FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[79jaybird]

D306- Millikin traditionally has had a solid defense that loves to hit and play solid football.  Since Wallick graduated, the problem for Millikin has been on offense.  The trend has been for the defense to keep the team in the game, and the offense not executing (turnovers or just not getting the first down).  Doug Neibuhr is a solid coach and I know he will have the Big Blue ready for the game.  The Loras debacle really surprised me last week as I thought MU was going to win that game.

Wow, a lot of back & forth with the Carthage game.  Seems to me Carthage played a solid opening day game and IMO, leave it at that.  They are 1-0 and off to a good start like many of the other CCIW teams.  Hope is a pretty good team and to score 70 points against a good---great team, tells me that your offense had a pretty good afternoon.

Congratulations to the CCIW Players of the Week and to Randy Wright for Elmhurst.  In the rain soaked mess, Randy was all over the field, and seemed to be in the Olivet huddle on numerous occasions.  I was surprised Olivet didn't try to keep their FB focused on Wright, because there were a few plays that the Comet RB or QB had no chance.

[Gregory Sager]

Hey, you can't delete a post that I am responding to!  Well, I guess you can, but it makes it harder for me to disagree! 

Usee.....are you kidding?  Have you ever played on slippery field?  Ittersagen didn't need any blocking because the tacklers got no footing to make the play.  On a wet slippery field the runner has a huge advantage because he is NOT in react mode...he dictating play by what he is proacively doing.  The kicking team must react and shift their weight quickly which causes footing issues.  Watch the tape.   It is my opinion that Bethel was the superior team and they would have won on a reasonable field.  You don't want to share that opinion because you are a Wheaton loyalist,, but so am I and I think got lucky with a wet field of play.  My opinion.....and by the way, it was the opinion of the people around me.   

Breach of etiquette!  Breach of CCIW post argument etiquette!  Both sides must go at least 3 posts before someone declares the "watch the tape" end all statement.

I always love the "watch the tape" argument.  So definitive... so "no need trying to continue the argument - it's over."

Right up there with the "I dare you", "I double-dog dare you", and the grand daddy of them all - "I triple-dog dare you."

cciw would have won the argument had he allowed it to go one more round.

I agree that "watch the tape" is the d3boards.com version of Godwin's Law. I guess that that means that a response along the lines of "If you watch the tape of the game and you still disagree with me, you're as evil as Hitler!" constitutes our version of a Double Godwin.

[usee]

Hey, you can't delete a post that I am responding to!  Well, I guess you can, but it makes it harder for me to disagree! 

Usee.....are you kidding?  Have you ever played on slippery field?  Ittersagen didn't need any blocking because the tacklers got no footing to make the play.  On a wet slippery field the runner has a huge advantage because he is NOT in react mode...he dictating play by what he is proacively doing.  The kicking team must react and shift their weight quickly which causes footing issues.  Watch the tape.   It is my opinion that Bethel was the superior team and they would have won on a reasonable field.  You don't want to share that opinion because you are a Wheaton loyalist,, but so am I and I think got lucky with a wet field of play.  My opinion.....and by the way, it was the opinion of the people around me.   

Breach of etiquette!  Breach of CCIW post argument etiquette!  Both sides must go at least 3 posts before someone declares the "watch the tape" end all statement.

I always love the "watch the tape" argument.  So definitive... so "no need trying to continue the argument - it's over."

Right up there with the "I dare you", "I double-dog dare you", and the grand daddy of them all - "I triple-dog dare you."

cciw would have won the argument had he allowed it to go one more round.

I agree that "watch the tape" is the d3boards.com version of Godwin's Law. I guess that that means that a response along the lines of "If you watch the tape of the game and you still disagree with me, you're as evil as Hitler!" constitutes our version of a Double Godwin.

Very sophisticated as usual Greg. Kind of reminds of many similar arguments on CCIW chat including a very controversial game last year at the crackerbox. (not to bring up a sore subject but it seemed apropos).

Q has a policy that after 5 posts he moves on. My threshold is 5 pages which is dangerously close.

[Gregory Sager]

Anybody care to give me the lowdown on Milliken and the area.
Will be coming into town Friday night. Were do we eat and catch a Friday night game on the big screen?

Champaign-Urbana.

[Gregory Sager]

The kick team fell down all over the place while Pete just ran.  Eleven fumbles, a runback with the block on, the best athletes on the field cannot change direction without falling down,

So Pete Ittersagen, who obviously didn't fall down on the runback, wasn't one of the best athletes on the field during that kick return?

(Hey, why should Mugsy, ThunderStones, cardinalfan, and usee be the only ones who get to shoot the fish in the barrel?)

Very sophisticated as usual Greg. Kind of reminds of many similar arguments on CCIW chat including a very controversial game last year at the crackerbox. (not to bring up a sore subject but it seemed apropos).

Well, I don't think that the Nazi Party accepts African-Americans as members, but I have seen tape of Mau Cason at a table at Chicago Brauhaus wolfing down schnitzel and Spaten and enjoying the Oktoberfest Band's oompah version of "Ein Prosit" while sitting next to some suspicious-looking old men who were wearing monocles.

Q has a policy that after 5 posts he moves on. My threshold is 5 pages which is dangerously close.

I, on the other hand, am proud to claim this as my family crest:

[redman04]

Hey, you can't delete a post that I am responding to!  Well, I guess you can, but it makes it harder for me to disagree! 

Usee.....are you kidding?  Have you ever played on slippery field?  Ittersagen didn't need any blocking because the tacklers got no footing to make the play.  On a wet slippery field the runner has a huge advantage because he is NOT in react mode...he dictating play by what he is proacively doing.  The kicking team must react and shift their weight quickly which causes footing issues.  Watch the tape.   It is my opinion that Bethel was the superior team and they would have won on a reasonable field.  You don't want to share that opinion because you are a Wheaton loyalist,, but so am I and I think got lucky with a wet field of play.  My opinion.....and by the way, it was the opinion of the people around me.   

Breach of etiquette!  Breach of CCIW post argument etiquette!  Both sides must go at least 3 posts before someone declares the "watch the tape" end all statement.

I always love the "watch the tape" argument.  So definitive... so "no need trying to continue the argument - it's over."

Right up there with the "I dare you", "I double-dog dare you", and the grand daddy of them all - "I triple-dog dare you."

cciw would have won the argument had he allowed it to go one more round.

I agree that "watch the tape" is the d3boards.com version of Godwin's Law. I guess that that means that a response along the lines of "If you watch the tape of the game and you still disagree with me, you're as evil as Hitler!" constitutes our version of a Double Godwin.

I tried to watch the tape, but all I could get was Bethel Head Coach Steve Johnson's Post Game interview....
I think the reporter asked him about the punt return in question.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_N1OjGhIFc

[Gregory Sager]

Hey, you can't delete a post that I am responding to!  Well, I guess you can, but it makes it harder for me to disagree! 

Usee.....are you kidding?  Have you ever played on slippery field?  Ittersagen didn't need any blocking because the tacklers got no footing to make the play.  On a wet slippery field the runner has a huge advantage because he is NOT in react mode...he dictating play by what he is proacively doing.  The kicking team must react and shift their weight quickly which causes footing issues.  Watch the tape.   It is my opinion that Bethel was the superior team and they would have won on a reasonable field.  You don't want to share that opinion because you are a Wheaton loyalist,, but so am I and I think got lucky with a wet field of play.  My opinion.....and by the way, it was the opinion of the people around me.   

Breach of etiquette!  Breach of CCIW post argument etiquette!  Both sides must go at least 3 posts before someone declares the "watch the tape" end all statement.

I always love the "watch the tape" argument.  So definitive... so "no need trying to continue the argument - it's over."

Right up there with the "I dare you", "I double-dog dare you", and the grand daddy of them all - "I triple-dog dare you."

cciw would have won the argument had he allowed it to go one more round.

I agree that "watch the tape" is the d3boards.com version of Godwin's Law. I guess that that means that a response along the lines of "If you watch the tape of the game and you still disagree with me, you're as evil as Hitler!" constitutes our version of a Double Godwin.

I tried to watch the tape, but all I could was Bethel Head Coach Steve Johnson's Post Game interview....
I think the reporter asked him about the punt return in question.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_N1OjGhIFc

That one never gets old. I could watch it over and over again. It ranks just below the infamous Lee Elia tirade of '83, a couple of Earl Weaver's old obscenity-laced umpire filibusters, and maybe a Bobby Knight postgame lunatic rant or two.

Twenty years from now it'll be the only thing that anyone remembers about Dennis Green.

[CardinalAlum]

Is cardinal alum a homer? 

To tell a family secret, my grandmother was Dutch!!   

[usee]

Very sophisticated as usual Greg. Kind of reminds of many similar arguments on CCIW chat including a very controversial game last year at the crackerbox. (not to bring up a sore subject but it seemed apropos).

Well, I don't think that the Nazi Party accepts African-Americans as members, but I have seen tape of Mau Cason at a table at Chicago Brauhaus wolfing down schnitzel and Spaten and enjoying the Oktoberfest Band's oompah version of "Ein Prosit" while sitting next to some suspicious-looking old men who were wearing monocles.

I just wish more people knew what we were talking about to really appreciate the genius of this post!

I guess that wasn't the best example but I will say in basketball you get a lot more of the "I was at the game underneath the basket and that was clearly a foul" or "I was sitting behind the bench and I heard the referee tell coach XXX he blew the call".

[Mugsy]

Mugsy and usee....

You guys are such homers.  I am s former Crusader, but I try to be objective.  Sure, the reason Pete could run one back with the block on was because of the field conditions.  Watch the film.  The kick team fell down all over the place while Pete just ran.  Eleven fumbles, a runback with the block on, the best athletes on the field cannot change direction without falling down, the team with a considerable advantage in stats loses the game....you tell me what happened.  Yes, it is my opinion that Bethel is a better team and it is a shame for the terrible field conditions (some poor design on the field to not get better drainage than that...ridiculous) to cost them the game.   

No argument here... I'm a homer.  So is virtually everyone who posts here.

So where did I say in any post that Wheaton was a better team?  Where was I void of any thread of objectivity?  

I merely stated that I don't think you can get an accurate gauge of the level to which one team was better than the other given the field conditions.  You began spouting some of the stats of where Bethel out performed Wheaton and then posted again and again (and again) how Ittersagen was lucky on his return.  

Honestly... some people hang on to stats way too much.  Here are 2 of the most important stats of the game.  Bethel was a minus 2 on turnovers and scored 3 less points than Wheaton.  Bethel had turnovers at key points in the game when they had a chance to take control of the game.  When top 20 teams play against each other, turnovers play a key role in the outcome.  Was it luck or did Bethel fail to execute?  Sure Wheaton's offense was horrible and Bethel's defense looked great.  I never disagreed that Bethel had some outstanding talent and speed on their defense.  They stuffed Wheaton at the point of attack.  But Wheaton won the game on defense and special teams.

I just love the picture of ineptness you give regarding Bethel's punt coverage.  Why didn't Wheaton have problems covering punts?  Why weren't there several more punts returned?  Why weren't there more TD's because the defensive players were just falling down due to the field conditions and offensive players "know where they are going?"  Oh... that's right... it's because I'm a homer and I didn't watch the film.

I can just see it...

[Punt Coverage Team]:  "Sorry coach, it was really slippery out there and we just fell down."
[Special Teams Coach]:  "Well that's alright son, it's really wet out there.  I didn't expect you guys to stay in your lanes, fight off blocks, breakdown and make a tackle.  Besides... the return guy got lucky."

BTW: I just love the title of your original post - "Wheaton - Bethel Game Almost Meaningless".  Really?  It counts as one win or one loss to a team.  Furthermore it could have significant ramifications on playoff seeding or if a team even makes the playoffs.  The game was very meaningful, just like any game.

[letsplay2]

CCIW... that's funny because I was at the game and talked to Bethel fans afterwards who did not feel they lost because of the weather, but because they did not execute when they needed to like Wheaton did.  That seems to imply that Wheaton was the superior team because they did what Bethel couldn't.  If you argue that Bethel dominated the game statistically, you are completely oblivious to what is always important in games played under conditions like that; special teams and turnovers.  Usee already posted it but both teams were identical in total yards at 273 a piece, and wheaton was +2 in turnovers.  also, if Bethel was the superior team, why wasn't wheaton falling down as much as they supposedly were? I've always connected athleticism with being able to stay on your feet... don't think i'm that far off with that. 

[Mugsy]

CCIW... that's funny because I was at the game and talked to Bethel fans afterwards who did not feel they lost because of the weather, but because they did not execute when they needed to like Wheaton did.  That seems to imply that Wheaton was the superior team because they did what Bethel couldn't.  If you argue that Bethel dominated the game statistically, you are completely oblivious to what is always important in games played under conditions like that; special teams and turnovers.  Usee already posted it but both teams were identical in total yards at 273 a piece, and wheaton was +2 in turnovers.  also, if Bethel was the superior team, why wasn't wheaton falling down as much as they supposedly were? I've always connected athleticism with being able to stay on your feet... don't think i'm that far off with that. 

Great athletes are only great when it isn't raining.

[redman04]

[quote author=Mugsy link=topic=4077.msg938315#msg938315
BTW: I just love the title of your original post - "Wheaton - Bethel Game Almost Meaningless".  Really?  It counts as one win or one loss to a team.  Furthermore it could have significant ramifications on playoff seeding or if a team even makes the playoffs.  The game was very meaningful, just like any game.
[/quote]

Does that bring up the old debate.... Pre-season games vs Non Conf schedules?

[Mugsy]

BTW: I just love the title of your original post - "Wheaton - Bethel Game Almost Meaningless".  Really?  It counts as one win or one loss to a team.  Furthermore it could have significant ramifications on playoff seeding or if a team even makes the playoffs.  The game was very meaningful, just like any game.

Does that bring up the old debate.... Pre-season games vs Non Conf schedules?

Oh no... I'll retract my post before usee reads it if you retract your post.   

[usee]

BTW: I just love the title of your original post - "Wheaton - Bethel Game Almost Meaningless".  Really?  It counts as one win or one loss to a team.  Furthermore it could have significant ramifications on playoff seeding or if a team even makes the playoffs.  The game was very meaningful, just like any game.

Does that bring up the old debate.... Pre-season games vs Non Conf schedules?

Oh no... I'll retract my post before usee reads it if you retract your post.   

Too late.  8)