FB: Ohio Athletic Conference

[joelmama]

I'm much more looking forward to Heidelberg because of their running game with Cartel Brooks and the future potential they seem to possess.  They were a very young 8-2 team last year and look to have the capabilities to match that or maybe even better it this season.   And if I remember their roster correctly, 2013 looks to be an even better year.  The last 3 weeks of the Berg schedule is brutal, but win 2 of the last 3 and they'll be in the playoffs.   I don't think their defense will be good enough to hold Mount under 30, but they definitely have the offense to make it very interesting.

I was at the Berg-Mount game last year and the Berg defense held Mount in check in the first half. It all fell apart in the 2nd half because the Berg offense couldn't keep their defense off the field. If Berg offense can move the ball this year it could be a game.

I might have to put him in my fantasy lineup this week.  If Pierre plays I will have two MUC WR's in my lineup for the same week for the first time.

[Desertraider]

Pierre does not sound like a "GO" for this week against the Giants.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/wp/2012/10/17/pierre-garcon-frustrated-but-intends-to-wait-patiently-for-foot-to-heal/

[Bein_86]

Desertraider, you have an email and a personal message...

[UMUplayerdad]

Okay I can't resist. According to the guys over at Atomic Football - Mount will win this weekend against OTT 34-6. They have it listed as 99.3% win. Mount is also predicted to beat Berg, BW and JCU. So I guess that makes it playoff time? Of course these guys also have Mount ranked #77 in the Win-Loss Based Ranking behind OTT (74), Berg (67) and of course the DIII power at 2-4 Gustavus Adolphus. Mount is ranked at #26 in the Hybrid.

At least they are giving Mount a 93% chance of finishing 10-0.

http://www.knology.net/jashburn/football/archive/teams/tm_590.html

I used to be a big believer in massey rating site but geez? UMU at #13? and he gives wilmington a 25% chance of beating heidelberg? and then predicts a close game when heidelberg plays us at home?   Geez he was right every time the kid played his high school games(the 3 years I followed) but I dunno what to think now? and UMU loses 3 spots after blow out wins?  Doesn't seem very logical to me   of course the rating sites don't mean all that much I know

[Desertraider]

Desertraider, you have an email and a personal message...

Got it and hit ya back with a PM. Thanks for the info and I hope the OTT can get healthy before its too late.

UMUplayerdad- That's what I like about the D3football rankings (a tip of the hat to Pat and crew). They seem to be based on what they see week-to-week and what they KNOW (like Mount stands a pretty good shot at being in the playoffs and should probably be penciled in somewhere in the top 4 by now). I think too many of the polls rely on mathmatics. I am not familiar with massey but any site that gives Wilmington a 25% chance of beating anyone other than Marietta lacks credibility in my book. 

[Dr. Acula]

I watched the Wilm/BW game (I know, I'm a sick, sick individual) and the Quakers didn't look that bad actually.  Don't get me wrong, they still looked bad, but I'd give them a 25% shot at beating Cap I think.       

[Desertraider]

I just checked Massey. Apparently the NESCAC is THE conference! They have 6 NESCAC teams in the top 20. #1 Middlebury, #3 Trinity (CT), #4 Amherst, #6 Weslyan (CT), #14 Bates and #16 Williams. None of them are ranked in the top25 here and only Trinity got a top 25 vote (1). The kicker is that Bates is 2-2 and Williams is 1-3. Some things just don't make sense.

[Desertraider]

I watched the Wilm/BW game (I know, I'm a sick, sick individual) and the Quakers didn't look that bad actually.  Don't get me wrong, they still looked bad, but I'd give them a 25% shot at beating Cap I think.       

You are not that sick - I watched it to (alright maybe we are both sick). You are right though - Wilma had a couple of decent players out there and had some success. However - when you are down 42-7 sometimes the other team lets its guard down a bit. BW seemed to slow down in the 2nd half. I checked the box score and Wilma had most of its success in the 2nd half (besides a 13 play drive in the 1st qtr with no points, and a scoring drive with a 61yd strike). Holy crap I am analyzing a Wilma game! I am off to the doctors office.

[HScoach]

^ you are seriously screwed up.  I'm not even crazy enough to watch a BW/Wilma and analyze it.

[bleedpurple]

Okay I can't resist. According to the guys over at Atomic Football - Mount will win this weekend against OTT 34-6. They have it listed as 99.3% win. Mount is also predicted to beat Berg, BW and JCU. So I guess that makes it playoff time? Of course these guys also have Mount ranked #77 in the Win-Loss Based Ranking behind OTT (74), Berg (67) and of course the DIII power at 2-4 Gustavus Adolphus. Mount is ranked at #26 in the Hybrid.

At least they are giving Mount a 93% chance of finishing 10-0.

http://www.knology.net/jashburn/football/archive/teams/tm_590.html

I used to be a big believer in massey rating site but geez? UMU at #13? and he gives wilmington a 25% chance of beating heidelberg? and then predicts a close game when heidelberg plays us at home?   Geez he was right every time the kid played his high school games(the 3 years I followed) but I dunno what to think now? and UMU loses 3 spots after blow out wins?  Doesn't seem very logical to me   of course the rating sites don't mean all that much I know

Massey is being generous.  Atomic-Football is one group not drinking the Mount Union Kool Aid. They see right through the Purple Raider ruse.  Ranked 77th this week.

http://www.al.com/atomic-football/index.ssf?d3-rankings

[rscl70]

Okay I can't resist. According to the guys over at Atomic Football - Mount will win this weekend against OTT 34-6. They have it listed as 99.3% win. Mount is also predicted to beat Berg, BW and JCU. So I guess that makes it playoff time? Of course these guys also have Mount ranked #77 in the Win-Loss Based Ranking behind OTT (74), Berg (67) and of course the DIII power at 2-4 Gustavus Adolphus. Mount is ranked at #26 in the Hybrid.

At least they are giving Mount a 93% chance of finishing 10-0.

http://www.knology.net/jashburn/football/archive/teams/tm_590.html

I used to be a big believer in massey rating site but geez? UMU at #13? and he gives wilmington a 25% chance of beating heidelberg? and then predicts a close game when heidelberg plays us at home?   Geez he was right every time the kid played his high school games(the 3 years I followed) but I dunno what to think now? and UMU loses 3 spots after blow out wins?  Doesn't seem very logical to me   of course the rating sites don't mean all that much I know

Massey is being generous.  Atomic-Football is one group not drinking the Mount Union Kool Aid. They see right through the Purple Raider ruse.  Ranked 77th this week.

http://www.al.com/atomic-football/index.ssf?d3-rankings

Well, if the Raiders can upset #74 Otterbein tomorrow they should surge ahead in this poll!

[HScoach]

Not to inject a bit of sanity into the discussion, but how is a computer ranking that is based on actual games played supposed to rank Mount in the top 5 when they've only played one decent team so far this season?   Yes, they've killed the last 5 worthless opponents, but so would any legitimate team. 

And with only one non-league game, the OAC's overall strength of schedule is always bad (.500 +/-) because we don't get the opportunity of winning a bunch of early season games like the CCIW does.  And it's even worse this year because of ONU and Capital both being in the crapper.  As long as the NCAA selection committee doesn't look at Mount as being a #2 or #3 seed simply because their strength of schedule numbers are average, I could care less what the calculations say.

[Desertraider]

Not to inject a bit of sanity into the discussion, but how is a computer ranking that is based on actual games played supposed to rank Mount in the top 5 when they've only played one decent team so far this season?   Yes, they've killed the last 5 worthless opponents, but so would any legitimate team. 

And with only one non-league game, the OAC's overall strength of schedule is always bad (.500 +/-) because we don't get the opportunity of winning a bunch of early season games like the CCIW does.  And it's even worse this year because of ONU and Capital both being in the crapper.  As long as the NCAA selection committee doesn't look at Mount as being a #2 or #3 seed simply because their strength of schedule numbers are average, I could care less what the calculations say.

In all seriousness - I didn't think any of this was a serious discussion. It's funny to me since we are used to seeing Mount at #1 or #2 for the past 15 years - so to see Mount not even in the Top #70 is just kind of funny. Besides if "sanity" was a part of this I would not have watched the Wilma/BW game yesterday. I am just looking forward to the big Top 75 battle between the Beiners and Mount. If Mount can eeek out a win they should easily crack #73 - maybe even jump #72 Framingham St. if they stumble against #183 Westfield St.  As far as the Massey goes we should pay attention to the Top 20 battle bewteen #1 Middlebury and #14 Bates. Mount could move up there with an upset - Go Bates! See - all fun!

[Pat Coleman]

Not to inject a bit of sanity into the discussion, but how is a computer ranking that is based on actual games played supposed to rank Mount in the top 5 when they've only played one decent team so far this season?   Yes, they've killed the last 5 worthless opponents, but so would any legitimate team. 

It depends on how seriously they take margin of victory.

[Raider 68]

Some great games in D3 football, but not in the OAC. UW-W vs. UW-Osh, Salisbury St. vs. Alfred
will be good ones! Maybe ONU finds more offense against JCU!