FB: Ohio Athletic Conference

[reality check]

A question to rc, kirasdad, or whomever: I don't have a tape of the game so only saw the ESPN2 replays.  IF the roughing the kicker call was a case of the FIRST UWW player was held and thrown into the punter (which was clearly the case), but the SECOND UWW player was indeed at fault (I didn't see the second, so am going by your accounts), wouldn't the first supercede the second?

It is obviously a moot point, but I'm trying to learn (I am NOT a trained ref).  Should the proper call have been:

a. as called on the field

b. holding against MUC, (at UWW option) play stands or kick-over after penalty

c. negating penalties, replay the down

d. other?

If they saw both penalties and flagged both offenses then the result of the play would have been to replay the down.  There is no instance where one trumps the other because of the order of things though.  Now if there were a personal foul during a play like roughing the kicker and then the punting team were to commit a personal foul after the whistle blew, then we have another situation I believe.  If that were the case, the punting team takes the roughing the kicker call, moves up 15 yards.  Then the deadball foul would be assessed; net effect being that the punting team gets a new set of downs but starts right where the original punt occurred from.  That's my understanding of the rules anyways.  But I was wrong once so who knows.   

[bushman]

I disagree with Pat et al in their picking Leipold to be coach of the year.  I thought  LK out coached his counter part on saturday.   It seems that what LK does is taken for granted, if another coach does the same thing than he gets an award or two.  It is much harder to stay on top than to get there.  Mt. was the underdog going into this game.  LK himself said so.  Mt. had a much higher hill to climb in order to win this game.   Coaching by LK and the Mt. staff was the difference in my opinion.  Their game plan was accurate in what they needed to do in order to win.  Their team executed that plan.  They were prepared better than their opponent.  Coaching does that.   LK  should have this award esp. this year.   He earned it.  

[Pat Coleman]

He did for the first five minutes, absolutely. Are you sure he did for the whole game?

HURFMUC, if you gave the East credit for winning this year it would be the first since 2007, since last year Mount was in the "East" bracket too. But Mount isn't an East Region team, so that wouldn't matter. It's another North Region title.

[TooForRaider]

I disagree with Pat et al in their picking Leipold to be coach of the year.  I thought  LK out coached his counter part on saturday.   It seems that what LK does is taken for granted, if another coach does the same thing than he gets an award or two.  It is much harder to stay on top than to get there.  Mt. was the underdog going into this game.  LK himself said so.  Mt. had a much higher hill to climb in order to win this game.   Coaching by LK and the Mt. staff was the difference in my opinion.  Their game plan was accurate in what they needed to do in order to win.  Their team executed that plan.  They were prepared better than their opponent.  Coaching does that.   LK  should have this award esp. this year.   He earned it.  

Completely agree with this.  Pat, first five minutes? Are we to not look at a coach's entire body of work? Did the vote for Leipold not take into account the loss they had?  What about the entire season?  I didn't notice a loss in the L column for the Raiders, nor do I see a "check" in the league championship column for WW.  No question LK deserved the award in from of Leipold.  Not trying to be combative, but once I saw that remark I had to say something. 

[bushman]

The plan was to get up on WW as much as possible.   This would give Mt. a fighting chance to win.  He knew he could not slug it out down for down.  He didn't have the horses.  He utilized his strengths as best he could.   WW was caught off guard.   The whole game, probably not.   For the end results, yes.

[seventiesraider]

Gotta agree with Bushman. If the "Coach of the Year" hadn't made some really questionable decisions, his team might  have been National Champs again. Lance was clearly not the better coach in the last five minutes. My neck is sore again from shaking my head at some of his calls. Pass for two points when you were 90 perent assured if you rushed? QB sneak on 3rd and 1 in 4 down territory? ?

Cecil Shorts 3rd team AA ? ? ? ? ? ?

[HURFMUC]

He did for the first five minutes, absolutely. Are you sure he did for the whole game?

HURFMUC, if you gave the East credit for winning this year it would be the first since 2007, since last year Mount was in the "East" bracket too. But Mount isn't an East Region team, so that wouldn't matter. It's another North Region title.

Thanks for the correction Pat

[usee]

HURFMUC, if you gave the East credit for winning this year it would be the first since 2007, since last year Mount was in the "East" bracket too. But Mount isn't an East Region team, so that wouldn't matter. It's another North Region title.

The only problem with this hypothetical is Mt didn't win last year so it doesn't count North or East! 

[pradierguy]

I think the "Sure he did... for the first five minutes" comment is a little unfair. What about the previous 14 games? What about U-WW loss in the reg. season.

Do I think Leipold is a great coach? Absolutely.

Do I think someone other than LK could/should win the award? Possibly.


I am just saying that comment is extremely unfair to LK and other coaches who will be judged on portions of games.

[Pat Coleman]

HURFMUC, if you gave the East credit for winning this year it would be the first since 2007, since last year Mount was in the "East" bracket too. But Mount isn't an East Region team, so that wouldn't matter. It's another North Region title.

The only problem with this hypothetical is Mt didn't win last year so it doesn't count North or East! 

Oy, sheesh. I need a day off.

[Pat Coleman]

I disagree with Pat et al in their picking Leipold to be coach of the year.  I thought  LK out coached his counter part on saturday.  

Completely agree with this.  Pat, first five minutes? Are we to not look at a coach's entire body of work? Did the vote for Leipold not take into account the loss they had?  What about the entire season? 

Absolutely. However, the specific piece pointed out was the Mount Union fan thinking LK outcoached his counterpart. All I did was ask if he was sure.

Did Mount Union lose a regular-season game? No. Did Mount Union play a WIAC schedule? No. By most accounts the OAC is down and St. John Fisher is definitely down. Mount Union had an easier road to Salem, both in terms of opponents and locations. Lance Leipold achieved almost identical results with what appears to be a significantly more difficult task.

That's the entire body of work that we took into account.

[Pat Coleman]

nor do I see a "check" in the league championship column for WW. 

Whitewater's league does.

http://www.wiacsports.com/football/08champ.html

[bushman]

Hey I didn't expect to change any minds here.  I simply stated my opinion and why I saw it that way.  You all have a Merry Christmas!

[Blutarsky]

This whole season I kept being reminded of the quote (and I forgot who originally said it):

"He can take his, and beat yours; or, he can take yours, and beat his."

.....should be applied to Coach Kehres (especially this "rebuilding" year)

[badgerwarhawk]

 Was LK setting up UWW for next year?  Keep the game close also helps the "sport" by not having a blowout?  Trying to give them confidence?  Only Coach K will ever know...

This is the most interesting theory I've read.   I hardly know what to say in response.  I suppose I should simply thank Coach K for sparing us the humilation.   

Too freakin' funny KD.