FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[Pat Coleman]

In the podcast, when Pat said someone will likely pick against the Warhawks for the third straight week, did he tell us to "deal with it"? If so, what does that even mean?

Judging by the way some people reacted on the social medias after all six picked against UWW for a second week in a row, just expecting some will be even more likely to react poorly. Odds are, not all six of us will pick UWW, so someone or more will be picking against UWW for a third consecutive week.

I think, not positive, but THINK, most of us realize that the informed opinions are not personal and that picking against UW-W does not equal "UW-W is terrible".

That may be true, but the minority is vocal. And those are the people I had in mind with that statement.

Appreciate you listening to the podcast!

[wally_wabash]

In the podcast, when Pat said someone will likely pick against the Warhawks for the third straight week, did he tell us to "deal with it"? If so, what does that even mean?

When I saw that all six picked SJU last week, I knew we were doomed.  Deal with the fact that opinions, even informed opinions, are just that. I would actually be hoping that UWW will not be a unanimous choice,

Trust me. I'm with you on that. I think, not positive, but THINK, most of us realize that the informed opinions are not personal and that picking against UW-W does not equal "UW-W is terrible".  And it certainly doesn't impact the outcome. Maybe it's my biased eyes doing the reading, but last week, the tone in a few of write ups seemed to be, "I really think this is a toss up, but since I've got to pick someone..."

Thank you for actually reading the Hits!  The context was important last week.  It's always important, but especially when we went 6-0 (or 0-6 depending on your perspective) in what most of us thought  was a coin flip game.

It won't be unanimous this week. We've got some great guest panelists delivering some Hits and unique perspectives.  Going to be a championship week worthy column. 

[emma17]

I'm not sure SJU's Oline didn't perform well. I watched their left tackle a bit and he was a wall. I give the UWW D line guys credit as they never let up on him, but he was tough.
My take on the line play was the UWW D linemen played a phenomenal game, as opposed to the SJU Oline being a problem. UWW guys were making incredibly athletic plays to get in the backfield. Maybe NCC's Oline guys will be more athletic- I don't know.

The challenge of Mr. Kamienski will be interesting to watch. I don't get the feeling UWW will go to man coverage on him as much.
This is where the good guys from UWW can draw on the experience of having to contend w a certain Mr. Garcon.

Garcon?  Current players were like 9 years old when UWW played against Garcon.

Here I thought Rindahl, Griz, Raebel and the whole crew would be taking the field.

We had the same conversation last week regarding UWW DB's not getting beat deep vs SJU. It was only one game, but somehow, someway, the UWW D found a way to do what other teams couldn't.
I believe there are benefits to experience and tradition.

I just find it curious how folks that have been bumping around on these boards for 10 or 15 or 20 years talk about these things like the games being played presently are part of the same, uninterrupted, 20-year season.  At times, I'm guilty of it also but try to be a bit more self-aware when I start to go down that particular rabbit hole. 

Anyway, don't think Garcon has anything to do with Friday.  Kamienski is excellent, obviously.  He's not Garcon- and that's not in any way a knock on Kamienski.

And I think you're wrong. Very wrong.

Gawd. If they waste a millisecond thinking about 2007, they'll have wasted a millisecond.

I'm not sure if you've ever coached or been coached. Whatever the case for you, I don't get the feeling you and I had the same sort of experience.

[emma17]

In the podcast, when Pat said someone will likely pick against the Warhawks for the third straight week, did he tell us to "deal with it"? If so, what does that even mean?

When I saw that all six picked SJU last week, I knew we were doomed.  Deal with the fact that opinions, even informed opinions, are just that. I would actually be hoping that UWW will not be a unanimous choice,

Trust me. I'm with you on that. I think, not positive, but THINK, most of us realize that the informed opinions are not personal and that picking against UW-W does not equal "UW-W is terrible".  And it certainly doesn't impact the outcome. Maybe it's my biased eyes doing the reading, but last week, the tone in a few of write ups seemed to be, "I really think this is a toss up, but since I've got to pick someone..."

Thank you for actually reading the Hits!  The context was important last week.  It's always important, but especially when we went 6-0 (or 0-6 depending on your perspective) in what most of us thought  was a coin flip game.

It won't be unanimous this week. We've got some great guest panelists delivering some Hits and unique perspectives.  Going to be a championship week worthy column.

I'm not one to gripe about the opinions of the pickers. That said, the pickers do open themselves up to scrutiny when their rationale for making a pick is not based on fact. This was certainly the case for one of the guys last week.

I give you all credit for your willingness to put your picks out in public.

[Pat Coleman]

So, one out of six. Got it. ::shrug::

[WW]

I'm not sure SJU's Oline didn't perform well. I watched their left tackle a bit and he was a wall. I give the UWW D line guys credit as they never let up on him, but he was tough.
My take on the line play was the UWW D linemen played a phenomenal game, as opposed to the SJU Oline being a problem. UWW guys were making incredibly athletic plays to get in the backfield. Maybe NCC's Oline guys will be more athletic- I don't know.

The challenge of Mr. Kamienski will be interesting to watch. I don't get the feeling UWW will go to man coverage on him as much.
This is where the good guys from UWW can draw on the experience of having to contend w a certain Mr. Garcon.

Garcon?  Current players were like 9 years old when UWW played against Garcon.

Here I thought Rindahl, Griz, Raebel and the whole crew would be taking the field.

We had the same conversation last week regarding UWW DB's not getting beat deep vs SJU. It was only one game, but somehow, someway, the UWW D found a way to do what other teams couldn't.
I believe there are benefits to experience and tradition.

I just find it curious how folks that have been bumping around on these boards for 10 or 15 or 20 years talk about these things like the games being played presently are part of the same, uninterrupted, 20-year season.  At times, I'm guilty of it also but try to be a bit more self-aware when I start to go down that particular rabbit hole. 

Anyway, don't think Garcon has anything to do with Friday.  Kamienski is excellent, obviously.  He's not Garcon- and that's not in any way a knock on Kamienski.

And I think you're wrong. Very wrong.

Gawd. If they waste a millisecond thinking about 2007, they'll have wasted a millisecond.

I'm not sure if you've ever coached or been coached. Whatever the case for you, I don't get the feeling you and I had the same sort of experience.

The only time the UWW coaching staff should be even thinking about "Garcon" is when ordering champagne on the Parisian leg of their victory tour.

[USee]

I do think coaches use history and gameplans from previous years when they are appropriate. In the post game presser after Muhlenberg, Jeff Thorne said they saw Muhlenberg doing something similar to Platteville in 2014 and they pulled out a couple plays from that game and put it in the game plan, plays they hadn't run all year. The Muhlenberg coach confirmed they ran a buck sweep with great effect that they hadn't seen on film.

So it's not at all far fetched to build in strategies for a player or a scheme that has worked in the past.

[retagent]

Not having seen NCC play this year, I will admit that I could be way off, BUT, I do believe St John's had more VERY GOOD receivers. If NCC has one EXCELLENT receiver, and other Capable receivers, it would seem that defending NCC's air game, should be less taxing than defending SJU's air attack.

[USee]

Not having seen NCC play this year, I will admit that I could be way off, BUT, I do believe St John's had more VERY GOOD receivers. If NCC has one EXCELLENT receiver, and other Capable receivers, it would seem that defending NCC's air game, should be less taxing than defending SJU's air attack.

Could be true, but wasn't so far for the #1, #2, #3 and #9 ranked defenses in the country.

[bleedpurple]

Not having seen NCC play this year, I will admit that I could be way off, BUT, I do believe St John's had more VERY GOOD receivers. If NCC has one EXCELLENT receiver, and other Capable receivers, it would seem that defending NCC's air game, should be less taxing than defending SJU's air attack.

Could be true, but wasn't so far for the #1, #2, #3 and #9 ranked defenses in the country.

Let's face it, neither of these receiving groups are easy to stop.  But we really can't go by the 1,2,3,9 thing because I don't think they played St. John's. Also, rankings...umm...can be a bit misleading. Wide variety of competition in D-III.

[USee]

Wheaton played NCC and St Johns. Pretty good comp for the #1 defense. Probably a big reason UWW won last week was the tape they saw. Very similar styles on defense between Wheaton and UWW

[emma17]

Well, this is interesting- to me anyway.
From the Daily Herald:

Derek Kumerow and Andrew Kamienski were seventh-grade teammates on the Bartlett Raiders youth football team.

They later formed a dynamic 1-2 punch as all-area receivers at South Elgin High School.

Jake Kumerow also attended South Elgin High School.

UWW picked up a couple players in NCC's backyard:

Besides Kumerow, UW-W starters include senior cornerback Garrett Purdy of Naperville Central, junior safety Mark McGrath from Lisle,

[emma17]

So, one out of six. Got it. ::shrug::

Not sure what this means Pat.
There were two games to pick last week. Not all that hard for all six to be reasonably accurate. If they don't know, then don't make stuff up.

[D O.C.]

<<The only time the UWW coaching staff should be even thinking about "Garcon" is when ordering champagne on the Parisian leg of their victory tour.>>

WW, that's one of the cleverest additions since I've been on these boards!

[Gregory Sager]

Well, this is interesting- to me anyway.
From the Daily Herald:

Derek Kumerow and Andrew Kamienski were seventh-grade teammates on the Bartlett Raiders youth football team.

They later formed a dynamic 1-2 punch as all-area receivers at South Elgin High School.

Jake Kumerow also attended South Elgin High School.

UWW picked up a couple players in NCC's backyard:

Besides Kumerow, UW-W starters include senior cornerback Garrett Purdy of Naperville Central, junior safety Mark McGrath from Lisle,

It's not as though North Central, or any other program for that matter, has ever had a lock on good west suburban football players. I think that people would be surprised if they knew just how many people live in the western suburbs. Heck, Naperville itself has a population of 150,000.