FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[NCF]

The Purple Powers thing is strange to me.  Having seen so much of UWW and Mt- IMO the one thing that sets them apart from the other top teams in the country is execution more than anything else- and not talent. 

Everytime I watch UWW and MTU online or on TV (in the title game), I leave thinking there is an enormous talent gap between them and the rest of Division III.  In my opinion the two powers have more "scholarship-caliber" kids across the board (offense, defense, special teams) than other teams. 

Don't get me wrong, they both execute extremely well, but I think UW-Whitewater and Mount Union get off the bus with the best players week after week (including the playoffs).

In recent years it has seemed like NCC is really closing the talent gap with the big two...but I don't think the Cards have ever pulled even.  Certainly heading in the right direction though.

I guess some of this comes down to how we individually define talent. From a purely physical perspective I just don't buy into the idea that UWW gets off the bus w more talent - at least not week after week. Look at Wesley- that team always has super physical talent. UWW has beaten them by wide margins in the playoffs - why?

IMO most of Mt's teams were more physically talented than UWW's. Like Warhawd Dad said, there is a lot to it.

Just a few thoughts for discussion: team chemistry, confidence, attitude, execution.

[New Tradition]

Scottie Williams featured in Around the Midwest.  Really neat article.

http://d3football.com/columns/around-the-region/midwest/2012/the-humble-big-man-on-campus

[02 Warhawk]

The Purple Powers thing is strange to me.  Having seen so much of UWW and Mt- IMO the one thing that sets them apart from the other top teams in the country is execution more than anything else- and not talent. 

Everytime I watch UWW and MTU online or on TV (in the title game), I leave thinking there is an enormous talent gap between them and the rest of Division III.  In my opinion the two powers have more "scholarship-caliber" kids across the board (offense, defense, special teams) than other teams. 

Don't get me wrong, they both execute extremely well, but I think UW-Whitewater and Mount Union get off the bus with the best players week after week (including the playoffs).

In recent years it has seemed like NCC is really closing the talent gap with the big two...but I don't think the Cards have ever pulled even.  Certainly heading in the right direction though.

I guess some of this comes down to how we individually define talent. From a purely physical perspective I just don't buy into the idea that UWW gets off the bus w more talent - at least not week after week. Look at Wesley- that team always has super physical talent. UWW has beaten them by wide margins in the playoffs - why?

IMO most of Mt's teams were more physically talented than UWW's. Like Warhawd Dad said, there is a lot to it.

Just a few thoughts for discussion: team chemistry, confidence, attitude, execution.

Not to get Pat and Keith upset about revealing what's in Kickoff, but a great stat was posted there about teams that advance in the playoffs in relation to how balance their offensive attack is. If you bought Kickoff this year you'll know what I'm referring to.

The stat reveals that the closer a team can get to a 1:1 ratio of total yards rushing vs. total yards passing, the further that team will advance in the playoffs. The stat showed 16 playoff teams from last year, and it was spooky how almost all pass and run heavy teams lost in the first or second round. However, the teams that showed more balance consistently made deeper playoff runs. Then of course the two most balanced teams in the playoffs last year were (surprise, surprise) Mount Union and Whitewater.

That's why option teams (run heavy), along with Monmouth, Franklin and Dubuque (pass heavy) didn't fair so well in the playoffs in 2011.

I think NCC is at UWW's and UMU's level as far as running the ball and defense. However, if they can just establish more of a consistent passing attack, that will considerably close the gap in DIII powers. IMHO.

[matblake]

The Purple Powers thing is strange to me.  Having seen so much of UWW and Mt- IMO the one thing that sets them apart from the other top teams in the country is execution more than anything else- and not talent. 

Everytime I watch UWW and MTU online or on TV (in the title game), I leave thinking there is an enormous talent gap between them and the rest of Division III.  In my opinion the two powers have more "scholarship-caliber" kids across the board (offense, defense, special teams) than other teams. 

Don't get me wrong, they both execute extremely well, but I think UW-Whitewater and Mount Union get off the bus with the best players week after week (including the playoffs).

In recent years it has seemed like NCC is really closing the talent gap with the big two...but I don't think the Cards have ever pulled even.  Certainly heading in the right direction though.

I guess some of this comes down to how we individually define talent. From a purely physical perspective I just don't buy into the idea that UWW gets off the bus w more talent - at least not week after week. Look at Wesley- that team always has super physical talent. UWW has beaten them by wide margins in the playoffs - why?

IMO most of Mt's teams were more physically talented than UWW's. Like Warhawd Dad said, there is a lot to it.

Just a few thoughts for discussion: team chemistry, confidence, attitude, execution.

Not to get Pat and Keith upset about revealing what's in Kickoff, but a great stat was posted there about teams that advance in the playoffs in relation to how balance their offensive attack is. If you bought Kickoff this year you'll know what I'm referring to.

The stat reveals that the closer a team can get to a 1:1 ratio of total yards rushing vs. total yards passing, the further that team will advance in the playoffs. The stat showed all 32 teams from last year, and it was almost spooky how almost all pass and run heavy teams lost in the first or second round. However, the teams that showed more balance consistently made deeper playoff runs. Then of course the two most balanced teams in the playoffs last year were (surprise, surprise) Mount Union and Whitewater.

I think NCC is at UWW's and UMU's level as far as running the ball and defense. However, if they can just establish more of a consistent passing attack, that will considerably close the gap in DIII powers. IMHO.

I had forgotten about that from Kickoff already.  That was really interesting.

[Pat Coleman]

Glad you guys enjoyed that. The chart was one of the last things added to Kickoff.

[emma17]

OK Wally, we get that you think the CCIW sucks.

Yeah, that's not what I said and that's not what I think...and I think you know that. 

What I'd like to know is what conference(s) do you consider among the nation's elite?
I mean lets vanquish that (false) perception that many of us are apparently under. Give us some reality please.
I'm interested in your opinion.
Thanks.

See, it's not a question of which league is good and which league isn't.  The thing I'm trying to examine is why the polls so often value reputation over results with a specific focus on the teams in this league where, in my opinion, the reputation isn't quite fully supported by their on-field results.

Wally I appreciate your approach to this discussion- I think it's fair and thoughtful.
I'm one of the guilty ones that ranks the CCIW very highly year in and year out.  To be honest, the stats in your prior post regarding the CCIW's performance against better conferences surprised me. 

After some thought I realized the answer for me at least, comes back to the idea of quality losses and outlying losses.  UWEC lost to St. Thomas and St. John-is their 0-2 start indicative of a bad team- hardly.  The same holds true for the CCIW.  So many teams get blown out of the water in non conference games.  Whether it be in the regular season or the playoffs, for the most part a CCIW team is going to give their opponent a tough game.  It's hard to find examples of a CCIW team getting beat badly in a non-con or playoff game.  Granted some of the lower level CCIW's are playing an easier non-con schedule- but in those games they more than hold their own.  Additionally, I believe in outlying losses- the types of losses that occur that just don't fit with the true team.  This will raise objections I know, but IMO if every NCC game this year was against La Crosse, NCC would finish with a 9-1 record. 

At the end of the day, to me it's more about knowing you'll get a quality game (meaning the outcome will be in doubt into the 4th qrtr) from the majority of teams within a conference than it is about their overall wins and losses.             

[Gregory Sager]

Since 2009, the league is 74-22 in non league games (including playoffs) which is awesome.  There's certainly nothing that I or anybody else can say to dispute that.  However, 65% of those wins have been accumulated against teams that play in the MIAA, NathCon, and UMAC.  All conferences that, without spoiling subscription content, are ranked very, very low by the experts at this site.  The CCIW's gaudy record has been built on a steady diet of decidedly lesser competition.

Instead of parceling out selected bits of information that buttress your argument, which is the way that politicians, opinion journalists, and other people of questionable moral fiber make their cases, give us all the information, please. Let's see a full breakdown of the CCIW's non-conference record on a league-by-league basis since 2009.

	win	loss
HCAC	1	1
IIAC	7	6
MIAA	26	3
MIAC	2	1
MWC	4	2
NathCon	16	3
NCAC	1	1
non-D3	2	0
OAC	1	1
SCIAC	1	1
UAA	3	1
UMAC	6	0
WIAC	4	3

Thanks for doing this, Wally. I just think it's important to have all of the facts on the table in a discussion like this.

[bleedpurple]

OK Wally, we get that you think the CCIW sucks.

Yeah, that's not what I said and that's not what I think...and I think you know that. 

What I'd like to know is what conference(s) do you consider among the nation's elite?
I mean lets vanquish that (false) perception that many of us are apparently under. Give us some reality please.
I'm interested in your opinion.
Thanks.

See, it's not a question of which league is good and which league isn't.  The thing I'm trying to examine is why the polls so often value reputation over results with a specific focus on the teams in this league where, in my opinion, the reputation isn't quite fully supported by their on-field results.

Wally I appreciate your approach to this discussion- I think it's fair and thoughtful.
I'm one of the guilty ones that ranks the CCIW very highly year in and year out.  To be honest, the stats in your prior post regarding the CCIW's performance against better conferences surprised me. 

After some thought I realized the answer for me at least, comes back to the idea of quality losses and outlying losses.  UWEC lost to St. Thomas and St. John-is their 0-2 start indicative of a bad team- hardly.  The same holds true for the CCIW.  So many teams get blown out of the water in non conference games.  Whether it be in the regular season or the playoffs, for the most part a CCIW team is going to give their opponent a tough game.  It's hard to find examples of a CCIW team getting beat badly in a non-con or playoff game.  Granted some of the lower level CCIW's are playing an easier non-con schedule- but in those games they more than hold their own.  Additionally, I believe in outlying losses- the types of losses that occur that just don't fit with the true team. This will raise objections I know, but IMO if every NCC game this year was against La Crosse, NCC would finish with a 9-1 record.

At the end of the day, to me it's more about knowing you'll get a quality game (meaning the outcome will be in doubt into the 4th qrtr) from the majority of teams within a conference than it is about their overall wins and losses.           

Wow. Would you feel the same way if LaCrosse was located in Illinois?  9-1 is a bit strong

[WarhawkDad]

OK Wally, we get that you think the CCIW sucks.

Yeah, that's not what I said and that's not what I think...and I think you know that. 

What I'd like to know is what conference(s) do you consider among the nation's elite?
I mean lets vanquish that (false) perception that many of us are apparently under. Give us some reality please.
I'm interested in your opinion.
Thanks.

See, it's not a question of which league is good and which league isn't.  The thing I'm trying to examine is why the polls so often value reputation over results with a specific focus on the teams in this league where, in my opinion, the reputation isn't quite fully supported by their on-field results.

Wally I appreciate your approach to this discussion- I think it's fair and thoughtful.
I'm one of the guilty ones that ranks the CCIW very highly year in and year out.  To be honest, the stats in your prior post regarding the CCIW's performance against better conferences surprised me. 

After some thought I realized the answer for me at least, comes back to the idea of quality losses and outlying losses.  UWEC lost to St. Thomas and St. John-is their 0-2 start indicative of a bad team- hardly.  The same holds true for the CCIW.  So many teams get blown out of the water in non conference games.  Whether it be in the regular season or the playoffs, for the most part a CCIW team is going to give their opponent a tough game.  It's hard to find examples of a CCIW team getting beat badly in a non-con or playoff game.  Granted some of the lower level CCIW's are playing an easier non-con schedule- but in those games they more than hold their own.  Additionally, I believe in outlying losses- the types of losses that occur that just don't fit with the true team. This will raise objections I know, but IMO if every NCC game this year was against La Crosse, NCC would finish with a 9-1 record.

At the end of the day, to me it's more about knowing you'll get a quality game (meaning the outcome will be in doubt into the 4th qrtr) from the majority of teams within a conference than it is about their overall wins and losses.           

Wow. Would you feel the same way if LaCrosse was located in Illinois?  9-1 is a bit strong

Wow, No matter how much I like and typically agree with Emma, seeing we are both FIB's and Fremd fans (high school) 9-1 is too strong.   More like 7-3. 

WarhawkDad

[NCF]

OK Wally, we get that you think the CCIW sucks.

Yeah, that's not what I said and that's not what I think...and I think you know that. 

What I'd like to know is what conference(s) do you consider among the nation's elite?
I mean lets vanquish that (false) perception that many of us are apparently under. Give us some reality please.
I'm interested in your opinion.
Thanks.

See, it's not a question of which league is good and which league isn't.  The thing I'm trying to examine is why the polls so often value reputation over results with a specific focus on the teams in this league where, in my opinion, the reputation isn't quite fully supported by their on-field results.

Wally I appreciate your approach to this discussion- I think it's fair and thoughtful.
I'm one of the guilty ones that ranks the CCIW very highly year in and year out.  To be honest, the stats in your prior post regarding the CCIW's performance against better conferences surprised me. 

After some thought I realized the answer for me at least, comes back to the idea of quality losses and outlying losses.  UWEC lost to St. Thomas and St. John-is their 0-2 start indicative of a bad team- hardly.  The same holds true for the CCIW.  So many teams get blown out of the water in non conference games.  Whether it be in the regular season or the playoffs, for the most part a CCIW team is going to give their opponent a tough game.  It's hard to find examples of a CCIW team getting beat badly in a non-con or playoff game.  Granted some of the lower level CCIW's are playing an easier non-con schedule- but in those games they more than hold their own.  Additionally, I believe in outlying losses- the types of losses that occur that just don't fit with the true team. This will raise objections I know, but IMO if every NCC game this year was against La Crosse, NCC would finish with a 9-1 record.

At the end of the day, to me it's more about knowing you'll get a quality game (meaning the outcome will be in doubt into the 4th qrtr) from the majority of teams within a conference than it is about their overall wins and losses.           

Wow. Would you feel the same way if LaCrosse was located in Illinois?  9-1 is a bit strong

Wow, No matter how much I like and typically agree with Emma, seeing we are both FIB's and Fremd fans (high school) 9-1 is too strong.   More like 7-3. 

WarhawkDad

If you watched the entire game, not just the highlights(or lowlights if your an NC fan ) 9-1 or 8-2 would be about right.

[lakeshore]

In last weekend's biggest upset, it seems as if Albion took advantage of a unique injury situation to Wheaton.  Per the Thunder roster and game stats...they were missing 4 All CCIW offensive players for that game, 3 of which were 1st team honorees.  That is a pretty big gap to fill for any team on any level.

QB Meador - 2011 1st Team
WR Hiben - 2011 1st Team
OL Randall - 2011 2nd Team
RB Velling - 2009 1st Team

[bleedpurple]

OK Wally, we get that you think the CCIW sucks.

Yeah, that's not what I said and that's not what I think...and I think you know that. 

What I'd like to know is what conference(s) do you consider among the nation's elite?
I mean lets vanquish that (false) perception that many of us are apparently under. Give us some reality please.
I'm interested in your opinion.
Thanks.

See, it's not a question of which league is good and which league isn't.  The thing I'm trying to examine is why the polls so often value reputation over results with a specific focus on the teams in this league where, in my opinion, the reputation isn't quite fully supported by their on-field results.

Wally I appreciate your approach to this discussion- I think it's fair and thoughtful.
I'm one of the guilty ones that ranks the CCIW very highly year in and year out.  To be honest, the stats in your prior post regarding the CCIW's performance against better conferences surprised me. 

After some thought I realized the answer for me at least, comes back to the idea of quality losses and outlying losses.  UWEC lost to St. Thomas and St. John-is their 0-2 start indicative of a bad team- hardly.  The same holds true for the CCIW.  So many teams get blown out of the water in non conference games.  Whether it be in the regular season or the playoffs, for the most part a CCIW team is going to give their opponent a tough game.  It's hard to find examples of a CCIW team getting beat badly in a non-con or playoff game.  Granted some of the lower level CCIW's are playing an easier non-con schedule- but in those games they more than hold their own.  Additionally, I believe in outlying losses- the types of losses that occur that just don't fit with the true team. This will raise objections I know, but IMO if every NCC game this year was against La Crosse, NCC would finish with a 9-1 record.

At the end of the day, to me it's more about knowing you'll get a quality game (meaning the outcome will be in doubt into the 4th qrtr) from the majority of teams within a conference than it is about their overall wins and losses.           

Wow. Would you feel the same way if LaCrosse was located in Illinois?  9-1 is a bit strong

Wow, No matter how much I like and typically agree with Emma, seeing we are both FIB's and Fremd fans (high school) 9-1 is too strong.   More like 7-3. 

WarhawkDad

If you watched the entire game, not just the highlights(or lowlights if your an NC fan ) 9-1 or 8-2 would be about right.

Interesting that you would project such consistency on a team that turned the ball over as much as NCC did that day.  The different perspectives are fun to explore on this board!

So what about the last couple of years?

What would NCC have been in 10 games against Wabash last year?  Redlands? UW-W in 2010?

The good news is that Emma now has no excuse to be Nervous Nellie during UWW-Lacrosse week this year.  And that's good because I think I may need help in calming other UW-W fans down during that week! 

[robertgoulet]

OK Wally, we get that you think the CCIW sucks.

Yeah, that's not what I said and that's not what I think...and I think you know that. 

What I'd like to know is what conference(s) do you consider among the nation's elite?
I mean lets vanquish that (false) perception that many of us are apparently under. Give us some reality please.
I'm interested in your opinion.
Thanks.

See, it's not a question of which league is good and which league isn't.  The thing I'm trying to examine is why the polls so often value reputation over results with a specific focus on the teams in this league where, in my opinion, the reputation isn't quite fully supported by their on-field results.

Wally I appreciate your approach to this discussion- I think it's fair and thoughtful.
I'm one of the guilty ones that ranks the CCIW very highly year in and year out.  To be honest, the stats in your prior post regarding the CCIW's performance against better conferences surprised me. 

After some thought I realized the answer for me at least, comes back to the idea of quality losses and outlying losses.  UWEC lost to St. Thomas and St. John-is their 0-2 start indicative of a bad team- hardly.  The same holds true for the CCIW.  So many teams get blown out of the water in non conference games.  Whether it be in the regular season or the playoffs, for the most part a CCIW team is going to give their opponent a tough game.  It's hard to find examples of a CCIW team getting beat badly in a non-con or playoff game.  Granted some of the lower level CCIW's are playing an easier non-con schedule- but in those games they more than hold their own.  Additionally, I believe in outlying losses- the types of losses that occur that just don't fit with the true team. This will raise objections I know, but IMO if every NCC game this year was against La Crosse, NCC would finish with a 9-1 record.

At the end of the day, to me it's more about knowing you'll get a quality game (meaning the outcome will be in doubt into the 4th qrtr) from the majority of teams within a conference than it is about their overall wins and losses.           

Wow. Would you feel the same way if LaCrosse was located in Illinois?  9-1 is a bit strong

Wow, No matter how much I like and typically agree with Emma, seeing we are both FIB's and Fremd fans (high school) 9-1 is too strong.   More like 7-3. 

WarhawkDad

If you watched the entire game, not just the highlights(or lowlights if your an NC fan ) 9-1 or 8-2 would be about right.

Interesting that you would project such consistency on a team that turned the ball over as much as NCC did that day.  The different perspectives are fun to explore on this board!

So what about the last couple of years?

What would NCC have been in 10 games against Wabash last year?  Redlands? UW-W in 2010?

The good news is that Emma now has no excuse to be Nervous Nellie during UWW-Lacrosse week this year.  And that's good because I think I may need help in calming other UW-W fans down during that week! 

7-3, 9-1, 4-6 

[NCF]

OK Wally, we get that you think the CCIW sucks.

Yeah, that's not what I said and that's not what I think...and I think you know that. 

What I'd like to know is what conference(s) do you consider among the nation's elite?
I mean lets vanquish that (false) perception that many of us are apparently under. Give us some reality please.
I'm interested in your opinion.
Thanks.

See, it's not a question of which league is good and which league isn't.  The thing I'm trying to examine is why the polls so often value reputation over results with a specific focus on the teams in this league where, in my opinion, the reputation isn't quite fully supported by their on-field results.

Wally I appreciate your approach to this discussion- I think it's fair and thoughtful.
I'm one of the guilty ones that ranks the CCIW very highly year in and year out.  To be honest, the stats in your prior post regarding the CCIW's performance against better conferences surprised me. 

After some thought I realized the answer for me at least, comes back to the idea of quality losses and outlying losses.  UWEC lost to St. Thomas and St. John-is their 0-2 start indicative of a bad team- hardly.  The same holds true for the CCIW.  So many teams get blown out of the water in non conference games.  Whether it be in the regular season or the playoffs, for the most part a CCIW team is going to give their opponent a tough game.  It's hard to find examples of a CCIW team getting beat badly in a non-con or playoff game.  Granted some of the lower level CCIW's are playing an easier non-con schedule- but in those games they more than hold their own.  Additionally, I believe in outlying losses- the types of losses that occur that just don't fit with the true team. This will raise objections I know, but IMO if every NCC game this year was against La Crosse, NCC would finish with a 9-1 record.

At the end of the day, to me it's more about knowing you'll get a quality game (meaning the outcome will be in doubt into the 4th qrtr) from the majority of teams within a conference than it is about their overall wins and losses.           

Wow. Would you feel the same way if LaCrosse was located in Illinois?  9-1 is a bit strong

Wow, No matter how much I like and typically agree with Emma, seeing we are both FIB's and Fremd fans (high school) 9-1 is too strong.   More like 7-3. 

WarhawkDad

If you watched the entire game, not just the highlights(or lowlights if your an NC fan ) 9-1 or 8-2 would be about right.

Interesting that you would project such consistency on a team that turned the ball over as much as NCC did that day.  The different perspectives are fun to explore on this board!

So what about the last couple of years?

What would NCC have been in 10 games against Wabash last year?  Redlands? UW-W in 2010?

The good news is that Emma now has no excuse to be Nervous Nellie during UWW-Lacrosse week this year.  And that's good because I think I may need help in calming other UW-W fans down during that week! 

I would think they wouldn't turn the ball over six times or more on a regular basis. I've never (in the four years I have been following the team at least) seen the offense perform so poorly as they did in the first game. I admit to being a homer, so I guess I would almost always give the benefit of the doubt to my team. I didn't get to see the Redlands game last year, so I can't comment. Watching the end of the Wabash game was pure hell, so maybe 6-4 or even 5-5. 

[ncc58]

OK Wally, we get that you think the CCIW sucks.

Yeah, that's not what I said and that's not what I think...and I think you know that. 

What I'd like to know is what conference(s) do you consider among the nation's elite?
I mean lets vanquish that (false) perception that many of us are apparently under. Give us some reality please.
I'm interested in your opinion.
Thanks.

See, it's not a question of which league is good and which league isn't.  The thing I'm trying to examine is why the polls so often value reputation over results with a specific focus on the teams in this league where, in my opinion, the reputation isn't quite fully supported by their on-field results.

Wally I appreciate your approach to this discussion- I think it's fair and thoughtful.
I'm one of the guilty ones that ranks the CCIW very highly year in and year out.  To be honest, the stats in your prior post regarding the CCIW's performance against better conferences surprised me. 

After some thought I realized the answer for me at least, comes back to the idea of quality losses and outlying losses.  UWEC lost to St. Thomas and St. John-is their 0-2 start indicative of a bad team- hardly.  The same holds true for the CCIW.  So many teams get blown out of the water in non conference games.  Whether it be in the regular season or the playoffs, for the most part a CCIW team is going to give their opponent a tough game.  It's hard to find examples of a CCIW team getting beat badly in a non-con or playoff game.  Granted some of the lower level CCIW's are playing an easier non-con schedule- but in those games they more than hold their own.  Additionally, I believe in outlying losses- the types of losses that occur that just don't fit with the true team. This will raise objections I know, but IMO if every NCC game this year was against La Crosse, NCC would finish with a 9-1 record.

At the end of the day, to me it's more about knowing you'll get a quality game (meaning the outcome will be in doubt into the 4th qrtr) from the majority of teams within a conference than it is about their overall wins and losses.           

Wow. Would you feel the same way if LaCrosse was located in Illinois?  9-1 is a bit strong

Wow, No matter how much I like and typically agree with Emma, seeing we are both FIB's and Fremd fans (high school) 9-1 is too strong.   More like 7-3. 

WarhawkDad

If you watched the entire game, not just the highlights(or lowlights if your an NC fan ) 9-1 or 8-2 would be about right.

Interesting that you would project such consistency on a team that turned the ball over as much as NCC did that day.  The different perspectives are fun to explore on this board!

So what about the last couple of years?

What would NCC have been in 10 games against Wabash last year?  Redlands? UW-W in 2010?

The good news is that Emma now has no excuse to be Nervous Nellie during UWW-Lacrosse week this year.  And that's good because I think I may need help in calming other UW-W fans down during that week! 

I would think they wouldn't turn the ball over six times or more on a regular basis. I've never (in the four years I have been following the team at least) seen the offense perform so poorly as they did in the first game. I admit to being a homer, so I guess I would almost always give the benefit of the doubt to my team. I didn't get to see the Redlands game last year, so I can't comment. Watching the end of the Wabash game was pure hell, so maybe 6-4 or even 5-5. 

There were turnovers on five straight possessions on the 4th quarter, as least two of them (per Usee's previous analysis) were unforced. There were also penalties on punt returns that hopefully wouldn't be the norm.

NCC and Wabash were well matched last season. But there were odd plays and odd calls. I'd give NCC a 6-4 edge. The Redlands game had odd calls too, I'd give that a 7-3.

As far as NCC vs. 2010 UWW, UWW was/is at a different level. NCC would need to be perfect to win any games. I'd call that 2-8. And only if the games could be played at Whitewater. The seedings that year only riled up UWW.

Until a WIAC team actually beats UWW, I don't understand why any Warhawk fan would be a Nervous Nellie. As an NCC alum, I worry about  IWU and Wheaton, because those are the best coached teams in the conference. And Augie when the game is in Rock Island because, well, strange things have happened there.