FB: American Rivers Conference

knightlife06 · August 23, 2006, 04:30:33 PM

We got rings for winning the state championship back when I was in high school but I consider that different. Like Walston brought up, we figured it was worth it for being the top team in our class. Rings were never really brought up when we won the iiac. It was important but we figured we were expected to do it. Heck, I don't think we even made shirts the last year we won. But that was more us being lazy.

Charlie Kohawk · August 23, 2006, 04:45:31 PM

K-Mack,
Nice job on the IIAC preview. You'll get no complaints from Kohawk Nation. I'm curious though who you're predicting Coe will lose to since you have them at 7-1 with Wartburg, Central and Luther all at 6-2.

DutchFan2004 · August 23, 2006, 05:11:44 PM

K-Mack,

I am curious as well. I have no problem with Coe being the favorite but with Wartburg, Central and Luther all having two losses and Coe only one then who is beating who. That math is somewhat fuzzy unless you think that the other teams will be pulling off upsets. That is entirely possible. However I do not understand the team rankings. If Coe is going 9-1 and Central 8-2 why is Central ahead at 18? Does it not make more sense that Coe be 18 and Central 20? Just curious how you ranked them.

K-Mack · August 23, 2006, 10:34:34 PM

Good questions all.

The Top 25 is voted on by a 25-person panel of eight writers, eight SIDs and eight coaches, plus Pat, spread throughout the different regions for balance. On my personal preseason vote, I remember voting for Coe a little higher than Central and not Wartburg.

Since that time, I talked to all nine conference coaches, analyzed the data and returning rosters, and did the preview for Kickoff '06.

So there is the discrepancy. 25 voters and 1 writer don't necessarily agree.

In the 1-234 rankings, Pat feels strongly that the top 25 should match the site's top 25, so technically he and I only ranked 26-234.

Also in the 1-234, the writer's predictions for a conference were a small factor, and that's only the ones we had in on time.

In the following post, I'll answer the other question ... Hope it doesn't sound too convoluted.

K-Mack · August 23, 2006, 10:35:20 PM

To make sure I was not engaged in any fuzzy math in the conference preview, I laid out all nine schedules to make sure if I had Buena Vista beating Loras, I had Loras losing to Buena Vista. I also tried to make sure my non-conference picks jived with the other conference picks (i.e. I can't have Wartburg winning vs. Monmouth and the Monmouth guy has them winning at Wartburg), but we don't do a big board for the entire nation, and mistakes in that regard undoubtedly get through.

When I did my initial breakdown, I accounted for the up-and-down nature of the conference by picking some results that did not exactly fall in line. The first time I did this, the standings shook out exactly like I wanted them to, places 1-9, with one exception: I had given Central three losses. So I went back and changed one of my picks to bring it in line with what every single coach said: Coe, Central and Wartburg.

Most everyone felt it could go any number of ways after that.

Without the specific picks in front of me (I'm at my real job) I remember it like this: I had Central beating Wartburg but losing to Coe and Luther. I think I also had Luther beating Wartburg again this year, but losing to Simpson maybe, and Coe, which would account for the so-called wackiness. I guess that would mean I had Coe losing to Wartburg, but Wartburg's losses to Central and Luther still giving it to the Kohawks outright.

It would also work if Coe beats Central and Wartburg but is upset by Luther, who beats another "big three" team but also loses to Simpson or another team pegged behind them, etc.

I know Wartburg had six turnovers in the loss to Luther last year and Central's win was much more of a blowout than 40-35 would indicate, and Tyler Sherden isn't playing ... so I gave Luther a lot of credit, and you could definitely argue that. Some of the hunches I developed were that Simpson has a defense that can keep it in a game or two with one of the top-half teams, but all-around, the Storm may not get in sync offensively until later in the year. Another was that Central won some games it didn't dominate. That's not to say they didn't deserve to win by punt blocks and such, because you create your own breaks, but it does indicate that Central was 3 points from being 10-0 just the same as it was not that far from being 7-3 or 6-4.

And then as much as you take last year's results into account, you have to look at who has what back where and how you think they'll match up. Central-Luther, Central-Wartburg and some others weren't very close games last year.

I didn't feel any team was going to run the table, and I didn't feel any would go winless, so there definitely had to be some out-of-order results incorporated to make everything shake out correctly.

The thing is, with so many of the games being 17-14 and whatnot last season, and others being decided by blocked punts and fourth-quarter rallies, I fully understand that my predictions could blow up in any direction. But I think that's an accurate reflection of what the coaches who were being genuine had to say as well.

Long answer to a short question.

More interesting than how I have it shaking out is the breakdown of last year's games and how many points they were decided by. A bunch by 2, 3 and 4.

DutchFan2004 · August 23, 2006, 10:47:28 PM

K-Mack

What you wrote makes some sense. I can see an upset or two. All the games were pretty close last year. Central could have had a losing season if the ball had bounced a little differently. The didn't dominate anyone last year. The did dominate some halves last year such as the first half with Luther and the second half with Wartburg. But I don't think any team really dominated any team last year or at least none I can recall offhand. Loras played Coe pretty close as well as Simpson. The Coe Central game was maybe a 10 point game (Central scored late losing by 3). But Coe didn't really crush Central. So I can understand your predicitions and some of the logic you used. looking at some of the other conferences I think that only MT Union is picked to go 10-0. That means that the playoffs spots will be hard to fill. The at large bids will be hard to come by. Good job with your picks. I HOPE YOU ARE WRONG LOL but a pat on the back for you and Pat for the effort you guys put in.

K-Mack · August 23, 2006, 10:59:15 PM

Thanks.

I think I might have even used the phrase "dominant halves" or "dominant stretches" in the Central preview. I totally agree. I did not like picking Central to lose to a team it led 40-14, but it's a new year ... that'll get me off the hook.

The Loras beef is that they were something like 1-5 in games decided by 10 or less, so if we use that same logic, and they have a bunch of starters back ... so I suppose Duhawks could mount an argument.

But anyone that changed coaches or coordinators on at least one side of the ball, I let that affect toss-up picks in their early games. The same way we give "points" for players continuity, via returning starters, I like to do for coaches ... and schemes. I think it can take as many as 3-4 games to feel comfortable under a new coordinator, or when you switch positions.

At least it did for me, but I was a slow learner ...

press_box · August 24, 2006, 12:42:34 AM

KCRG-TV9 Story today on Cornell (video link as well on this page):
http://www.kcrg.com/news/sports/3719381.html

KCRG also had a Coe story Tuesday from Coe's Media Day. KWWL had a Wartburg story Wednesday.

Walston Hoover · August 24, 2006, 10:35:30 AM

Pressbox-How goes it?
Long time no speak.
I'm assuming you photographed the Cornell story. I couldn't get it to play on my computer, but how did the old wing-T look.

Confused77 · August 24, 2006, 10:40:35 AM

press box- thanks for the link. I really don't mind the white helmets as much as I thought I would.. Gotta love the wing-t. I think I saw more boot and buck sweep work in one video clip than I ran in high school.....wait, no I didn't, but it appears teams are going to get a steady diet of trap, buck sweep, bootleg and possibly the old 36/37 reverse and the "new" in vogue jet sweep so many wing t teams are running now. I might actually go watch the rams even if they are not playing the knights or duhawks. Wing t guys never let it leave our hearts.

They are still a few years away, but I am gonna say they will steal 1 or 2 games they have no business winning.

Walston Hoover · August 24, 2006, 11:34:59 AM

Ah yes High School, my junior year, I think the number was 30. That was the number of time we averaged running trap a game-The old 52 Trap. Just to keep teams honest, ran the 38 sweep, 25 reverse, and 36 power. No other plays to run. I coached at 4 wing-t blocking camps this summer so its still near and dear to my heart.

press_box · August 24, 2006, 02:43:05 PM

Walston- Actually I didn't shoot that. I think JC probably did.

Also, neglected to mention it, but in the KWWL Wartburg story, it appeard that the Knights were wearing some new unis. Looked like they had some orange in the shoulder area. No pics to be found on the Wartburg website though.

Which brings up another issue, with the new PEC going up, this would seem like as good a time as any to actually have a logo, rather than just a "W." Maybe they'll actually get on that and having something cool.

sportsknight · August 24, 2006, 02:46:40 PM

Cornell's helmets didn't bother me as much as I thought they would, either. They actually look a little better with the purple jerseys than the old purple helmets did.

As far as Wartburg's unis go, I had heard last year that the Knights would be getting new home threads to match up with the new away ones they got last year. If that's the case, you can probably expect the orange inserts in the shoulders that pressbox was talking about, and possibly a rather large Wartburg logo just below the neckline.

sportsknight · August 24, 2006, 11:01:40 PM

Time to drive more traffic to the KCRG website...TV9 Sports has a feature on Wartburg on the site now. Link: http://www.kcrg.com/news/sports/3731691.html

As pressbox already mentioned, the Knights definitely have new black uniforms, and they're not the ones I had in mind. Looks like the unis are made by Nike, and the Swoosh logo adorns the left chest. The jerseys have the orange shoulder inserts that first appeared on last year's away uniforms. Also, the shoulder numbers are orange with a white outline, and I'd have to expect the regular numbers to be the same way. Last year's whites were made by adidas, so I'm not sure if there will be new Nike road uniforms to match up. I guess we will find out in week three when Wartburg heads to Simpson.

press_box · August 24, 2006, 11:21:09 PM

More media watch...in today's CR Gazette, there was an article about Cornell. It included a picture and note about the fact that Cornell will have a live ram as its mascot again. Apparently they just bought the ram in Wisconsin a week ago and it's the first time they've had the live mascot since 1999-2000.