FB: Ohio Athletic Conference

[Craft_Beermeister]

Jeffrey Zupanic had some interesting tweets today about Mount Union's football dominance during their 100 game regular season win streak.

Mount Union has played 6,000 minutes of football time during 100-game streak and trailed less than 35 minutes COMBINED.  The shortest UMU ever trailed during reg. season during streak was :18 against BW in 2010.  The longest Mount ever trailed in regular season during streak was for 9:42 against Heidelberg in 2012.  During 100 game winning streak from 2005-2015 & four years (2014, 2006-08) MTU never trailed in reg. Season.  During the win streak Mount has allowed 10 points or more 27 times; while recording a shutout 37 times.

[mr_mom]

A wild week, and a bad week to take the points, but a few folks did manage to do quite well.  OAC Pick-Em rookies MediaGuy and bluestreak66 led with 14 and 13 points respectively.

And now it's a party!  One person who didn't do as well this week was our leader 02 Warhawk who has come back to the pack, now leading by a single point.  With three weeks to go, it's anyone's game.

Week #9 spreads will come out Monday night.

[Sir Battlescars]

Heidelberg's Donteea Dye's first career NFL Catch was a 7 yard TD today vs. the Redskins.

[Dr. Acula]

The JV Raiders beat Ashland today 35-16 to remain perfect at 6-0.  They finish up their season next Sunday against Bethany.

[SaintsFAN]

The highly touted RJ3 kid got his first start at ONU today and he didn't disappoint based on the stat line.  Wonder if Freed got hurt or what prompted the change.  I'm out of the loop.

Saw that - after a few years of being limited because of the QB in Ada (I recall a HScoach post about it), sounds like Coach Paul has a nice problem of having two guys with loads of potential and at least three years to use them.

For this reason, I feel like ONU is on their way back up the OAC ladder.

[mr_mom]

Heidelberg's Donteea Dye's first career NFL Catch was a 7 yard TD today vs. the Redskins.

Saw that (living near DC) but had to temper my enthusiasm as my son is a big DC (and Pierre Garcon) fan.

Having two OAC alums in a game was standard normal until Fletcher retired.  So congrats to Mr. Dye!  Another red-letter day for the OAC.

[SaintsFAN]

I hate to admit that when I saw the headline "Mount hits 100," I thought that they had scored 100 on Wilmington.

Can you imagine the scores if Mount played the starters all 4 qtrs and didn't attempt FG on first down inside the 30?

It's AWFULLY hard to put 100 on the board, in my opinion.. And we tried to against MSJ in 2012 with a talent disparity between the two schools which is similar to say UMU and Etta).  We were throwing bombs and completing them in the fourth Q up 75-6.  The reasoning behind it was MSJ completely disrespecting TMC in social media and "stomping" the midfield logo prior to the game.  I was 10 feet away from our HC when he said they were going for the C-note prior to the Kickoff. 

There were three penalties which brought TD's back on drives that yielded no points.  I thought that 75 would stand as a school record for a long time, then came Hanover this year and TM had a QB making his first start and needed him to get seasoned so they sat the starter.  84 points in your first career start is not bad.  . Even cooler was the fact they scored 12 TDs on a day they were honoring their teammate, Mitch Kramer, who was killed in a crash on the night before the first day of classes.  He wore #12.

[SaintsFAN]

I have to respect the Wilmington kids for even taking the field every week knowing the eventual outcome.  Perhaps a change of conference would put them in a better situation, but the factors involved in changing are very difficult.  First, someone has to have room or want them, then travel becomes an issue, plus many other decisions and discussions have to take place.  I would like to know Pat and Keith's opinion on what conference may be a good match for them.

I just wonder how many players would continue to go out and get hammered every Saturday.  That takes character and guts, sometimes more character and guts than someone who wins even 50% of the time. So, I give them a thumbs up and hope they stay healthy and don't lose their love for this great game.

I would think if that's what they chose the best fit is where they came from...the HCAC.  I have no idea why they left so maybe it's not even an option.  It would certainly be better for their football program today though.  They're 1-50 in OAC play since 2010.  We have to remember though that Berg was nearly that bad prior to Hallett and I'd argue that Wilm geographically is better off than Berg for recruiting.  Someone has to finish last, but I just wish those bottom teams were at least somewhat competitive.

They are getting murdered on the recruiting trail in Cincinnati/Northern Ky.  This has killed Hanover and to a lesser extent, Mount St Joe as well.  It's not just one school doing it - just in the OAC; ONU and Heidelberg both have HC's who have very good relationships with the Coaches in the area.  Wittenberg does well in Cincy as well. 

Thomas More has a Senior WR who transferred in this year and cracked the rotation (he's 6'5" and his brother was a very good hoops player at Xavier).  Seeing this made me wonder how many of their kids transfer annually or just decide to give up the sport.  The attrition numbers must be really high. 

I'm happy for the kid winning his first 8 games this year (and hope he gets to feel what it's like to go 10-0)

[Desertraider]

I imagine it is hard to score 100 in a game. Granted - I last played in HS and us scoring more than 14 seemed almost impossible. But when your starters leave the game with 9 minutes until half-time and you still manage to go in up 56-0, 100 seems to be very possible. Anyway - I do feel for the Wilmington players. It has to suck knowing week in and week out that you (most weeks anyway) don't have a shot at being in the game. But I am more worried about the Raiders (i know "poor Mount Union and all your trophies and rings"). We have seen years like this where teams get steamrolled with ease all season and the first competitive game comes in the semis (some years not until the Stagg Bowl). I hate to say it but Mount needs good games from JCU, BW and Ott ( ) . Mount needs a test and ONU and Berg failed to provide one.

[Raider 68]

I imagine it is hard to score 100 in a game. Granted - I last played in HS and us scoring more than 14 seemed almost impossible. But when your starters leave the game with 9 minutes until half-time and you still manage to go in up 56-0, 100 seems to be very possible. Anyway - I do feel for the Wilmington players. It has to suck knowing week in and week out that you (most weeks anyway) don't have a shot at being in the game. But I am more worried about the Raiders (i know "poor Mount Union and all your trophies and rings"). We have seen years like this where teams get steamrolled with ease all season and the first competitive game comes in the semis (some years not until the Stagg Bowl). I hate to say it but Mount needs good games from JCU, BW and Ott ( ) . Mount needs a test and ONU and Berg failed to provide one.

IMHO, The Raiders will not be tested until the playoffs. The North region has some teams who are playing pretty well this year
Wabash, Wheaton  and others like Thomas More, Johns Hopkins could move North. The question will be the slotting for
the payoffs and who will make up the bracket. With Wesley undefeated, they will probably be seed #1 in the East if they
win out. Mount will be in the North unless the NCAA changes the slotting around which they have done in prior years.

[ExTartanPlayer]

IMHO, The Raiders will not be tested until the playoffs. The North region has some teams who are playing pretty well this year
Wabash, Wheaton  and others like Thomas More, Johns Hopkins could move North. The question will be the slotting for
the payoffs and who will make up the bracket. With Wesley undefeated, they will probably be seed #1 in the East if they
win out. Mount will be in the North unless the NCAA changes the slotting around which they have done in prior years.

Just a correction/clarification, the playoff brackets are not built by Region any more.  They're built around the four #1 seeds.  There is no "North region" or "East region" - there is the "Mount Union bracket" and the "Wesley bracket" and the "UMHB bracket."  It happens that mostly East teams will likely end up in the Wesley bracket, but that's probably about where the dedicaton to Region will end.  The North, West, and South teams will be all a-jumbled.

With UWW losing this year, it will be very interesting to see who ends up with the four top seeds.  Mount, UMHB, and Wesley would appear to be shoo-ins as long as they finish undefeated.  Will it go to Linfield?  Will UWO's win over UWW be the trump card?  Will UWO's NAIA loss count?  Because who gets that fourth #1 seed has the interesting trickle down effect to where we put the rest of the good teams seeded #2 and #3.  Wheaton, Wabash, Thomas More, and Johns Hopkins all are movable to more than one of those #1 seeds' brackets.

[jknezek]

To be fair, if Wesley is the 1 seed in one of the brackets almost the whole Eastern seaboard and west to Indiana is in play just for them. St Lawrence (upstate NY) is 454 miles, Guilford (NC) is 416, Mount Union is 405 miles. Done another way, just drawing a circle 450 miles around Wesley (leaving 50 miles for TES road following) creates a circle from the Maine border includes the rest of the north east, all of NY, PA, almost all of Ohio, all of VA and parts of NC.

That circle covers over half of what the UMU circle would cover, but between the two of them they would cover just about every plausible playoff school East of the MS and south of Chicago except Wash U (on the western side of the river), Berry, Maryville (520 miles to UMU), or Huntingdon.

As an interesting side note, there might not need to be a pure TX bracket this year. Hendrix is 480 miles from UMHB, but just over 500 miles to H-SU. Huntingdon/Maryville and Berry also form an interesting first round coupling, although Berry lost to Maryville Week 1.

[hopefan]

ok... football rules question to the OAC experts... from a basketball guy..

on one of the BIG games on TV, two weekends ago, a game was won on a fake field goal play... the ball was snapped to the holder, the kicker took off, the holder passed it to the kicker who ran around the left side for a touchdown...

here is my question.. the holder never rose off the ground with the ball to make the play.. his knee was clearly in contact with the ground until after he threw the ball... I thought, in college, that contact with the ground with, for instance, with the knee, meant you were DOWN, the play is dead...  where am I wrong? (I usually am).. why was this a legal play, or was there an error?  The play was not even reviewed, but I'm curious about the rule....

Thanks for any explanation...

[SaintsFAN]

ok... football rules question to the OAC experts... from a basketball guy..

on one of the BIG games on TV, two weekends ago, a game was won on a fake field goal play... the ball was snapped to the holder, the kicker took off, the holder passed it to the kicker who ran around the left side for a touchdown...

here is my question.. the holder never rose off the ground with the ball to make the play.. his knee was clearly in contact with the ground until after he threw the ball... I thought, in college, that contact with the ground with, for instance, with the knee, meant you were DOWN, the play is dead...  where am I wrong? (I usually am).. why was this a legal play, or was there an error?  The play was not even reviewed, but I'm curious about the rule....

Thanks for any explanation...

Not exactly sure but I know the holder is the only player allowed to have his knee on the ground because of the nature of what he's usually doing.  He's exempt from that rule initially at the snap.

[Desertraider]

ok... football rules question to the OAC experts... from a basketball guy..

on one of the BIG games on TV, two weekends ago, a game was won on a fake field goal play... the ball was snapped to the holder, the kicker took off, the holder passed it to the kicker who ran around the left side for a touchdown...

here is my question.. the holder never rose off the ground with the ball to make the play.. his knee was clearly in contact with the ground until after he threw the ball... I thought, in college, that contact with the ground with, for instance, with the knee, meant you were DOWN, the play is dead...  where am I wrong? (I usually am).. why was this a legal play, or was there an error?  The play was not even reviewed, but I'm curious about the rule....

Thanks for any explanation...

Not exactly sure but I know the holder is the only player allowed to have his knee on the ground because of the nature of what he's usually doing.  He's exempt from that rule initially at the snap.

The way I had always understood was the holder was exempt - otherwise when he fielded the snap the play would be dead. However, if his knee comes up and then returns to the ground (which I have seen happen) the play is dead.