FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[vikes35]

The problem with Kansas State is Snyder never got the part of the memo that says once you start winning you should schedule harder teams. He was notorious for opening the season with games his 3rd string could have won. Spurrier also did it alot at Florida if I remember right. At least teams like Michigan schedule one tough game every year to start the season when they play Notre Dame (ND hasn't been the greatest of programs lately but at least it is a game you always have to show up to play in). USC also does that every year against ND for a rivalry game as well.

The problem that I have with all these bowls is that a bowl team that finishes 6-6 gives me the impression that they are mediorce, and if they are mediorce than that makes the bowl games mean less than if it was just the elite teams playing in them. The Minnesota/ UVA game that I saw very little of was 21-10  Minn. at half and they go on to lose it 34-31, I know I am less than impressed. The So. Carolina/ Missouri game as well as the UCLA/ Northwestern game also had huge collapses as well. While that might make for great drama and fun for some, I for one like the games that are close throughout and come down to a last second play that wins the game after each team showed up for 60 minutes. I mean how in the world does Northwestern allow 2 onside kicks to get returned for touchdowns. They can be great games and I am not against being able to watch extra football, I am merely saying that teams like Arkansas St from the Sun Belt and some of the other 6-5 teams that scrape their way in with under .500 conference records would not be in my bowl picture.  If they are going to have that many bowls maybe they could give the small schools and conferences better chances to get to those games and allow them the chance to shine, but these bowl games seem to end up in the hands of the big conferences (for example the Big 12 had 8 bowl teams this year) because of $$ and sponsors. I will continue to watch these games because I like CFB but I am saying that it seems to me that 28 bowls makes the exclusivity of being a bowl team fly right out the window, since it used to be that only great teams made bowls and good, average, and bad ones needed to improve, whereas with all these bowl games great, good, and average teams get to play and only bad ones really need work to become part of the bowl picture. As part of the D3 community we see 9-1 teams not make it and really good 8-2 teams not make it because our playoff means that you were part of the exclusive elite, I just wish that the bowl games would also be that way, but hopefully to a little bit lesser of an extent.

[formerd3db]

Now be careful there Vikes.   I agree with some of what you say, however, ...
some could accuse you that you're starting to be too picky - you can't have it both ways.  While I don't like 6-5 teams in bowl games either (but if they are going to be there - parity anyone??!! and it appears they will be for sometime), I would much rather see the bowl games that were today like Northwestern/UCLA and the Missouri/So. Carolina and the Minn/UVA  - very exciting and wild scoring as opposed to the the boring blowout that LSU did against Miami (although I must admit I was glad to see Miami get its tail kicked for once and put them back down to reality- such a renegade program as that has been over the years with regard to attitudes, it was good to see them get pummeled for once! )). At least people get their $'s worth seeing a bowl game like 3 out of the 4 were today. 

Yet I will agree that the Northwestern kicker that kicked the two onsides attempts that went for TD's against them was pathetic - I do feel sorry for him - but come on, how can one make that mistake twice like that?   Why would you even take a chance and kick it the same way, the same direction and to the same guy???.  With that, Northwestern didn't even deserve to win   I did like the lineman's interception for a TD though!!!  A once-in-a-lifetime dream for him - and in a bowl game no less!!!

[vikes35]

formerd3db,

I agree with the Miami/ LSU game not being a great game in that it was a blowout, I just really enjoy seeing the games where both team fight for 60 mins not where each team plays for 30 minutes like what it looked liked yesterday. If I had to take my pick I would choose the seesaw games over the blowout games as well. I just think that both games fail to give the excitement that comes from both teams working their tails off for 60 mins. All I was saying was that I wish bowl games were more exclusive then they are right now. It is great that these guys get that experience of going to a bowl game and I am glad that they do since it is afforded to them, it is just my opinion that because that happens so frequentely now (28 bowls and 56 teams) the bowl games tend to lose their shine that I think they once had. It is for that reason, and that reason alone, that I am in favor of the BCS, because at least those 4 bowl games mean that you did something special (for the most part since I understand the argument about the Big East and FSU this year). Those games are held up on a pedestal and it seems to me that is what the postseason should be about. It seems to me that the main change is that all teams (including the big conference teams and Notre Dame) in the past had to work to get to a bowl game as it was not guaranteed. Unfortunately now if you are an average team in a big conference you really have to "not screw up too bad" and you make one of the many bowls, something that I wish would change. I understand both sides of the argument I just wish that the post season meant more then it does right now.

[Pat Coleman]

Pat, when is the Pat Coleman Bowl? 

If I come up with $750,000 times two, I am not giving it to some Division I-A program, that's for sure.

[formerd3db]

vikes:
I know what you mean - again, I agree with most of what you mention.  I was just giving you some good-natured "hassling" and playing the "discussion" card.

Certainly, there are many changes that could be made to improve the system and a variety of ideas or ways to do that.  Yet, as we all know, those people and organizations that have control over these issues will do what they want in their own time.  Some changes will probably occur at some point in the future I'm sure, but who knows when that will be.  And like the aspects in the other divisions (such as DIII), obviously not everyone will be happy.  Perhaps the best way for any of us to view it in general, at least for the present, is at least there is a system for bowl games existing in the first place!  But that doesn't mean improvements can't be made - that's goes for anything in life, let alone college football.

Pat:
You are absolutely right about the $ in that situation!

BTW, what are your thoughts about Clark resigning again from your alma mater? (it sounds like either he desired moving on again since an opportunity came up, which one has to make a choice if that occurs; or he just wanted out for some reason).   Any news about who they are desirous of considering i.e. what direction they want to go?
     

[Pat Coleman]

I have no idea where they want to go at this point. The SID, AD, both basketball coaches and now the football coach have changed since I was last a regular visitor to campus ,so I have no idea.

I have heard that finances were an issue, that Clark was unable to find a reasonable house in the area and for that reason his family remained in Williamsburg, where Clark had coached William & Mary. Don't know if that's true but given real estate around here it seems reasonable. Given that, a coordinator position at Liberty, which is where he apparently went, is a better fit.

[formerd3db]

Pat:
Thanks for the follow-up on what you know and/or surmise.  Certainly understandable for those aspects regarding Clark if they came into play.  Also, who knows, perhaps he just wanted to go back to being an assistant as opposed to all the inclusive responsibilites of being a head coach, and there is certainly nothing wrong with that (if that was even a part of the decision).


To others:
Man, some of you guys are quite unrealistic and/or mean spirited about this karma "thing".  Similar to many others, I really don't care about it in the sense that everyone is entitled to their opinions.  However, if the system is going to be in place, it should be utilized appropriately - and by that I mean when someone is really "out-of-line", disrepectful, etc. as opposed to just "slapping a smite" on someone because of a disagreement in opinion on some topic of discussion.  Unfortunately, though, there are always some who feel they have to behave that way.

[79jaybird]

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL AND LET'S HOPE 2006 IS A BANNER YEAR FOR  THE CCIW IN ALL SPORTS.
formerd3db-- I agree with you on most of these topics.  I remember the MSU/CMU game, and what a shocker.  I also recall NIU upsetting Alabama and Maryland, so the "underdogs" do have their days and it is worth.
Pat-- I agree with you, that if I had the money I would never ever give it to anything above D-2 Athletics.  D3, NAIA, D2  would be my order.
That Northwestern game was disheartening.  Don't they practice onside and situation kicking in practice? 
I was watching the TCU/ISU game which was a seesaw, great game.
With regards to scheduling and SOS.. IMO you shouldn't increase your level of your opponents continuously, until you have developed a program that can handle your current level.  Ex. Elmhurst had IBC, CURF on their schedule which was o.k. when Paul Krohn/Tom Journell was developing a consistent program.  Now the Bluejays have gone 6-4, 4-6, and 6-4 in the last 3 years.  Still have a ways to go to get to the level of Augie, Wheaton  but CURF doesn't do much to help the Bluejays prepare for what they will see in the CCIW.  Thus, Elmhurst has dropped CURF and is looking for a stronger opponent.  I think they should also drop IBC, however I don't make that decision.

[formerd3db]

79jaybird:

Happy New Year to you as well.  Yes, I remember those games too.  IMO, it is neat to see as well.  Also, I think that your theory on how to progress (i.e. gradual) in a program is the way to do it.  If some programs try to do it, shall we say either unrealistically or overzealously, it can backfire if one tries to jump too far at first.

In your opinion, who would you like to see and/or feel Elmhurst should add to fill the slot in the process as you've described?

[79jaybird]

formerd3db, hope New Year's Day is going well.  I think the Bowls have been competitive and exciting... just too many of them.
Who would you like to see Elmhurst schedule?  Honestly, I would like to see them play a team that is consistently a 7-3/8-2 team.  I think this year's Capital team would be a good example.  UW-Oshkosh (whom the Bluejays scrimmage against) would be a good opponent, One of the MIAC opponents (Alma, Hope, and/or Albion) would be good.  Or perhaps a Team from Indiana.
I think the Bluejays need a test in non conference  because you know the 7 CCIW games will be tests.

[usee]

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

did i see that Pat is giving out free Karma? me too!! all on page 208 get some new years karma!

is there any way both Ohio State and Notre Dame can lose??

[Mr. Ypsi]

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

did i see that Pat is giving out free Karma? me too!! all on page 208 get some new years karma!

is there any way both Ohio State and Notre Dame can lose??

As a Michigan fan, I wish!!

[Red Reign]

formerd3db, hope New Year's Day is going well.  I think the Bowls have been competitive and exciting... just too many of them.
Who would you like to see Elmhurst schedule?  Honestly, I would like to see them play a team that is consistently a 7-3/8-2 team.  I think this year's Capital team would be a good example.  UW-Oshkosh (whom the Bluejays scrimmage against) would be a good opponent, One of the MIAC opponents (Alma, Hope, and/or Albion) would be good.  Or perhaps a Team from Indiana.
I think the Bluejays need a test in non conference  because you know the 7 CCIW games will be tests.

I like Elmhurst but I don't think they could contend with Capital. They wouldn't learn from anything in that game. UW-Oshkosh would be a good oppenet however, they are not consistant 6-4 nontheless 7-3. I think teams should have at least one non-conf game that is very win-able, for the fact that a teams start slow and its a good way to build them up and you don't want 3 tough games going into the CCIW. I think a better oppenet for Elmhurst is Aurora, Concordia (wis), lakeland, A good team from the IBC. Elhurst had a great year last year. However, they still went 6-4 and haven't won 7 games since I can remember.

[79jaybird]

Shark56,  Elmhurst last won 7 games in 1985 when Bruce Hoffmann was the Coach  7-2  6-2 CCIW.
I agree with the Aurora Lakeland and and UW Oshkosh, but I don't agree with you thinking Elmhurst couldn't "keep up" with Capital.  I'll tell you why I think this:  If Kniss doesn't engineer 2 great drives late in the EC/NC game, I think Elmhurst beats NC.  NC also had a great shot to beat Capital in the playoffs.  While I DO think that right now Capital is the stronger team of the 3, I think that scheduling a team like Capital would be a good barometer of what you will see 7 weeks in conference.  I am anxious to see whom Tom Journell and the Bluejays schedule.  Also, it means we get to visit a new campus' booth. 

[wolfie75]

Look for NPU to announce a new coach possibly this week.  I understand they had 65 resumes submitted and interviewed 12.  Let's hope they can increase the quality of their play and players and become CCIW competitive.