FB: Ohio Athletic Conference

[HScoach]

What Aprof did was far worse than what the players allegedly said. Aprof put it out for the entire world to see permanently. Well,I am going to leave it alone now as enough attention has been given it,which is one of the pitfalls of responding to slander. I am truly amazed anyone defended him. I will always defend players from cheap shots,even ONU guys,hell,even JCU or BW guys.

All I know is that with good QB play, not great, just good the last 2 years we're sitting here today worrying about how to get title #13.  Not the evasive #11.

[reality check]

Was told today by my AD that I might get an interview if/when they have second round of interviews.  I'd like to think that sounds good as I skip the initial round but the truth is there isn't a coach on staff getting an interview on the official day.  I informed him that the internal posting went up Dec. 21 (when we left for break) and that I applied on Jan 4 (our first day back from break) and he said I missed their initial cut-off.  He explained that the posting had been put up externally on the AIA job board (equivalent to the OHSAA) to which I responded, "Well I applied as soon as it was posted internally and you're telling me that's too late.  I don't check the AIA site because if I checked it regularly, that would mean I was looking for jobs outside our district." 

I didn't get much of a response after that; presumably because he couldn't think of anything to really outwit my last comment.  I guess that's the only satisfaction I'll get is knowing that he/they know how much they're botching this job hunt but that they're too stubborn and prideful to admit it. 

Really disappointing so far but I guess they're really hoping to hire one of their prestigious out of state candidates that has no idea what the hell he is getting into.  I was at least told how much the AD wants me to remain on staff in some capacity.  If I'm lucky I will get to stick around and wash jocks.

[PurpleSuit]

What Aprof did was far worse than what the players allegedly said. Aprof put it out for the entire world to see permanently. Well,I am going to leave it alone now as enough attention has been given it,which is one of the pitfalls of responding to slander. I am truly amazed anyone defended him. I will always defend players from cheap shots,even ONU guys,hell,even JCU or BW guys.

All I know is that with good QB play, not great, just good the last 2 years we're sitting here today worrying about how to get title #13.  Not the evasive #11.

agree 100%, I would even stretch it to 3 years if Rocco didn't get knocked out the week prior to Stagg Bowl in '09.  I guess it could be worse.  We could be LSU fans with that QB performance tonight, oh wait we have had that the past two seasons.

[Raider 68]

For 2011 the Raiders had introduced a new purple home jersey, but I wonder why they did not wear the traditional "playoff" black in the playoffs ( except the Stagg, visitors jersey)?    Also, they did not use the black over purple pants at all!

[emma17]

What Aprof did was far worse than what the players allegedly said. Aprof put it out for the entire world to see permanently. Well,I am going to leave it alone now as enough attention has been given it,which is one of the pitfalls of responding to slander. I am truly amazed anyone defended him. I will always defend players from cheap shots,even ONU guys,hell,even JCU or BW guys.

All I know is that with good QB play, not great, just good the last 2 years we're sitting here today worrying about how to get title #13.  Not the evasive #11.

agree 100%, I would even stretch it to 3 years if Rocco didn't get knocked out the week prior to Stagg Bowl in '09.  I guess it could be worse.  We could be LSU fans with that QB performance tonight, oh wait we have had that the past two seasons.

Yeah, Mt needs a QB like they had in 2007- then they'd never lose.

[ExTartanPlayer]

All I know is that with good QB play, not great, just good the last 2 years we're sitting here today worrying about how to get title #13.  Not the evasive #11.

It's pretty hard for me to take that too seriously when I can look at the stats and see the following:

Over the past two years combined, you've averaged about 240 passing yards per game, completed 64% of your passes for ~8 yards per attempt, and have a 2.5-1 TD-to-INT ratio.  Most of those numbers would be near the top of the leaderboard in any division (including the NFL).  I know that I'm nitpicking the difference between "good" and "great" here, but saying that Mount Union's QB play has been less than "good" the last few years just seems like it's taking things a little far, IMHO.

If you wish to discount the regular-season statistics because they're compiled against lesser competition, even that's fine with me.  However, UMU managed 300+ passing yards in three of five postseason games in 2010 (including the semifinals and finals).  You might also suggest that the lofty 2010 statistics were boosted by Cecil Shorts' phenomenal ability.  Fair point.  However, with Shorts gone, your QB threw for 271 yards and four touchdowns in the national semifinals this year.

I do believe that it's fair to suggest that the current UMU QB's are not playing as well as previous incarnation(s).  I also think it's fair to suggest that UMU has lost the past two Stagg Bowls because of struggles at the QB position in the title game.  However, I think that saying that UMU only needs "good" QB play to win the Stagg (implying that they have not received "good" QB play) is a little bit unrealistic.

[HScoach]

What Aprof did was far worse than what the players allegedly said. Aprof put it out for the entire world to see permanently. Well,I am going to leave it alone now as enough attention has been given it,which is one of the pitfalls of responding to slander. I am truly amazed anyone defended him. I will always defend players from cheap shots,even ONU guys,hell,even JCU or BW guys.

All I know is that with good QB play, not great, just good the last 2 years we're sitting here today worrying about how to get title #13.  Not the evasive #11.

agree 100%, I would even stretch it to 3 years if Rocco didn't get knocked out the week prior to Stagg Bowl in '09.  I guess it could be worse.  We could be LSU fans with that QB performance tonight, oh wait we have had that the past two seasons.

I disagree.  Rocco played fine.  It was 2 fumbles in the 4th quarter by RB's that did Mount in.  Not our QB.

[HScoach]

All I know is that with good QB play, not great, just good the last 2 years we're sitting here today worrying about how to get title #13.  Not the evasive #11.

It's pretty hard for me to take that too seriously when I can look at the stats and see the following:

Over the past two years combined, you've averaged about 240 passing yards per game, completed 64% of your passes for ~8 yards per attempt, and have a 2.5-1 TD-to-INT ratio.  Most of those numbers would be near the top of the leaderboard in any division (including the NFL).  I know that I'm nitpicking the difference between "good" and "great" here, but saying that Mount Union's QB play has been less than "good" the last few years just seems like it's taking things a little far, IMHO.

If you wish to discount the regular-season statistics because they're compiled against lesser competition, even that's fine with me.  However, UMU managed 300+ passing yards in three of five postseason games in 2010 (including the semifinals and finals).  You might also suggest that the lofty 2010 statistics were boosted by Cecil Shorts' phenomenal ability.  Fair point.  However, with Shorts gone, your QB threw for 271 yards and four touchdowns in the national semifinals this year.

I do believe that it's fair to suggest that the current UMU QB's are not playing as well as previous incarnation(s).  I also think it's fair to suggest that UMU has lost the past two Stagg Bowls because of struggles at the QB position in the title game.  However, I think that saying that UMU only needs "good" QB play to win the Stagg (implying that they have not received "good" QB play) is a little bit unrealistic.

I'm not worried, nor commenting, about the regular season.  I'm specifically talking about the Stagg Bowl.   Looking simply at the stats doesn't tell the whole story.  Strauch and Ciccone had good rushing stats in 2004 but they were very average D3 running backs.  The stats didn't show it, but watching them play did. 

And after watching every Mount game since 1992, I think I can offer an opinion on the comparative level of QB play over the years.  I might not be an expert on the finer points of the QB position, but I'm very comfortable in making the assertion that the QB play in the last 2 Stagg's has not been up to typical Mount standards.  Most of D3 might be thrilled to have our QB playing for their team, but here the expectations are much higher.  Might not be fair or right, but that's the way it is.  If they don't like being under a microscope and playing with expectations and pressure from younger players trying to take their spot they should go to Hiram.

In terms of your point about the 271 yards in the semi's against Wesley, it was a good day on paper.  However watching it live shows that a good, accurate QB would have thrown for 400+.   Wesley couldn't cover any of the receivers and the defensive pressure was handled pretty well by the Mount O-line.  They got to the QB a few times, but it typically took blitzing to do so.  Again, nothing out of the ordinary.

For the record, I'm not expecting the next Jim Ballard or Bill Borchert to show up.  I'd be more than happy with another Gary Smeck, Rob Adamson or Kurt Rocco.

[purple]

 I think HS Coach is being a little "tongue in cheek" here. Gary Smeck was 40-1 as a starter and QB'd two National Championship teams. Rob Adamson was 28-0 and QB'd two National Championship teams and Kurt Rocco in his first and only year as a starter was 14-1 and still holds the playoff record for passing yards. His only loss being to the cheese eaters in the Title game.   I am interested in what HS Coach thinks of the non-renewal of Coach Johnson at Canton McKinley?

[HScoach]

^  Mckinley made a mistake.  Not because Johnson is a genius and should be untouchable, but because he's s good coach that has had good results but us being booted, making the next hire even harder than it is to normally be at a high profile/high stress position.  They'll be lucky to get someone as good.

[Raider 68]

I think HS Coach is being a little "tongue in cheek" here. Gary Smeck was 40-1 as a starter and QB'd two National Championship teams. Rob Adamson was 28-0 and QB'd two National Championship teams and Kurt Rocco in his first and only year as a starter was 14-1 and still holds the playoff record for passing yards. His only loss being to the cheese eaters in the Title game.   I am interested in what HS Coach thinks of the non-renewal of Coach Johnson at Canton McKinley?

purple,

The Raiders have been very fortunate to have had those top QB's.

[PurpleSuit]

^  Mckinley made a mistake.  Not because Johnson is a genius and should be untouchable, but because he's s good coach that has had good results but us being booted, making the next hire even harder than it is to normally be at a high profile/high stress position.  They'll be lucky to get someone as good.

Johnson's dismissal has little to due with on-the-field results.  The whole Worstell-Foster thing did him in, which is unfortunate.  Gonna be a mess at McK. 

On the MUC QB discussion, I think HScoach was trying to say that Mount needs a QB that can run the offense without being a detriment to the team in big games.  Mount doesn't need the next Hall of Fame QB, just something better than we have seen lately.

[WarhawkDad]

All I know is that with good QB play, not great, just good the last 2 years we're sitting here today worrying about how to get title #13.  Not the evasive #11.

It's pretty hard for me to take that too seriously when I can look at the stats and see the following:

Over the past two years combined, you've averaged about 240 passing yards per game, completed 64% of your passes for ~8 yards per attempt, and have a 2.5-1 TD-to-INT ratio.  Most of those numbers would be near the top of the leaderboard in any division (including the NFL).  I know that I'm nitpicking the difference between "good" and "great" here, but saying that Mount Union's QB play has been less than "good" the last few years just seems like it's taking things a little far, IMHO.

If you wish to discount the regular-season statistics because they're compiled against lesser competition, even that's fine with me.  However, UMU managed 300+ passing yards in three of five postseason games in 2010 (including the semifinals and finals).  You might also suggest that the lofty 2010 statistics were boosted by Cecil Shorts' phenomenal ability.  Fair point.  However, with Shorts gone, your QB threw for 271 yards and four touchdowns in the national semifinals this year.

I do believe that it's fair to suggest that the current UMU QB's are not playing as well as previous incarnation(s).  I also think it's fair to suggest that UMU has lost the past two Stagg Bowls because of struggles at the QB position in the title game.  However, I think that saying that UMU only needs "good" QB play to win the Stagg (implying that they have not received "good" QB play) is a little bit unrealistic.

I'm not worried, nor commenting, about the regular season.  I'm specifically talking about the Stagg Bowl.   Looking simply at the stats doesn't tell the whole story.  Strauch and Ciccone had good rushing stats in 2004 but they were very average D3 running backs.  The stats didn't show it, but watching them play did. 

And after watching every Mount game since 1992, I think I can offer an opinion on the comparative level of QB play over the years.  I might not be an expert on the finer points of the QB position, but I'm very comfortable in making the assertion that the QB play in the last 2 Stagg's has not been up to typical Mount standards.  Most of D3 might be thrilled to have our QB playing for their team, but here the expectations are much higher.  Might not be fair or right, but that's the way it is.  If they don't like being under a microscope and playing with expectations and pressure from younger players trying to take their spot they should go to Hiram.

In terms of your point about the 271 yards in the semi's against Wesley, it was a good day on paper.  However watching it live shows that a good, accurate QB would have thrown for 400+.   Wesley couldn't cover any of the receivers and the defensive pressure was handled pretty well by the Mount O-line.  They got to the QB a few times, but it typically took blitzing to do so.  Again, nothing out of the ordinary.

For the record, I'm not expecting the next Jim Ballard or Bill Borchert to show up.  I'd be more than happy with another Gary Smeck, Rob Adamson or Kurt Rocco.

HS Coach

I certainly understand where you seem to be coming from.  I would submit that quality defense sometimes takes good or at time great quarterback play and makes it mediocre.  Having personally been at 09, 10 and 11 Stagg Bowls, I believe the UWW defense had some impact on the QB play.   To some degree Pilotto's lack of mobility really hurt UMU in 10 & 11.  Whether or not Seaman could do better is speculation, but he would have had more mobility if healthy.

To a UMU/UWW Purple rematch (#8) in 2012.

WarhawkDad

[Raider 68]

WarhawkDad,

A top defense that pressures the QB, often does force the QB to be not as effective as in the case for "10 and :11 Stagg Bowls. In '10 Piloto had to get up to speed in a hurry,but
for '11 it was a different story. As HScoach stated better QB play would have really mattered in '11 since the Raider defense only gave up 6 pts! I am not sure Seaman's play would
have changed the outcome, IMHO.

[HScoach]

^  Mckinley made a mistake.  Not because Johnson is a genius and should be untouchable, but because he's s good coach that has had good results but us being booted, making the next hire even harder than it is to normally be at a high profile/high stress position.  They'll be lucky to get someone as good.

On the MUC QB discussion, I think HScoach was trying to say that Mount needs a QB that can run the offense without being a detriment to the team in big games.  Mount doesn't need the next Hall of Fame QB, just something better than we have seen lately.

That's exactly what I was trying to say.    Unfortunately 5 years of engineering school doesn't help me write a reasonably understood sentence.