FB: Ohio Athletic Conference

[mr_mom]

I think that the fact that I googled "Gregg Easterbrook douche" and got 8,430 hits says it all!   

And "Gregg Easterbrook douchebag" got 39,000!

[bleedpurple]

Okay, Raider68, what is your prediction for your Mount Union Saturday?  I don't think they will have a problem with Wilmington- the only "guess" is what the margin of victory will be most likely.

I say Wilma by 3 TDs.

(OMG - I haven't dropped acid in 40 years, and am still having flashbacks! )

formerd3db,

It will be a real nail-biter for the first 2 minutes, then I think the Raiders will pull away. It will
a long ride home for Wilmington, IMHO!

I just hope Mount doesn't put up 84, that was a bit odd as a Mount fan....somebody call Gregg Easterbrook

I told you guys that I emailed him once to explain the Mount blowouts, and that his suggestions (i.e. that they should just move up to Division II, or that they needed to find a tougher league) were not realistic options, right?

He never replied.

ExtartanPlayer,

Who is "he" that you emailed?

Gregg Easterbrook.  In his TMQ column, he often rags on Mount for running up the score (obviously he never reads any game stories, he always just prints the score and says that any team who wins by more than 50 should be ashamed for running up the score, clearly unaware of Mount's generally good sportsmanship in blowouts by playing backups, running the ball, even taking FG's on first down and/or running out of bounds inside the 5) and playing a "weak schedule" (again, obviously pays no attention to the fact that they play in the OAC and have 9 mandated league games; he also talks about them changing conferences as though it's a simple matter, neglecting the fact that the OAC is the most logical home for Mount in all sports, and that even if they could join a conference just for football, where are they going to go?  The WIAC?  CCIW?  MIAC?  How does that work for any of the involved parties?  And what's the guarantee that those will be any tougher on Mount week to week?).

I was right with you til the last sentence. I promise you, if Mount were to join the WIAC their schedule would be more demanding physically and competitively than it is in the OAC. I know it's not feasible and I agree with your overall point...until the last sentence.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Okay, Raider68, what is your prediction for your Mount Union Saturday?  I don't think they will have a problem with Wilmington- the only "guess" is what the margin of victory will be most likely.

I say Wilma by 3 TDs.

(OMG - I haven't dropped acid in 40 years, and am still having flashbacks! )

formerd3db,

It will be a real nail-biter for the first 2 minutes, then I think the Raiders will pull away. It will
a long ride home for Wilmington, IMHO!

I just hope Mount doesn't put up 84, that was a bit odd as a Mount fan....somebody call Gregg Easterbrook

I told you guys that I emailed him once to explain the Mount blowouts, and that his suggestions (i.e. that they should just move up to Division II, or that they needed to find a tougher league) were not realistic options, right?

He never replied.

ExtartanPlayer,

Who is "he" that you emailed?

Gregg Easterbrook.  In his TMQ column, he often rags on Mount for running up the score (obviously he never reads any game stories, he always just prints the score and says that any team who wins by more than 50 should be ashamed for running up the score, clearly unaware of Mount's generally good sportsmanship in blowouts by playing backups, running the ball, even taking FG's on first down and/or running out of bounds inside the 5) and playing a "weak schedule" (again, obviously pays no attention to the fact that they play in the OAC and have 9 mandated league games; he also talks about them changing conferences as though it's a simple matter, neglecting the fact that the OAC is the most logical home for Mount in all sports, and that even if they could join a conference just for football, where are they going to go?  The WIAC?  CCIW?  MIAC?  How does that work for any of the involved parties?  And what's the guarantee that those will be any tougher on Mount week to week?).

I was right with you til the last sentence. I promise you, if Mount were to join the WIAC their schedule would be more demanding physically and competitively than it is in the OAC. I know it's not feasible and I agree with your overall point...until the last sentence.

I generally agree, noting that even in years when Whitewater won the Stagg, their regular-season WIAC slate was competitive-ish (i.e. winning most games by 14-28 instead of 40+ like Mount generally does - note that I refer to "most" games since each seems to get pushed hard in conference play at least once a year).  Maybe I went a little too far with that sentence, but I think we are generally in agreement on the overall point.  It's silly to suggest Mount's athletic department can find a better home - taking everything into account, not just competitive fit for the football team - and thus he's basically railing on Mount for beating up "OAC patsies" that a) they have to play per their league schedule and b) are quite on par with the vast majority of Division III conferences.  It's not like Mount is going out of their way to schedule Hiram and Earlham for nonconference games.  Incidentally, if you flip back through the years and look at Mount's OOC opponents, they have usually opened with either a team that had some decent tradition in the fairly-recent past (Allegheny in the early 00's, WashU in the mid-00's), a recent playoff team (St. John Fisher, Franklin) or an up-and-comer that maybe we didn't see coming (they played some school from Wisconsin in 2002-2003).  They've almost never opened with an outright "bad" team save for 2007 Averett, and they had been pretty good in 2006.

[Dr. Acula]

I'd imagine there isn't a line outside LK's door to sign up for the opener.  I mean, it's not like it's DI where you're getting a big bag of cash in exchange for your pain if you're a bad team.  You're basically limited to good programs who want to measure themselves and their progress.  And you have to give those programs credit because they're usually tossing their chances at a Pool C bid out the window and making it mandatory that they win their conference.  I had big time respect for UWW, UWO and SJF for doing it.  I do for Franklin too, but they're in a different boat given the the rest of the HCAC right now.  The WIAC and E8 are tough sledding when you walked in 0-1.       

[PurpleSuit]

Okay, Raider68, what is your prediction for your Mount Union Saturday?  I don't think they will have a problem with Wilmington- the only "guess" is what the margin of victory will be most likely.

I say Wilma by 3 TDs.

(OMG - I haven't dropped acid in 40 years, and am still having flashbacks! )

formerd3db,

It will be a real nail-biter for the first 2 minutes, then I think the Raiders will pull away. It will
a long ride home for Wilmington, IMHO!

I just hope Mount doesn't put up 84, that was a bit odd as a Mount fan....somebody call Gregg Easterbrook

I told you guys that I emailed him once to explain the Mount blowouts, and that his suggestions (i.e. that they should just move up to Division II, or that they needed to find a tougher league) were not realistic options, right?

He never replied.

ExtartanPlayer,

Who is "he" that you emailed?

Gregg Easterbrook.  In his TMQ column, he often rags on Mount for running up the score (obviously he never reads any game stories, he always just prints the score and says that any team who wins by more than 50 should be ashamed for running up the score, clearly unaware of Mount's generally good sportsmanship in blowouts by playing backups, running the ball, even taking FG's on first down and/or running out of bounds inside the 5) and playing a "weak schedule" (again, obviously pays no attention to the fact that they play in the OAC and have 9 mandated league games; he also talks about them changing conferences as though it's a simple matter, neglecting the fact that the OAC is the most logical home for Mount in all sports, and that even if they could join a conference just for football, where are they going to go?  The WIAC?  CCIW?  MIAC?  How does that work for any of the involved parties?  And what's the guarantee that those will be any tougher on Mount week to week?).

I was right with you til the last sentence. I promise you, if Mount were to join the WIAC their schedule would be more demanding physically and competitively than it is in the OAC. I know it's not feasible and I agree with your overall point...until the last sentence.

its too bad the WIAC hasn't won more than half of the OAC's titles overall.  That conference is so tough, I dont know how their teams cant beat up on each other all season and then lose in the playoffs. 

How can the short-lived, mini dynasty of UWW not swing things in the direction of the WIAC?  Don't you people know that St. T beating UW-O last year was a fluke and shouldn't count?  UW-O  would have killed Mount due to their tough schedule.  I would equate the WIAC to the SEC, but it seems like the WIAC doesn't typically perform as well. 

I don't think that we should all bow down to the WIAC teams unless you have more than one come out and be more than good.  Why does perceived conference depth matter?  A bunch of mediocre teams in one league is better than a couple of high level teams with the jokes of Ohio?  The UWW little run skewed things a bit.  The D3 system of playoffs shows the best areas of football,  I would argue that the OAC has set themselves apart in terms of titles.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Okay, Raider68, what is your prediction for your Mount Union Saturday?  I don't think they will have a problem with Wilmington- the only "guess" is what the margin of victory will be most likely.

I say Wilma by 3 TDs.

(OMG - I haven't dropped acid in 40 years, and am still having flashbacks! )

formerd3db,

It will be a real nail-biter for the first 2 minutes, then I think the Raiders will pull away. It will
a long ride home for Wilmington, IMHO!

I just hope Mount doesn't put up 84, that was a bit odd as a Mount fan....somebody call Gregg Easterbrook

I told you guys that I emailed him once to explain the Mount blowouts, and that his suggestions (i.e. that they should just move up to Division II, or that they needed to find a tougher league) were not realistic options, right?

He never replied.

ExtartanPlayer,

Who is "he" that you emailed?

Gregg Easterbrook.  In his TMQ column, he often rags on Mount for running up the score (obviously he never reads any game stories, he always just prints the score and says that any team who wins by more than 50 should be ashamed for running up the score, clearly unaware of Mount's generally good sportsmanship in blowouts by playing backups, running the ball, even taking FG's on first down and/or running out of bounds inside the 5) and playing a "weak schedule" (again, obviously pays no attention to the fact that they play in the OAC and have 9 mandated league games; he also talks about them changing conferences as though it's a simple matter, neglecting the fact that the OAC is the most logical home for Mount in all sports, and that even if they could join a conference just for football, where are they going to go?  The WIAC?  CCIW?  MIAC?  How does that work for any of the involved parties?  And what's the guarantee that those will be any tougher on Mount week to week?).

I was right with you til the last sentence. I promise you, if Mount were to join the WIAC their schedule would be more demanding physically and competitively than it is in the OAC. I know it's not feasible and I agree with your overall point...until the last sentence.

its too bad the WIAC hasn't won more than half of the OAC's titles overall.  That conference is so tough, I dont know how their teams cant beat up on each other all season and then lose in the playoffs. 

How can the short-lived, mini dynasty of UWW not swing things in the direction of the WIAC?  Don't you people know that St. T beating UW-O last year was a fluke and shouldn't count?  UW-O  would have killed Mount due to their tough schedule.  I would equate the WIAC to the SEC, but it seems like the WIAC doesn't typically perform as well. 

I don't think that we should all bow down to the WIAC teams unless you have more than one come out and be more than good.  Why does perceived conference depth matter?  A bunch of mediocre teams in one league is better than a couple of high level teams with the jokes of Ohio?  The UWW little run skewed things a bit.  The D3 system of playoffs shows the best areas of football,  I would argue that the OAC has set themselves apart in terms of titles.

Same criticism can be leveled at the OAC as the WIAC.  In recent history, those titles have all come from one place.  I have previously defended the OAC by pointing out a number of OAC runners-up that have made deep playoff runs only to fall to Mount, but it's been five years or more since that happened (I think), although it was a regular occurrence in the early 00's.

Your post contains a number of straw-man points that bleedpurple did not say.  he never said UWO losing to UST was a fluke, nor that UWO would have beaten Mount.  Re: "That conference is so tough, I dont know how their teams cant beat up on each other all season and then lose in the playoffs." - the WIAC playoff reps from 2005 forward:

UWW, 4-1, Stagg Bowl loss
UWW, 4-1, Stagg Bowl loss
UWW, 4-1, Stagg Bowl loss
UWW, 4-1, Stagg Bowl loss (in a year where they lost a conference game, no less) and UW-SP, first-round loss
UWW, 4-1, Stagg Bowl win
UWW, 5-0, Stagg Bowl win
UWW, 5-0, Stagg Bowl win
UWO, 3-1, Semifinal loss (after beating MIAC runner-up and NWC champ)

Now, I am but a poor Statistics major and thus my math skills may not be up to snuff, but that looks like a lot more winning in the playoffs than losing.  Even if most of that "winning" was done by one team, the same is true of the OAC, and last year - the first year after the UWW monster was toppled - UWO won three playoff games and lost in the semifinals.

What stands out to me about the WIAC is that, even during their Stagg Bowl run, UWW often faced some tough battles in conference play, and they rarely play the 66-0 games that Mount usually plays 2 or 3 times a year against the dregs; even the lower-rung WIAC teams usually play UWW "tough-ish" and the game is something more like 38-14 or 31-7 than the 84-14 beatdown Mount just slapped on Etta.  I know that Mount usually gets tested once or twice in OAC play as well, so I'm not saying this is totally unique to the WIAC, but checking the scores shows that UWW seemed to have to work harder in conference play than Mount usually did.  This could also be due to UWW's style of play being a bit more conservative and defense-driven than Mount's.

[theaprof]

As a Purple Raider fan I would like to point out to a few of the newbies that the WIAC has had teams in the playoffs for a long time--I remember some really tough games (and some losses) that involved UW-La Crosse, UW Osh Kosh, and maybe even UW Stephens Point.

I think they have a very tough conference, and while no individual team has had the long term success of Mount, the conference has had high caliber teams for a very long time.

[emma17]

As a Purple Raider fan I would like to point out to a few of the newbies that the WIAC has had teams in the playoffs for a long time--I remember some really tough games (and some losses) that involved UW-La Crosse, UW Osh Kosh, and maybe even UW Stephens Point.

I think they have a very tough conference, and while no individual team has had the long term success of Mount, the conference has had high caliber teams for a very long time.

Thanks for this objective post theaprof.
No school anywhere has done it as well as Mt. I'm equally impressed in the games Mt is willing to take on in their only non conference opportunity.
I'd like to think we don't need a conference debate as both have had tremendous success over the years. I am thrilled for all OAC fans that the conference has some doubt this year. The uncertainty is the same in the WIAC and it's really created an added element of excitement.
Heck, it's true in the MIAC as well.
This 2013 has great potential for a memorable year.
Keep an eye on UWW this weekend as we should have a better feel if they are on their way back to being in position to challenge UWO and UWP.

[reality check]

Remember to quote everything related to the discussion guys.  We need at least half the page to be just quotes or else people might not be able to follow the discussion.

[HScoach]

Okay, Raider68, what is your prediction for your Mount Union Saturday?  I don't think they will have a problem with Wilmington- the only "guess" is what the margin of victory will be most likely.

I say Wilma by 3 TDs.

(OMG - I haven't dropped acid in 40 years, and am still having flashbacks! )

formerd3db,

It will be a real nail-biter for the first 2 minutes, then I think the Raiders will pull away. It will
a long ride home for Wilmington, IMHO!

I just hope Mount doesn't put up 84, that was a bit odd as a Mount fan....somebody call Gregg Easterbrook

I told you guys that I emailed him once to explain the Mount blowouts, and that his suggestions (i.e. that they should just move up to Division II, or that they needed to find a tougher league) were not realistic options, right?

He never replied.

ExtartanPlayer,

Who is "he" that you emailed?

Gregg Easterbrook.  In his TMQ column, he often rags on Mount for running up the score (obviously he never reads any game stories, he always just prints the score and says that any team who wins by more than 50 should be ashamed for running up the score, clearly unaware of Mount's generally good sportsmanship in blowouts by playing backups, running the ball, even taking FG's on first down and/or running out of bounds inside the 5) and playing a "weak schedule" (again, obviously pays no attention to the fact that they play in the OAC and have 9 mandated league games; he also talks about them changing conferences as though it's a simple matter, neglecting the fact that the OAC is the most logical home for Mount in all sports, and that even if they could join a conference just for football, where are they going to go?  The WIAC?  CCIW?  MIAC?  How does that work for any of the involved parties?  And what's the guarantee that those will be any tougher on Mount week to week?).

I was right with you til the last sentence. I promise you, if Mount were to join the WIAC their schedule would be more demanding physically and competitively than it is in the OAC. I know it's not feasible and I agree with your overall point...until the last sentence.

its too bad the WIAC hasn't won more than half of the OAC's titles overall.  That conference is so tough, I dont know how their teams cant beat up on each other all season and then lose in the playoffs. 

How can the short-lived, mini dynasty of UWW not swing things in the direction of the WIAC?  Don't you people know that St. T beating UW-O last year was a fluke and shouldn't count?  UW-O  would have killed Mount due to their tough schedule.  I would equate the WIAC to the SEC, but it seems like the WIAC doesn't typically perform as well. 

I don't think that we should all bow down to the WIAC teams unless you have more than one come out and be more than good.  Why does perceived conference depth matter?  A bunch of mediocre teams in one league is better than a couple of high level teams with the jokes of Ohio?  The UWW little run skewed things a bit.  The D3 system of playoffs shows the best areas of football,  I would argue that the OAC has set themselves apart in terms of titles.

Same criticism can be leveled at the OAC as the WIAC.  In recent history, those titles have all come from one place.  I have previously defended the OAC by pointing out a number of OAC runners-up that have made deep playoff runs only to fall to Mount, but it's been five years or more since that happened (I think), although it was a regular occurrence in the early 00's.

Your post contains a number of straw-man points that bleedpurple did not say.  he never said UWO losing to UST was a fluke, nor that UWO would have beaten Mount.  Re: "That conference is so tough, I dont know how their teams cant beat up on each other all season and then lose in the playoffs." - the WIAC playoff reps from 2005 forward:

UWW, 4-1, Stagg Bowl loss
UWW, 4-1, Stagg Bowl loss
UWW, 4-1, Stagg Bowl loss
UWW, 4-1, Stagg Bowl loss (in a year where they lost a conference game, no less) and UW-SP, first-round loss
UWW, 4-1, Stagg Bowl win
UWW, 5-0, Stagg Bowl win
UWW, 5-0, Stagg Bowl win
UWO, 3-1, Semifinal loss (after beating MIAC runner-up and NWC champ)

Now, I am but a poor Statistics major and thus my math skills may not be up to snuff, but that looks like a lot more winning in the playoffs than losing.  Even if most of that "winning" was done by one team, the same is true of the OAC, and last year - the first year after the UWW monster was toppled - UWO won three playoff games and lost in the semifinals.

What stands out to me about the WIAC is that, even during their Stagg Bowl run, UWW often faced some tough battles in conference play, and they rarely play the 66-0 games that Mount usually plays 2 or 3 times a year against the dregs; even the lower-rung WIAC teams usually play UWW "tough-ish" and the game is something more like 38-14 or 31-7 than the 84-14 beatdown Mount just slapped on Etta.  I know that Mount usually gets tested once or twice in OAC play as well, so I'm not saying this is totally unique to the WIAC, but checking the scores shows that UWW seemed to have to work harder in conference play than Mount usually did.  This could also be due to UWW's style of play being a bit more conservative and defense-driven than Mount's.

RC, this quote is for you!

[ExTartanPlayer]

Remember to quote everything related to the discussion guys.  We need at least half the page to be just quotes or else people might not be able to follow the discussion.

I want to see another creative impression.

[HScoach]

The following doesn't exactly fit the discussion, but it's something I had composed a couple years ago in response to a discussion occurring in the E-8 page.   I'm also to lazy to update it to include the 2012 season, but you get the point.


Writing off the OAC simply because Mount has consistently won the conference is an overly simplistic and incorrect view.

Who wins the conference championship is not the only sign of conference strength.  Balance, yes.  But not strength.  You dismiss the OAC simply because they can't beat Mount?  Well then you can dismiss the rest of D3 outside of the WIAC for the last few years.     Since 1996, there have been exactly five (5) teams that have beaten Mount Union, and only one of them has done it multiple times:
Whitewater (WAIC) – 4 times
Ohio Northern (OAC) - once
Mary Hardin Baylor (ASC) - once
St John's (MIAC) - once
Rowan (NJAC) - once

So outside of the WIAC, the OAC has done exactly what the rest of the nation has done against Mount.  Beaten Mount every once in a while.   

Here's a brief synopsis of the last 20 years of Mount results in terms of toughest/closest games that season and what conference that team was from.   If you take the time to read it, you'll see that the OAC has often provided the toughest test for Mount.  Not always, but the conference has often put up as tough a fight as the best playoff teams from around the nation.

2011 – National Runner-up (14-1)
Ohio Northern  (OAC)  :  Mount win 14-6
Baldwin Wallace  (OAC)  :  Mount win 25-20
Wesley (ind):  Mount win 28-21
Whitewater (WIAC):  Mount loss 13-10
     
2010 – National Runner-up (14-1)
Marietta  (OAC)  :  Mount win 28-14
Whitewater (WIAC):  Mount loss 31-21
Next closest regular season game was Otterbein (OAC) by 18 pts, next closest playoff game was 20 pts

2009 – National Runner-up (14-1)
Capital  (OAC)  :  Mount win 28-21
Whitewater (WIAC):  Mount loss 38-28
no other team, including playoffs, was closer than 17 pts.

2008 – National Champion (15-0)
Whitewater (WIAC):  Mount win 31-26
No other team, playoffs included, closer than 21 pts

2007 – National Runner-up (14-1)
Whitewater (WIAC):  Mount loss 31-21
No other team, playoffs included, closer than 24 pts

2006 – National Champion (15-0)
Baldwin Wallace  (OAC)  :  Mount win 14-0
Capital  (OAC) in Round 3  :  Mount win 17-14
St. John Fisher (E-8):  Mount win 26-14
    NOTE:  beat Whitewater (WIAC) by 19 in Stagg

2005 – National Champion (14-1)
Ohio Northern  (OAC):  Mount loss 21-14 
Baldwin Wallace  (OAC)  :  Mount win 17-3
Capital  (OAC) in Round 3  :  Mount win 34-31
Whitewater (WIAC):  Mount win 31-26

2004 – Semi-Finalist (12-1)
Ohio Northern  (OAC)  :  Mount win 41-27
Mary Hardin Baylor (ASC):  Mount loss 38-35 to runner-up

2003 – National Runner-up (13-1)
St. John's (MIAC):  Mount loss 24-6
Only decent games were John Carroll  (OAC)   34-16 and Baldwin Wallace  (OAC) 24-0.   No other team, including playoffs, was closer.

2002 – National Champion (14-0)
Baldwin Wallace  (OAC)  :  Mount win 28-21
John Carroll  (OAC)  :  Mount win 35-16
Capital  (OAC)  :  Mount win 38-22
Ohio Northern  (OAC)  :  Mount win 34-24
No other team, including playoffs, closer than 21 pts.  Beat John Carroll  (OAC) in semi-finals.

2001 – National Champions (14-0)
Baldwin Wallace  (OAC)  :  Mount win 17-3
Bridgewater (ODAC):  Mount win 30-27
No other team, including playoffs, closer than 21 pts

2000 – National Champions (14-0)
John Carroll  (OAC)  :  Mount win 41-31
Wittenberg (NCAC):  Mount win 32-15
St. John's (MIAC):  Mount win 10-7
No other team, including playoffs, closer than 24 pts.  Beat Ohio Northern   (OAC)    in Round 1

1999 -  Semi-Finalist (12-1)
John Carroll  (OAC)  :  Mount win 57-51 in  3 OT's 
Augustana (CCIW):  Mount win 42-33
Rowan (NJAC):  Mount loss 24-17 in OT to runner-up
Played Ohio Northern   (OAC)    in 2nd round of playoffs.

1998 – National Champion (14-0)
John Carroll  (OAC)  :  Mount win 21-14
Albion (MIAA):  Mount win 21-19
Wittenberg (NCAC):  Mount win 21-19
Trinity Tx (ASC):  Mount win 34-29
    NOTE:  beat Rowan (NJAC) by 20 in Stagg

1997 – National Champions (14-0)
Allegheny (NCAC):  Mount win 34-30
Closest regular season game 38-14 over Ohio Northern  (OAC)  .  Other than Allegheny, no playoff game within 45 pts.  Played John Carroll   (OAC)    in 2nd round of playoffs.

1996 – National Champion (14-0)
Allegheny (NCAC):  Mount win 31-26
No other team, including playoffs, closer than 18 pts.
     NOTE:  beat Rowan by 32 in Stagg

1995 – Semi-Finalist (12-1)
Marietta  (OAC)  :  Mount win 41-37
Wisc La Crosse (WIAC):  Mount loss 20-17 to eventual champs
No other team, including playoffs, closer than 21 pts

1994 – Regional Finalist (10-2)
Ohio Northern  (OAC)  :  Mount win 41-35
Baldwin Wallace  (OAC):  Mount loss 23-10 
Allegheny (NCAC):  Mount win 38-19
Albion (MIAA):  Mount loss 34-33 to eventual champs

1993 – National Champs (14-0)
Heidelberg  (OAC)  :  Mount win 24-7
Albion (MIAA):  Mount win 30-16
Rowan (NJAC):  Mount win 34-24

1992 – Semi-Finalist (12-1)
Baldwin Wallace  (OAC)  :  Mount win 23-14
John Carroll  (OAC)  :  Mount win 24-14
Wisc La Crosse (WIAC):  Mount loss 29-24 to eventual champs
No other team, including playoffs, closer than 17 pts.

[bleedpurple]

its too bad the WIAC hasn't won more than half of the OAC's titles overall.  That conference is so tough, I dont know how their teams cant beat up on each other all season and then lose in the playoffs. 

How can the short-lived, mini dynasty of UWW not swing things in the direction of the WIAC?  Don't you people know that St. T beating UW-O last year was a fluke and shouldn't count?  UW-O  would have killed Mount due to their tough schedule.  I would equate the WIAC to the SEC, but it seems like the WIAC doesn't typically perform as well. 

I don't think that we should all bow down to the WIAC teams unless you have more than one come out and be more than good.  Why does perceived conference depth matter?  A bunch of mediocre teams in one league is better than a couple of high level teams with the jokes of Ohio?  The UWW little run skewed things a bit.  The D3 system of playoffs shows the best areas of football,  I would argue that the OAC has set themselves apart in terms of titles.

As usual your disdain for all things UW-W has flawed your logic, not that you usually strive for logic anyway. Who in the world ever said Uw-O would have killed Mount? And to call UWW's run "short lived" and a "little run" is just silly. Mount has the respect of D3 fans everywhere. UW-W has the respect of most Mount fans. Except you. Fortunately for everyone involved, everything you post reflects on you, not on Mount and most certainly not on UW-W. The teams will meet again soon enough. And every person involved will probably congratulate the winner. Except one.

[HScoach]

Ignore suit.   He's simply a younger version of 70's.   

[mr_mom]

Given the early distribution split, this is my worst ever  set of spreads and everyone  who plays will be a winner!  So get those picks in by noon Saturday!

HSCoach, thanks for the history lesson.  +K.

[And Temple is beating Cinti? ... wait ... no ... nevermind!]