FB: American Southwest Conference

[buf]

Well if you guys haven't had enough of UWW, their baskeball team is coming down to Belton in a couple of weeks. 

[Ralph Turner]

Well if you guys haven't had enough of UWW, their baskeball team is coming down to Belton in a couple of weeks. 

Yes,  I am glad that UMHB has brought some quality opposition south so these fans can see really good d3 men's basketball.

[cover2]

A couple of things that may help clarify some previous comments:

1.  On the in game updates board there was some question as to why Noack came in and played as long as he did.  Saenz got hurt somehow, I didn't see how, but he had his pads off and ice on his throwing shoulder for those last few series of the first half.  Don't know what it was or what extent. 

2.  The second half kickoff call.  The ball definitely traveled more than 10 yards as it crossed mid field in the air.  However, the ruling I heard was that the kicking team can not touch the ball less than 10 yards from where it is kicked unless touched  by the recieving team.  So it didn't matter that the ball went more than 10 yards because UMHB recovered it less than 10 yards from the kicking point.  Hence the illegal touching call.    Just bad luck, with the wind and with the way the ball bounced when it hit the turf. 

Again, I am not sure if that is the correct rule or not but that is what was being tossed around in the area I was sitting. 

[headlinesman]

I, too, was present at the Wind Bowl this afternoon, and I must agree with a couple of the other posters that talked about how Whitewater physically dominated the game.  I believe UMHB got outplayed in all aspects of the game, and that, as sacrireligious as this might be, they also got outcoached.  The kids were confused in the kicking game, and the secondary never did adjust, and a lot of that is coaching.

What I wanted to address, however, is the opening kickoff of the 2nd half.  We all know the rule that says the ball has to travel 10 yards before a member of the kicking team can legally touch the ball.  The Field Judge (FJ) (the guy with the F on his back) was straddling the 40 yd line, also known as the kicking team's restraining liine.  His main job is to make sure the ball travels 10 yards.  Here's where it gets hinky.  Any restraining line is treated as a line, not as a plane, as the goal line is treated.  A kicked ball, by rule, is deemed not to have crossed a line until it touches the ground, a player, or an official on or beyond that line.  In all the confusion, you miay not have noticed, but the FJ had dropped his bean bag on the UMHB 39, signifying that being the spot where the kick first touched the ground.  Of course, we all know that once the ball hit the ground, it looked like a Tiger Woods wedge shot, and shot back toward the UMHB goal line, so the ball, by rule, never crossed the restraining line, hence it never traveled the required 10 yards, hence when the CRU recovered, it constitited illegal touching, giving Whitewater the ball at the spot of the illegal touching.  If the FJ was right, the call was absolutely correct, inasmuch as the home crowd protested.

Some of the confusion occurred up in our part of the stands when some folks started sayint that the ball actually hit the ground at the 42, not the 39.  If that were the case, then the ball crossed the restraining line, and the Cru should have been allowed to keep the ball.  However, without replay, the only way to know will be to look at the game film much after the fact.

I agree with the other poster who said that this game also pointed out the difference in the level of play between us and the Wisconsin/Ohio area.  Obviously, the Cru is the best DIII team in this part of the country, but they've only beaten Mount Union once, and are o-for against Whitewater.  Still, all in all, a great and wonderfully entertaining season for Coach Pete and his student athletes.


Not edited, but "cut-and-pasted" on the Year in Review board.  Sorry. Ralph Turner

[Toby Taff]

Quote from: Toby Taff on December 09, 2008, 01:33:32 pm
Quote from bleedpurple
2 Scenarios:
1. A Stagg Bowl Championship, having defeated Warburg College in the Semi's and MUC in the Stagg.
2. A loss to UWW in the Semi's, but the satisfaction of knowing they had that shot at redemption!

Hell, Tex, let's take #2. At least we gave our Seniors one more shot at dem boys from Wisconsin!

That about sums it up.  Better to go down swinging that to take the path of least resistance.  Like I said not rational, but sometimes its more about the challenge than the result.

Well, glad we could accomodate ya'll. Ya got what you wanted. Congrats to the Cru for a great season.

y'all did accommodate us, and won on the field I have no gripes.  Big props to the Warhawks.

[Sader4life]

The Crusaders lost to a better team today, Congrats to the Warhawks and good luck in the National Championship game. UMHB was simply outplayed today.

[D O.C.]

their baskeball team is coming down to Belton in a couple of weeks.

Suggest play them outside where the threes can blow in the wind.   

[Bill McCabe]

Let's don't forget the game was very competitive going into the start of the 2nd half.  The kick off was a disaster and UWW took immediate advantage.  Not being able to run the ball in the 3rd quarter going into the wind put the Cru in a big hole. 

It seemed like we didn't run the option as much as in previous games.  Saenz came back to play in the 2nd half after having his shoulder iced in the first.  Seems like we hit some seams with the option.  UWW defense was fast and UMHB missed Tucker's speed at RB.

[bleedpurple]

Let's don't forget the game was very competitive going into the start of the 2nd half.  The kick off was a disaster and UWW took immediate advantage.  Not being able to run the ball in the 3rd quarter going into the wind put the Cru in a big hole. 

It seemed like we didn't run the option as much as in previous games.  Saenz came back to play in the 2nd half after having his shoulder iced in the first.  Seems like we hit some seams with the option.  UWW defense was fast and UMHB missed Tucker's speed at RB.

I felt like it was very risky for UMHB to choose to kick the ball into the wind in the first place. I understand the hope of having the wind in the 4th quarter. But in a 2 point game, to hand the other team field position AND the ball to start the second half sure made for an uphill climb for the CRU. As other posters have mentioned, I believe the UWW line-play was superior, so it probably wouldn't have mattered. I just think giving UWW the ball AND the wind to start the 3rd was risky. Classic second guess, but I thought at the time it was quite a risk.

[Bill McCabe]

Let's don't forget the game was very competitive going into the start of the 2nd half.  The kick off was a disaster and UWW took immediate advantage.  Not being able to run the ball in the 3rd quarter going into the wind put the Cru in a big hole. 

It seemed like we didn't run the option as much as in previous games.  Saenz came back to play in the 2nd half after having his shoulder iced in the first.  Seems like we hit some seams with the option.  UWW defense was fast and UMHB missed Tucker's speed at RB.

I felt like it was very risky for UMHB to choose to kick the ball into the wind in the first place. I understand the hope of having the wind in the 4th quarter. But in a 2 point game, to hand the other team field position AND the ball to start the second half sure made for an uphill climb for the CRU. As other posters have mentioned, I believe the UWW line-play was superior, so it probably wouldn't have mattered. I just think giving UWW the ball AND the wind to start the 3rd was risky. Classic second guess, but I thought at the time it was quite a risk.

We were debating whether on not the Cru should take the wind.  I'm assuming UWW chose to receive, since they had deferred their option.  If we had been ahead, I think we would want to take the wind in the 4th quarter.  Since we were behind, I think it was iffy.  However, the offense had moved the ball in the 2nd quarter and were hoping we would move the ball again.  The kickoff was the worst thing that could have happened.

[Ralph Turner]

Bill, let me ask your opinion.   

On whose roster at a Texas college or university is the type of athlete with the physical attributes that we saw from UWW?

UMHB does not have those athletes.

[Bill McCabe]

d3 only?

[Bill McCabe]

Ralph, field position doomed UMHB yesterday.  UWW had a great defense, but UMHB did move the ball in the 2nd quarter.  As I stated earlier, not having Tucker's speed hurt UMHB.  They never could get to the corner without him.  I don't think UWW's offense line dominated until late in the game.  UWW was definitely the better team.  Also, UWW handled going against the wind better than UMHB.

[janesvilleflash]

Looked to me like the Cru had plenty of athletes. My opinion is the passing games were the difference. WW was commited to stop the run, and the Cru couldn't mount enough of a passing game to make them play it differently.

Opposite was true with WW. It looked like the Cru could stop the WW run when commited to do so, but the passing ability of WW forced them to play both.

[Bill McCabe]

janesvilleflash,  I agree with you.  UWW had excellent pass coverage.  UMHB couldn't throw anything against the wind.  UWW was able to do so.  The drive before half was incredible.  Several excellent throws against the wind.

The pass interference call on the goal line in the 3rd quarter was a big play.  Third down and it looked the ball was not catchable.  It only landed 5 yards out of bounds.