FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[usee]

I'm not credible for analyzing the best defenses in the CCIW over the past 20 years, but I'd like to suggest that the 2004 Carthage defense should at least make the team picture. Certainly not the best, but in contention for a high seating

Tailgater, do you have any stats on the '04 defense?

Thanks Diehard you did my homework for me an it is much apprecited!

Titanwatcher:
Here is a quick summary of the 2004 Carthage defense ranking in the CCIW that year.

Scoring Defense - #1
Pass Defense - #2
Turnover Margin - #1 at +30 (may have led the nation in this category?)
Rushing Defense - #1
Pass Defense Efficiency - #1
Opponent 3rd Down Conversion - #1
Opponent Red Zone Defense - #1
Total Defense - #1

Now you'd have to compair actual numbers for those categories with other team defenses in various years to see how Carthage ranks with other #1 CCIW season defenses, but none-the-less the 2004 Carthage "D" was mighty impressive and deserves mention in a conversation about the best CCIW defenses.

Tailgater, thanks for taking the time to compile this information. A very impressive set of stats.

these stats are meaningless without the actual numbers. the 30+ turnover ratio is awesome and has to be up there with the best but being #1 or #2 in the CCIW in a given category doesn't say anything in relation to how that defense stacks up against the best. I would argue that the league is not playing nearly as good of defense over the last 5-7 yrs than it did in the 80s. I do think the 2004 carthage defense was an excellent defense. it was a pressure defense that surprised everyone they faced. We should try to lay out the relevant stats and compare some of the best. yards per play, rushing yds per game, pass yds per game, turnovers, etc. if we could get the info and line up the defenses from augie's championship years through today, then we would have a debate. without that it seems like a bunch of he said/April said.

[NCC_alum62]

Thats cool that Kindred is getting some time, I barley knew him and I didn't know Jerry.

[diehardfan]

these stats are meaningless without the actual numbers. the 30+ turnover ratio is awesome and has to be up there with the best but being #1 or #2 in the CCIW in a given category doesn't say anything in relation to how that defense stacks up against the best. I would argue that the league is not playing nearly as good of defense over the last 5-7 yrs than it did in the 80s. I do think the 2004 carthage defense was an excellent defense. it was a pressure defense that surprised everyone they faced. We should try to lay out the relevant stats and compare some of the best. yards per play, rushing yds per game, pass yds per game, turnovers, etc. if we could get the info and line up the defenses from augie's championship years through today, then we would have a debate. without that it seems like a bunch of he said/April said.

http://web1.ncaa.org/stats/StatsSrv/rankings?doWhat=archive&sportCode=MFB
Choose 2003-04 under the first category: Divisions II & III, and press View. (Sorry, there's no direct link.)

Nationally, here's where Carthage fell....

Total defense: #30
Pass efficiency defense: #12
Rushing defense: #10
Scoring defense: #47
Turnover margin: #1

The actual numbers of all the teams in the top 100 are also available on the site, if that's helpful.

[Titanwatcher]

Diehard thank you for the kind words. I could use the K boost

[Comet 14]

Hi all, I havn,t posted in a while. I tried to read through the pages of posts since the last time I was on. Unfortunately I have not been around D3 football long enough to coment on all ime greats. I do have a question that I am sure posters can answer. I read that there were some arrests maid at U-W Stout of players for steroids and that there is mandatory drug testing in D3 in the fall. Is this true? and if it is what is everones opinion?

[Augie6]

[/quote]

these stats are meaningless without the actual numbers. the 30+ turnover ratio is awesome and has to be up there with the best but being #1 or #2 in the CCIW in a given category doesn't say anything in relation to how that defense stacks up against the best. I would argue that the league is not playing nearly as good of defense over the last 5-7 yrs than it did in the 80s. I do think the 2004 carthage defense was an excellent defense. it was a pressure defense that surprised everyone they faced. We should try to lay out the relevant stats and compare some of the best. yards per play, rushing yds per game, pass yds per game, turnovers, etc. if we could get the info and line up the defenses from augie's championship years through today, then we would have a debate. without that it seems like a bunch of he said/April said.



Thanks Diehard you did my homework for me an it is much apprecited!

Titanwatcher:
Here is a quick summary of the 2004 Carthage defense ranking in the CCIW that year.

Scoring Defense - #1
Pass Defense - #2
Turnover Margin - #1 at +30 (may have led the nation in this category?)
Rushing Defense - #1
Pass Defense Efficiency - #1
Opponent 3rd Down Conversion - #1
Opponent Red Zone Defense - #1
Total Defense - #1

Now you'd have to compair actual numbers for those categories with other team defenses in various years to see how Carthage ranks with other #1 CCIW season defenses, but none-the-less the 2004 Carthage "D" was mighty impressive and deserves mention in a conversation about the best CCIW defenses.
[/quote]

I agree with usee that I don't see how rankings within the CCIW for a given year say a whole lot about how a team compares to the best over a period of time.  I did pull some key defensive statistics for several Augie teams (including the 4 championship teams and some of the better teams over the past few years)  in order to compare them to 2004 Carthage and 1998 NCC.


Team        Scoring D         Pass D          Run D         Total D          Turnovers
83 Augie       13.4              167.3            83.8            251.1              36 (21 INT, 15 Fum)
84 Augie        8.5               137.4            50.0            187.4              47 (27 INT, 20 Fum)
85 Augie        6.2               130.4            46.7            177.1              38 (17 INT, 21 Fum)
86 Augie        5.6               134.0            23.9            157.9              63 (42 INT, 21 Fum)
04 Carthage  17.9              188.7            85.4            274.1              50 (31 INT, 19 Fum)
98 NCC         18.1              138.2           105.7           243.9              No data I could find
99 Augie       17.6              171.5           101.5           273.0              33 (23 INT, 10 Fum)
00 Augie       18.0              146.6           126.6           273.3              29 (17 INT, 12 Fum)
01 Augie       12.9              126.0           124.9           250.9              30 (18 INT, 12 Fum)

What this says to me is that, statistically, 04 Carthage was very similar to some good, but not great, Augie defenses in the recent past.  Where they ranked higher was in their ability to generate turnovers, but I certainly wouldn't rank them as a "shut down" type of defense.  IMO, this is the type of defense that will need to be developed in the CCIW if the conference is ever going to compete for a National Championship again.  During the 80's, we played against some very good defenses (83 Elmhurst, 83-86 Millikin, 85/86 Wheaton) and it would be interesting to see where they would compare statistically. 

[Augie6]

One additional comment on my previous post.  When you look at the numbers for the 83 Augie team, they stand out as being comparable to Carthage, NCC and some on the more recent Augie teams and aren't really in line with the other championship teams.  Although this defense probably wasn't quite as athletic as the next 3 years, it was a very good defense.  That year, the CCIW had the top 3 offenses in the country (in total yds./game) in Elmhurst, Wheaton and Augustana.  Including the CCIW schedule and playoffs, the offensive competition that team faced was probably tougher than an Augie team before or since.

[NCC_alum62]

Hi all, I havn,t posted in a while. I tried to read through the pages of posts since the last time I was on. Unfortunately I have not been around D3 football long enough to coment on all ime greats. I do have a question that I am sure posters can answer. I read that there were some arrests maid at U-W Stout of players for steroids and that there is mandatory drug testing in D3 in the fall. Is this true? and if it is what is everones opinion?

As far as I know there allready was mandatory drug testing. NCC had to do it on physical day every year. So I don't think its going to have a great affect on D-III. They can't seem to catch 'em in D-I so I don't think they're going to do something in D-III that they haven't allready tried in D-I.

I don't think steroids are a rampant part of D-III football I don't have any facts to back that up, but in my experience I don't remember anyone doing anything except creatin and legal supplaments, however it isn't hard to cycle off of a controlled substance when you know the test date year in and year out. Maybe a random test day or something, but the logistics of test the athletes at all D-III schools is monumental to say the least, I doubt its ever going to be more than the piss test on physical day until there is a cheap, random, and unpredictable way to do it

[Tailgater]

these stats are meaningless without the actual numbers. the 30+ turnover ratio is awesome and has to be up there with the best but being #1 or #2 in the CCIW in a given category doesn't say anything in relation to how that defense stacks up against the best. I would argue that the league is not playing nearly as good of defense over the last 5-7 yrs than it did in the 80s. I do think the 2004 carthage defense was an excellent defense. it was a pressure defense that surprised everyone they faced. We should try to lay out the relevant stats and compare some of the best. yards per play, rushing yds per game, pass yds per game, turnovers, etc. if we could get the info and line up the defenses from augie's championship years through today, then we would have a debate. without that it seems like a bunch of he said/April said.



Tailgater said:

Now you'd have to compair actual numbers for those categories with other team defenses in various years to see how Carthage ranks with other #1 CCIW season defenses, but none-the-less the 2004 Carthage "D" was mighty impressive and deserves mention in a conversation about the best CCIW defenses.

Holy Cow usee, are you suffering from root canel pain? I think I qualified that the defensive rankings need dissecting in more specific detail in order to compair where the 2004 Carthage defense stacks up historically in the CCIW. Maybe the CCIW offenses weren't nearly as good or sophisticated in the 80's and relatively easier to stop than they have been over the last 5-7 years? I'll let you figure out how to measure that .

[Gregory Sager]

Actually I love any story about a CPS (Chicago Public Schools) kid in the CCIW and seeing how they're doing. I think its an under-recruited market by D-III.

More recently CPS schools have started showing better against thier suburban counterparts, it used to be anytime a CPS school went to playoffs it was one and done 49-7 in many cases, now we've had some teams do much better and winning a couple games here and there.

We don't get much respect, but we have to earn it and they're starting to build a few programs here and there.

There are 2 other WYHS students on the roster; Kindred Cook saw a little time on the D-Line this year as a frosh I think, and Jerry Watkins is a soph DB.
I agree with your assessment of the CPS improving, but I think you guys get your respect on National signing day. More money for equipment and more coaches to teach the game in the CPS would certainly tip the balance in their favor.

Its all together too true. Not enough money and not enough land either. Some schools are lucky to have a nearby park, but some others like Senn, and possibly still King practice on thier front lawns. 

A few years ago King played the high school season with something like 15 guys YES 15.  They all played two way and I think they won 7 games, but didn't qualify for state playoffs only city. Money, equipment and coaches who don't use f*ck 6 times in a sentence.

NPU has seven Public Leaguers on the returning roster for next season. Due to its location, the Park has always had a large contingent of CPS grads, both among the general student population and on its sports teams. Even though NPU only accepts students from the upper academic strata of the Chicago Public Schools, the attrition rate is still very high among CPS grads; the combination of economic stress and a less-than-ideal educational background is often very hard to overcome for those students. Lane Tech has often been the best-represented Public League institution on the North Park football team, due to both its proximity to the NPU campus and the fact that it's one of the better schools in the CPS system.

I don't think that suburbanites realize just how much inner-city kids have to overcome if they want to play football. As NCC_alum62 said, the total lack of resources in terms of money, facilities, equipment, and decent coaching is pretty shocking. The el stop closest to the North Park campus is up the block from Theodore Roosevelt High School, and for years I've looked out the window of the train and seen the Roughriders practice every fall. There's usually anywhere from thirty to forty kids on the Roosevelt football team; few of them seem to have pads that fit well (they're probably all decades-old hand-me-downs), there's only a couple of footballs that they can use, and their practice field behind the high school is a cramped and muddy empty lot. No goalposts. No blocking sleds. No coolers or squirt bottles in sight. No chalklines. And there's maybe two or three coaches present.

A high percentage of the players come from immigrant families, so they have no background in the sport. Many of the American-born kids are from single-parent families living near or below the poverty level. Gangs are an ever-present problem at Roosevelt, so it's common to see players walking home or to the bus or el stop in threes and fours, each carrying their pads and helmet, because the gangs are less likely to harass them if they travel together. None of those players has the money to attend a summer football camp in order to better learn the game. And I'm not sure how much insurance the school will provide for them if they get injured, but I'm pretty sure it's not much.

You look out the window of the el and watch those Roosevelt kids practicing on that muddy lot every afternoon, and it really brings home just how much "playing for the love of the game" is not just a cliche for them. It's the absolute truth.

[NCC_alum62]

Excellent Post...I actually played against Roosevelt my Soph year. I was on the Soph team and we played them in a nearby park that had goalposts...as well as alot of hard dirt, broken glass, and a manhole (covered thank god) in the middle of the field.

Many schools are lucky enough to have a Chicago Park District park nearby to practice at, a good number have thier own practice field. Lane Tech has its own Stadium (although they share it in the Public League.  Its hard because many in the public league don't want to see Hubbard, Morgan Park, Simeon, and the other "powerhouses" get too powerful or recruit, but it is the only way to achieve any kind of parity with Suburban schools as far as getting a large group of kids together that want to play football.

The biggest difference I see is the lack of participation in pee-wee, pop warner, and youth leagues that teach kids fundamentals of football.  My Jr/Sr years we played Geneseo and they're young guys learn the basic offense that the high school guys learn.  In terms of prepearation and feeder programs, I'm not sure the CPS will ever catch up.

I think now more kids are ready to move on to college than before in terms of academics getting better, and really that should be the focus of CPS schools, not athletics.  I just wish the schools would hire more good coaches and support the athletic departments, becasue there is a correlation between playing sports and staying out of gangs and trouble as much as some sports have a bit of a stigma of having the most troublemakers.

[washdupcard]

Agreed Sager.  Excellent post.

[Comet 14]

nc_alum62, I don,t think there was mandatory random drug testing before, even if you had to submit to it at your school. The cost is to high. I heard that ncaa has implemented this for next fall across the board. I disagree that it is not a part of D3. How (  rampant ) is unkown. I think it happens more than we think. Just because DI doesn't catch them all doesn't change the fact that it is not there and DIII shouldn't try to clean it up. It happens at the highschool level and I would just about garauntee that there was some use while you attended NCC.

[Comet 14]

Sorry for the spelling in the last post. I was in a hurry.

[NCC_alum62]

nc_alum62, I don,t think there was mandatory random drug testing before, even if you had to submit to it at your school. The cost is to high. I heard that ncaa has implemented this for next fall across the board. I disagree that it is not a part of D3. How (  rampant ) is unkown. I think it happens more than we think. Just because DI doesn't catch them all doesn't change the fact that it is not there and DIII shouldn't try to clean it up. It happens at the highschool level and I would just about garauntee that there was some use while you attended NCC.

Completely and alltogether possible. I mean like I said I don't have any facts because its not something any school or players is ready to admit (the use of steroids). I mean as far as steroids at NCC I would say anyone using them must have done a super job keeping it quiet and unnoticable. There wasn't anyone that came back from a summer away 35 lbs of muscle heavier or something like that. Most of the growth came from work in the gym that improved over time (all credit to coach Weinke for his hellish programs, anyone in the program the last 5 years knows about Helter Skelter)

I was only saying that NCC does a piss test every year on physical day (I can't speak for the rest of     D-III let alone the conference), but what I was also saying that anyone can cycle off when they know the testing day and then after that I don't remember ever having to do another test until the next fall for the physical again. So it is very possible that someone could have been using and many of us would have never known...

Performance enhancers are a problem at every level to be sure, but I was just saying it seems like it is more of a problem in D-I then in D-III and that the NCAA is more concerned about its big money division that endures the most "public scrutiny" because it makes them the most money