bowl.

Kind of vague. Start the season slow or have a bad span could mean a lot of things. In simple measurables in the AQ era there has never been a 2 loss team make the Stagg Bowl and a 1 loss team has only won the Stagg Bowl twice. Of those two, only UMU in 2005 had a D3 loss (ONU), because UWW's loss in 2007 came out of division (St. Cloud State).

So yeah, if you define a slow start or a bad span as winning ugly some games that should be won easily, I would agree 100%. If you define it as dropping a game or two you shouldn't, well, that would be pretty rare.

It's game day for me, so I'm not going to let your silliness get to me.
Surely it's possible for a really good team to lose a critical player for a couple of games during the season. 
Surely it's possible a really good team can start the season with an inexperienced QB and lose to a couple good teams early, and then develop throughout the season. 

Is it common?  No.  Would it be an unusual occurrence?  Yes.  Can it happen, absolutely.
As far as a 2-loss team not making the Stagg Bowl, surely some of that could be the result of the rotating Pez Dispenser method of selecting Pool C teams.

 

Since we are now asking and answering our own questions....

Am I the smartest guy posting on this board? Yes. Is everyone else an idiot? Yes. Are the Johnnies the best team in America? Yes.

And there you have it folks.

[ExTartanPlayer]

I believe a team can start off the season slow, or have a bad span, and still be good enough to win the Stagg Bowl.

Kind of vague. Start the season slow or have a bad span could mean a lot of things. In simple measurables in the AQ era there has never been a 2 loss team make the Stagg Bowl and a 1 loss team has only won the Stagg Bowl twice. Of those two, only UMU in 2005 had a D3 loss (ONU), because UWW's loss in 2007 came out of division (St. Cloud State).

So yeah, if you define a slow start or a bad span as winning ugly some games that should be won easily, I would agree 100%. If you define it as dropping a game or two you shouldn't, well, that would be pretty rare.

It's game day for me, so I'm not going to let your silliness get to me.

Just when I thought the old emma (who perceives every disagreement as "silliness" or a personal slight) was gone, you go ahead and do something like this.

He was just making conversation, dude.  Normal conversation, using actual examples that are relevant to the topic being discussed.  Nothing personal about it.

[hazzben]

I'll just throw in there, some of this scheduling stuff is very specific to a given conference. If you're a strong team in a highly competitive conference, I think the onus on a brutal non-con is decreased. You're going to face stiff competition most, if not every week, in the top 4-5 conferences when you get to league play. Now, if you're a very good team (capable of making a run to, say, the region finals) in a conference where there's maybe only one or two other good teams, you're risking something by scheduling easy. You'd better run the table, or you run the risk of being left home.

[emma17]

I believe a team can start off the season slow, or have a bad span, and still be good enough to win the Stagg Bowl.

Kind of vague. Start the season slow or have a bad span could mean a lot of things. In simple measurables in the AQ era there has never been a 2 loss team make the Stagg Bowl and a 1 loss team has only won the Stagg Bowl twice. Of those two, only UMU in 2005 had a D3 loss (ONU), because UWW's loss in 2007 came out of division (St. Cloud State).

So yeah, if you define a slow start or a bad span as winning ugly some games that should be won easily, I would agree 100%. If you define it as dropping a game or two you shouldn't, well, that would be pretty rare.

It's game day for me, so I'm not going to let your silliness get to me.
Surely it's possible for a really good team to lose a critical player for a couple of games during the season. 
Surely it's possible a really good team can start the season with an inexperienced QB and lose to a couple good teams early, and then develop throughout the season. 

Is it common?  No.  Would it be an unusual occurrence?  Yes.  Can it happen, absolutely.
As far as a 2-loss team not making the Stagg Bowl, surely some of that could be the result of the rotating Pez Dispenser method of selecting Pool C teams.

It's got to be me right? I post that something hasn't happened providing historical facts and allow it would be rare to happen in the future and somehow this sets you off. You proceed to call it silly and then say EXACTLY the same thing. Anyone with the ability to think logically instead of just lashing out like a small child would read the two bolded parts above to be pretty much the same, right, except one is full of facts and one is full of conjecture? Is it a reading comprehension problem or just the simple need to exacerbate and irritate everyone?

And just for the heck of it.... I really, really want UWW to win tonight, so go Warhawks!

What you began your post with jk is "Kind of vague".
Believe it or not, I actually think of you, Ex, Wally and others I've had disagreements with as really intelligent people.  I give all of you the benefit of the doubt that you think things through pretty thoroughly.   

Because I think from that perspective, in my opinion, there was no need for me to provide scenarios of how a team could have a couple losses but still be good enough to win the Stagg Bowl. 
I simply cannot fathom any reader on this board believing that, no matter what, a 2- loss team isn't capable of winning the Stagg Bowl. 
 

[MasterJedi]

I don't like/am nervous about the parallels of this game to the 2007 game against St Cloud State. Then again, I think this team is much better at this point in the year than the 2007 team was. I think UWW can and will win, I'm just going to be nervous right up until the clock hits 0.

[jknezek]

What you began your post with jk is "Kind of vague".
Believe it or not, I actually think of you, Ex, Wally and others I've had disagreements with as really intelligent people.  I give all of you the benefit of the doubt that you think things through pretty thoroughly.   

Because I think from that perspective, in my opinion, there was no need for me to provide scenarios of how a team could have a couple losses but still be good enough to win the Stagg Bowl. 
I simply cannot fathom any reader on this board believing that, no matter what, a 2- loss team isn't capable of winning the Stagg Bowl. 

Yep. I always post things with nothing to back them up and then start calling people silly for providing facts. I also always assume that everyone in a message board will of course agree with me, so I don't actually have to provide any reasonable reasons for my opinions. When people do other than what I believe they must be silly, wrong, or twisting my words!

Of course, I should have known.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Careful posting this in the WIAC room, jknezek.  This is their house. 

BoBo will come and slaughter you and destroy any pride that you have.

I'm disappointed that my turkey discussion from yesterday never got any traction.

I postulate that dark meat is better than white meat.