FB: Ohio Athletic Conference

[MUC57]

SaintsFAN

Good to hear from you. It's fun playing someone for the 1st time. Never are quite sure what to expect. Your comments certainly help us understand our opponent better. And, Go Raiders. 😃 🏈

[Kira & Jaxon's Dad]

I, too, was disappointed by the second unit' performance against Centre, but perhaps the quality of the opponent was superior to what the second unit usually faces.  Playoff rosters do limit substitutions, however, Centre seemed like they forgot they brought second team offensive players.  Perhaps they wanted to make the score look respectable in the end,  which they did.  But, I felt the onside kick after VK called off the dogs and allowed them a big half was inexcusable from the my perspective.  It spat into the face of sportsmanship, IMO. The Centre article on the school site was laughable, but it is the job of the SID to put a positive spin on it, and he surely did a great job of that.  Will be interesting if the teams meet again with the same coaches at the helm.

This may be the first time in history a team that had a 51-0 lead in a half comes into the next game between the teams with revenge on their minds. 

But I do understand exactly what you are saying about the onside kick.  I know much is often made about running up the score (including by myself in blatant "Caruso type" cases).  Because there is something to be said for knowing how to win.  However, there is something to be said for losing well, also. If you are getting pounded and you want the team in the lead to call off the dogs, it's incumbent for you to play the game a certain way as well. Run simple pass routes and don't try to embarrass the young players on the team in the lead. Don't do an onside kick. Play defense straight up and don't put nine men in the box and have first string linebackers take pot shots at running backs on a team trying to do you the service of getting through the game with fewer points being scored. Don't call timeouts. Obviously, the coach who is getting blown out has every right to ignore everything I just typed.  Just don't then expect the team in the lead to play nice.

Great Take on this.

[HScoach]

Maybe I'm completely on glue, but I have no problem with Centre keeping their starters on the field in a playoff game against the team everyone outside of UWW or MHB is afraid of.  They were on a historic run and wanted to measure themselves against the best.  No shame in that.  Besides, they were already playing with their 2nd string QB that will be next year's starter with Tanner Young graduating.  What better way to get the kid some confidence and experience heading into next season than doing so against Mount, even if it is the 2nd unit. 

Do you expect them to pull everyone at halftime to match Mount and lessen their chance at building some kind of goodwill for the off season?  A team in the position of Centre heading into this game is 1st happy to be there, 2nd hoping to not be embarrassed and 3rd wanting to gauge their team and learn something for the future.  They succeeded on all 3.

If they pull the starters which means their now on the 3rd QB,  they're likely looking at score worse than 51-7.  What benefit is there in that?

If this was a mid-season game I'd feel differently as you could get someone injured during scrub time that would adversely impact your entire season, but we're talking week 12.  There is no next game.  Only next season.  And the primary goal for Centre's coaches once winning this game was gone was to think long term.  And in my opinion they absolutely succeeded in that.  They head into the off season on an upswing mentally.   That's the best case scenario for a team that got completely owned in the first 30 minutes.

[wally_wabash]

Maybe I'm completely on glue, but I have no problem with Centre keeping their starters on the field in a playoff game against the team everyone outside of UWW or MHB is afraid of.  They were on a historic run and wanted to measure themselves against the best.  No shame in that.  Besides, they were already playing with their 2nd string QB that will be next year's starter with Tanner Young graduating.  What better way to get the kid some confidence and experience heading into next season than doing so against Mount, even if it is the 2nd unit. 

Do you expect them to pull everyone at halftime to match Mount and lessen their chance at building some kind of goodwill for the off season?  A team in the position of Centre heading into this game is 1st happy to be there, 2nd hoping to not be embarrassed and 3rd wanting to gauge their team and learn something for the future.  They succeeded on all 3.

If they pull the starters which means their now on the 3rd QB,  they're likely looking at score worse than 51-7.  What benefit is there in that?

If this was a mid-season game I'd feel differently as you could get someone injured during scrub time that would adversely impact your entire season, but we're talking week 12.  There is no next game.  Only next season.  And the primary goal for Centre's coaches once winning this game was gone was to think long term.  And in my opinion they absolutely succeeded in that.  They head into the off season on an upswing mentally.   That's the best case scenario for a team that got completely owned in the first 30 minutes.

Totally agreed.  I'm really not sure why there's so much offense being taken to Centre not quitting in an elimination situation. 

[SaintsFAN]

Maybe I'm completely on glue, but I have no problem with Centre keeping their starters on the field in a playoff game against the team everyone outside of UWW or MHB is afraid of.  They were on a historic run and wanted to measure themselves against the best.  No shame in that.  Besides, they were already playing with their 2nd string QB that will be next year's starter with Tanner Young graduating.  What better way to get the kid some confidence and experience heading into next season than doing so against Mount, even if it is the 2nd unit. 

Do you expect them to pull everyone at halftime to match Mount and lessen their chance at building some kind of goodwill for the off season?  A team in the position of Centre heading into this game is 1st happy to be there, 2nd hoping to not be embarrassed and 3rd wanting to gauge their team and learn something for the future.  They succeeded on all 3.

If they pull the starters which means their now on the 3rd QB,  they're likely looking at score worse than 51-7.  What benefit is there in that?

If this was a mid-season game I'd feel differently as you could get someone injured during scrub time that would adversely impact your entire season, but we're talking week 12.  There is no next game.  Only next season.  And the primary goal for Centre's coaches once winning this game was gone was to think long term.  And in my opinion they absolutely succeeded in that.  They head into the off season on an upswing mentally.   That's the best case scenario for a team that got completely owned in the first 30 minutes.

+K .. I agree completely.

Edit:  I'd also add its a completely different coaching job for Centre's staff in 2019 then if it had got worse than the 51-7 score.  They outplayed the #2's... who, lets face it, would have started for 90% of the rest of the Division in 2018 had they chosen a different school. 

[MUC57]

HScoach

I don't have a problem with Centre keeping the 1st stringers in for the reasons you mentioned. Good take by you on that. My problem is with how poorly Mount's backups played. Did you see LK walk down the sideline, say something to VK and then VK put the starters back in. Somebody else wasn't pleased. But his displeasure means more than mine.
This is past history now. Let's work on the Mules. Go Raiders! 😃 ❗️

[Kira & Jaxon's Dad]

I'm ok with Centre leaving their starters in and playing ball.

Not sure I agree with the onside kick.

Mount Union 2nds and 3rds should have played better.

[wally_wabash]

Not sure I agree with the onside kick.

Of course you don't.  But it's an elimination game.  Centre has pulled to within 16, so it's two possessions with 1:16 left.  The odds of forcing overtime there are slim for sure, but the chances are also definitely nonzero.  You don't stop trying to win the game at that point. 

[HScoach]

Not sure I agree with the onside kick.

Of course you don't.  But it's an elimination game.  Centre has pulled to within 16, so it's two possessions with 1:16 left.  The odds of forcing overtime there are slim for sure, but the chances are also definitely nonzero.  You don't stop trying to win the game at that point.

Exactly!  At that point in the game Centre had earned their way back to a chance, albeit really slim.  I have ZERO problem with the onside kick at that point. 

If they onside kick down 30 then I would feel differently.   But down only 2 scores after already scoring 4 times and Mount  showing they couldn't stop them?  Absolutely I'm onside kicking it at that point in the game.

[MUC57]

HScoach

I don't have a problem with Centre keeping the 1st stringers in for the reasons you mentioned. Good take by you on that. My problem is with how poorly Mount's backups played. Did you see LK walk down the sideline, say something to VK and then VK put the starters back in. Somebody else wasn't pleased. But his displeasure means more than mine.
This is past history now. Let's work on the Mules. Go Raiders! 😃 ❗️

The problem is not with Centre. The problem is with the Mount backups. See my post above.

[raiderguy]

Maybe I'm completely on glue, but I have no problem with Centre keeping their starters on the field in a playoff game against the team everyone outside of UWW or MHB is afraid of.  They were on a historic run and wanted to measure themselves against the best.  No shame in that.  Besides, they were already playing with their 2nd string QB that will be next year's starter with Tanner Young graduating.  What better way to get the kid some confidence and experience heading into next season than doing so against Mount, even if it is the 2nd unit. 

Do you expect them to pull everyone at halftime to match Mount and lessen their chance at building some kind of goodwill for the off season?  A team in the position of Centre heading into this game is 1st happy to be there, 2nd hoping to not be embarrassed and 3rd wanting to gauge their team and learn something for the future.  They succeeded on all 3.

If they pull the starters which means their now on the 3rd QB,  they're likely looking at score worse than 51-7.  What benefit is there in that?

If this was a mid-season game I'd feel differently as you could get someone injured during scrub time that would adversely impact your entire season, but we're talking week 12.  There is no next game.  Only next season.  And the primary goal for Centre's coaches once winning this game was gone was to think long term.  And in my opinion they absolutely succeeded in that.  They head into the off season on an upswing mentally.   That's the best case scenario for a team that got completely owned in the first 30 minutes.

Bingo! Right on the money!

[Kira & Jaxon's Dad]

So what's up with Ernie Banks? Lots of talk about him before the Denison game.  Then he doesn't see the field in the Centre game.  Injured?

[MUC57]

So what's up with Ernie Banks? Lots of talk about him before the Denison game.  Then he doesn't see the field in the Centre game.  Injured?

Injured? Yes!

[HScoach]

HScoach

I don't have a problem with Centre keeping the 1st stringers in for the reasons you mentioned. Good take by you on that. My problem is with how poorly Mount's backups played. Did you see LK walk down the sideline, say something to VK and then VK put the starters back in. Somebody else wasn't pleased. But his displeasure means more than mine.
This is past history now. Let's work on the Mules. Go Raiders! 😃 ❗️

The problem is not with Centre. The problem is with the Mount backups. See my post above.

I know.  I was responding to those that thought Centre didn't lose with dignity by simply rolling over like they should.

[Kira & Jaxon's Dad]

Next time MTU is in the situation they were in last weekend, they should just leave the starters in and score 100.