FB: Ohio Athletic Conference

[pumkinattack]

Welcome to East region life, Mt fans.

For what it worth, I thought you guys were incredibly cool when we had to gets de-pantsed (a new word, of course) in 2008 by UMU.  (Hobart guy here) Perhaps even over complimentary.

As someone suggested, I now believe UMU is historically elite, for lack of a better description, and the top 3-5 teams stand out above everyone else.  I'd love to get a taste of life even in that club, but should we get to Belton I imagine the road stops there anyway. If we get there, may be happy that Bart would get a third straight shot against a top 4 team (Wesley in 11, STU last year and we'll see this year), but to get to that level you ultimately have to beat one of those top 3-5 teams, not just show up. 

[rscl70]

Is this the OAC board? Or did I "click" on the wrong link?

[mr_mom]

Is this the OAC board? Or did I "click" on the wrong link?

If the NCAA keeps sending us East, then we better get used to it!   

[Upstate]

That wasn't our finest moment.

Personally I thought it was hilarious...

[pumkinattack]

We've annexed your part of the country.  It's now called "far from the ocean East ".

[Raider 68]

Welcome to East region life, Mt fans.

For what it worth, I thought you guys were incredibly cool when we had to gets de-pantsed (a new word, of course) in 2008 by UMU.  (Hobart guy here) Perhaps even over complimentary.

As someone suggested, I now believe UMU is historically elite, for lack of a better description, and the top 3-5 teams stand out above everyone else.  I'd love to get a taste of life even in that club, but should we get to Belton I imagine the road stops there anyway. If we get there, may be happy that Bart would get a third straight shot against a top 4 team (Wesley in 11, STU last year and we'll see this year), but to get to that level you ultimately have to beat one of those top 3-5 teams, not just show up. 

pumkinattack,

Glad to know you believe that UMU is an historically elite progam. Check out Ric's post on some statistics.

[Jacket_Backer]

What a cop out by the OAC giving Co-Coach of the Year, Co-Assistant of the Year, and Co-First Team All OAC quarterbacks. 

Make a decision.

[NCF]

What a cop out by the OAC giving Co-Coach of the Year, Co-Assistant of the Year, and Co-First Team All OAC quarterbacks. 

Make a decision.

I agree, but don't the coaches vote on those awards? Hard to believe there would be that many ties.

[Dr. Acula]

I'm happy to see Gonell got 1st team All-OAC.  He has really emerged as a stud at LB this year.  I was impressed with him every game I've seen so far.

That sophomore class is strong on D.  4 first teamers (Lally, Gonell, Kocheff, Jones).  And that doesn't even include Spencer who was HM I'm sure based largely on missing some time with injury.  That's a heck of a core to build around the next 2 years that's for sure. 

I don't like the Co-COY, Co-1st Team QB but I can see how it shook out that way.  Such strong cases can be made for all of those guys. 

[pradierguy]

What a cop out by the OAC giving Co-Coach of the Year, Co-Assistant of the Year, and Co-First Team All OAC quarterbacks. 

Make a decision.

Are these awards based on coach's vote? If not, cop out is the perfect description.

[SJFF82]

Clearly JCU could win the battle 8/10...I mean all they have to do is not get turned over SIX times by a weak program from the East that now has 4 ROAD wins in the tournament against top 25 teams in last 10 years and score more points than they give up in those 8games and presto....

Wow. For such a storied and elite program I would have thought you did more over a 10 year period, or at the very least you would have locked up some home field games  . Sorry but this one makes as much sense as BWs 'streak of mediocrity'. So what - you won 4 road games in 10 years over Top 25 opponents. What have you actually won? SJF won the game. No one is saying JCU lost it (essentially) - but JCU was abig let down. They are the D3 equivalent of a "dome team" - the tag always hung on Peyton Manning's teams. The weather turned bad and the most complete team won the game - SJF.

Did I imply we are storied or elite?  Certainly not going to have this debate with MUC...

Haven't checked so maybe I'm way off base here...but I doubt there are many programs that have won multiple road play off games against Top 25 teams...

Obviously MUC UWW MHB etc win many games and are far superior in NCAA.  Im simply referring to the other 230+ programs that could never consistently go on road in yhe NCAA ag top teams and win...

Actually, if you are talking about real road games in the playoffs (as opposed to a neutral field), I'm not sure Mount Union HAS won 4 road games in the last 10 years. 

yeah, that was part of my point.  Obviously MUC, UWW, etc...the top flight programs dont play road play off games until they get to Salem.  But there are dozens of other schools that go to play-offs every year (believe it or not  ) and I sure most have never won a road play-off game let alone 4 against Top 25 in past 10 years.

[HScoach]

I knew this wasn't the most loaded Mount team ever, but after looking at the All-OAC team 2 thoughts come to mind:

1.  The selections are a joke with all the "co-winners" and too many players at one position like 3 RB's, 5 DL's and 5 LB's on the 1st team.  2nd team is even worse with 5 WR's.

2.  Mount is lucky to have won the conference

[badgerwarhawk]

WHITEWATER has won six playoff road games prior to the Stagg Bowl.  We've won post season games against Linfield, Willamette, Mary Hardin Baylor, Wesley, St Johns and North Central.  While I haven't verified it I suspect all of these teams were ranked in the Top 25 at the time. 

[formerd3db]

I knew this wasn't the most loaded Mount team ever, but after looking at the All-OAC team 2 thoughts come to mind:

1.  The selections are a joke with all the "co-winners" and too many players at one position like 3 RB's, 5 DL's and 5 LB's on the 1st team.  2nd team is even worse with 5 WR's.

2.  Mount is lucky to have won the conference

HSc:

I've always not been in favor of that either i.e. too many selections at one position including and/or when there is more than 11 picked for the offense and/or defensive teams.  I can see perhaps occasionally having two players selected at one position in some circumstances, but when it is seemingly overloaded as has been happening more often it appears in recent years in some conferences, I'm not sure I understand that.  Not to take anything away from any player who is selected for that honor, but it make sense to me that you fill the allowed positions on the 11 for either side of the ball (plus the special teams positions, P, K possibly Return Specialist if the conference allows the latter spot on their all-league team also) and that's it.

[Raider 68]

I knew this wasn't the most loaded Mount team ever, but after looking at the All-OAC team 2 thoughts come to mind:

1.  The selections are a joke with all the "co-winners" and too many players at one position like 3 RB's, 5 DL's and 5 LB's on the 1st team.  2nd team is even worse with 5 WR's.

2.  Mount is lucky to have won the conference

HSc:

I've always not been in favor of that either i.e. too many selections at one position including and/or when there is more than 11 picked for the offense and/or defensive teams.  I can see perhaps occasionally having two players selected at one position in some circumstances, but when it is seemingly overloaded as has been happening more often it appears in recent years in some conferences, I'm not sure I understand that.  Not to take anything away from any player who is selected for that honor, but it make sense to me that you fill the allowed positions on the 11 for either side of the ball (plus the special teams positions, P, K possibly Return Specialist if the conference allows the latter spot on their all-league team also) and that's it.

formerd3db, HScoach,

What is unfortunate is that the awards become less special if the approach is to have some extra
chairs when the music stops. If you win the conference then those coaches and players should
be the selections. The OAC wanted to make everyone happy, not do what they should have.