FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[wheatie barefooter]

Go Thunder! 
  Thought this would be a nice first post.

and I would agree ... but according to Karma points, I guess not!

I'm not quite sure how all this Karma stuff works.    Will this post increase or decrease my Karma rating?  We'll find out!

[Crutches McGee 87]

Go Thunder! 
  Thought this would be a nice first post.

and I would agree ... but according to Karma points, I guess not!

I'm not quite sure how all this Karma stuff works.    Will this post increase or decrease my Karma rating?  We'll find out!

I have no idea...  I've wondered the same thing.  But, who cares?  As long as you're contributing to topics and maintaining a respectful manner (but still getting in a few good shots) you're good! 

[Mugsy]

Go Thunder! 
  Thought this would be a nice first post.

and I would agree ... but according to Karma points, I guess not!

I'm not quite sure how all this Karma stuff works.    Will this post increase or decrease my Karma rating?  We'll find out!

I have no idea...  I've wondered the same thing.  But, who cares?  As long as you're contributing to topics and maintaining a respectful manner (but still getting in a few good shots) you're good! 

That is the exact mindset you should hold.  Strive to contribute meaningful dialogue, support your view and opinion, in a respectful manner and everything else will take care of itself.  Don't worry about the "K&%*$"... just mentioning the word puts you on the hitlist of some.   

Subliminal Message:  Doesn't hurt to give NCC grief whenever you get the chance.

[April]

Yea roger that Obi Wan! 

Oh, can I pleeease start calling Usee Obi Wan? In return I'll give you permission to call me "Young Padawan"...

If any newcomers want more information on Mt Union you can go to Ric Brienza's site www.mtunionfootball.com  It's one of the best d3 sites out there and you can get all the info you need about The Purple Raiders.

Wow... love the scrolling signature!  (and it isn't too big to be annoying  )

I actually love it, but then I just get highly amused when "tough guys" use lots of smileys in their sigs in general. It makes them all cute and snuggly.

Wheaton College ended my career yesterday, unfortunately, but I wanted to give the Thunder the credit they deserved!!  They were a class act and had a great game plan.  I hope the Thunder can give Mount all they can handle and more next week! 

What a classy post! Good luck to you as you move on with life and begin your real career! Former players frequently make the best posters, so I hope you hang around and contribute after graduation.

lol, my brother's last season was like 5 years ago.... The fact that you guys still remember my mom and her, uh, very emphatic take on the fact that Wheaton had a chance to beat you is actually hilarious.

April.......you are a fountain of wisdom, manners, and decorum compared to your "interesting" mother.  And believe me I know.........we can pick our friends.......butttt.....family is another matter.   

Teasing......I am sure she is a loving mother who has raised you to be the fine young woman you are.....

Thanks... I think? My mom actually knows a great deal more about football than I do, and one of those crucial gifts she bestowed on us as kids was a love for football. However, she's arguably too unobjectively motherly to ever make it to HoFer status on these boards (or heck, off of Pat's hate list, though I did nearly die laughing on the inside that one time they met in Salem). Looking back at my scary number of years posting here, I don't know if familial unobjectivity is ultimately really such a terrible negative. The presence of parents/aunts/brothers/sisters on the boards add a certain charm to the boards that's pretty unique to D3. And even if their posts tend to be biased they are also frequently informative due to inside info... It's similar to the homey feeling you get at games cheering for players you actually know.

And lets face it, at least none of you guys have never been stalked by a CCIW poster like I was stalked by an OAC poster!!!

[DIIIinVA]

I have to admit that I haven't followed Mt. Union at all this year.  Having seen them here in Salem,, VA on an almost annual basis though, I have a pretty good idea of what to expect out of them.  Can anyone comment on how this year's Mount team compares to ones of the recent past?  Are there any areas of relative weakness compared to other powerhouse teams they have put on the field, or are they the usual machine, with no discernible flaws from a D-III perspective?

I'm hoping to be able to welcome some of my fellow Wheaton alums to Virginia for the Stagg bowl.  But not counting on it . . .

[Blutarsky]

I have to admit that I haven't followed Mt. Union at all this year.  Having seen them here in Salem,, VA on an almost annual basis though, I have a pretty good idea of what to expect out of them.  Can anyone comment on how this year's Mount team compares to ones of the recent past?  Are there any areas of relative weakness compared to other powerhouse teams they have put on the field, or are they the usual machine, with no discernible flaws from a D-III perspective?

I'm hoping to be able to welcome some of my fellow Wheaton alums to Virginia for the Stagg bowl.  But not counting on it . . .

I'll keep this as simple as possible....(and keep in mind this is one humble observer's opinion)

MUC this year vs. Last couple of years:

Wide Receivers:  Up (despite having one from last year competing in the NFL)--more diversified, more options
Offensive Line:  Down (however, the "inexperience factor" from earlier this year is starting to not be a bother any more)
QB:  Year older, year better
RB:  See QB
TE:  See RB
Offense creates a balanced attack compared to most schools....especially at this level. 

Defensive Line:  Same 'ol, Same 'ol (undersized for some, very athletic for others, great feet compared to past couple of years)
Linebackers:  More mobile compared to past couple of years, but not the "iso stuffers" like DeRiggi
Secondary:  Very athletic, but not the playmakers of the past couple of years.  It seemed that there was always a punt block or other big play occurring in the past.  This is more of a "don't make a big mistake" group.
Ends:  Make the defense special this year....have not really seen them blocked consistently all season
Defense, which was a big question mark at the beginning of the year (with lack of starter's returning) has been a pleasant surprise.

Special Teams:  Perhaps an area of concern--we seem to give up some yardage on kickoffs (which we get a lot of practice doing), and the punt return had some fakes executed in the 2nd round vs. Hobart.  That being said, due to Mount's depth, many good athletes reside on these special teams awaiting their turn.....and attempting to impress the coaches.

The concern with MUC this year was the general lack of experience on both sides of the ball, but in game 14 that is a long-gone concern.  They don't have the size of past squads, esp. on the O/D lines, but are just as athletic and quick, quick, quick.

Bottom Line, while the areas of strength are in different areas, this team is very comparable to the past couple of MUC teams......with one notable addition--I see a sense of drive and commitment that was perhaps missing last year (losing in the national championship will do that)

[raiderfan1983]

I think Blutarsky hit the nail on the head.  The one thing I would add to his list is that as with Kehres teams in the past, just getting to halftime and having it close is not going to cut it.  One of the greatest team strengths is the ability of the coaches to adjust at halftime.  Looking at the last two games as examples....

Mount vs. Cortland State: 20-14 half    41-14 final
Mount vs. Hobart: 14-7 half    42-7 final

This is not a team that is going to shut down just because another team steps up and hits them in the mouth in the first half.  In those two games it came down to Mount's ability to make halftime adjustments as well as the ability to wear the other team down in the second half from the number of athletes on the field.  That is the strength, the adjustments and the athletic ability at 11 positions on both sides of the ball.

[Neverwas]

From looking at general statistics alone it looks like MUC is very similar to when Wheaton last matched up with them.  Similiar total offense/defense stats (little better O in 06, little better D this year).  This is a very basic comparision I know but here are some rather impressive numbers:

103 TFL's in 13 games for a defense only giving up 170 ypg.  With five players in double digit TFL's
Kmic has 39 TD's and almost 200 yds a game...crazy
Micheli has thrown 2 INTs in 275 passing attempts and completes 76% of his passes. 
A WR with 66 catches 20 TD's and over 1200 yards.

I find this amazing.  I am a Wheaton fan and I think #34 and #9 have had great season but they seem rather normal by comparison...

I think Wheaton has a shot, I really do, but I think they have to be very aggressive on both sides of the ball.  I think the D needs to "live and die" by the blitz.  IMO this is the best CB duo Wheaton has brought to Alliance...make MUC test them (I am sure they will anyways).  Offensively, we actually have more success than most teams do against the Raiders (look at 2006) we just do what Wheaton does...Turn the ball over.  It would be interesting to see how many times the Thunder have turned the ball over in the redzone the past few years.  Cut those out and it may actually be a game into the 4th quarter.  I am looking forward to Saturday! 

[HScoach]

Blutarsky hit it pretty well, but I'll add my opinion to the mix.

WR's:  slightly better than last year.  Shorts is a deep ball threat and runs great routes, but isn't the game breaker after he catches it like Garcon was.  However as a whole, the WR core is deeper and overall better than last season.

RB's:  Kmic is even better than before and is on a mission!  FB was a question mark coming into the season with Terrance Morring's injury, but coverterd LB Jud Lutz has played very well, especially as a lead blocker.

QB:  better.  Micheli is another year older and very focused.

O-LINE:  my biggest area of concern heading into the season and it has only grown as the season has went on.  Solid, but much smaller and not nearly as strong or as deep as previous years.  Injuries have really taken it's toll on the O-line this season.   In fact, Mount's best O-lineman is a guy that played last season as a back-up DT.  Last season's line was one of the best ever, but this one is just good.  Overall, they're a quality Divison 3 line, but they're not naywhere near the physical level of previous Mount lines.  But what they do have is a real desire to block for Nate and Greg!

DE's:  better than last year.  Herbert and Millings are unblockable in passing situations.  Both are undersized and can struggle a little in rush defense, but they're extremely athletic and make plays.  James Herbert has turned into a quicker version of Justin Stickly!

DT's:  a little weaker than last year.  Matt Williamson is a stud, but the other tackle (multipe guys rotate) are fireplugs filling up space, not play makers.  Last year's DT's were great with McCullough leading the way and Parr very good.  The change this season isn't the difference between Williamson and McCullough, it's the other tackles trying to replace Nick Parr.

LB's:  slightly weaker than last season because neither Yoder or Kershaw have Tony DeRiggi's size (6-2, 240).  Both LB's have great speed and are solid tacklers, but being undersized they're a little susceptible to Iso's and big power backs.

CB's:  about the same as last season.  Ely and Renbarger are both solid.  Not termendous play makers, but you'd have to go back to Chris Kern to find a true stud at CB for Mount.

Safeties:  a little weaker against the run, but a little better against the pass.  McClain is a very good SS, but Kostelnik was an absolute play maker at the line of scrimmage.  Jordan at FS and Stewart at WS are more aggressive and better tacklers than last year's group.  Overall, I'd say about the same.

Special Teams:  Other than O-line, the biggest weakness on the team.  With a lesser QB and TB, this would probably be a bigger weakness since Mount would have to rely on special teams to score and set up the offense more.  Kick and punt returns have been average, kick-off coverage has been less than average to poor.  And they don't really have FG kicker.  The starting kicker was lost mid-season to injury and the replacement has a range of about 30 yards max.  Punter is fine, not that he gets much opportunity

I expect Mount to try very hard to not kick the ball to Ittersagen.  I'd gladly trade 10-15 yards of field position to keep Pete from braking a big return.


Overall, this Mount team at the skill positions is about as good as any they've ever had, however the O-line is average at best.  And defensively, while very athletic,  the D-line and LB's are very undersized and could be pushed around by a big opponent.  This defense is perfectly suited to defend a spread passing attack, but not so much a power running game like old Augie or Whitewater could run. 

[raiderpa]

If the Thunder blitz more than usual, Kehres will waste your great corners off with wideouts running deep and hit underneath crossing patterns with the TE or Kmic out of the backfield....

so, if you are going to blitz, you had better get there quick

[Mugsy]

I have to admit that I haven't followed Mt. Union at all this year.  Having seen them here in Salem,, VA on an almost annual basis though, I have a pretty good idea of what to expect out of them.  Can anyone comment on how this year's Mount team compares to ones of the recent past?  Are there any areas of relative weakness compared to other powerhouse teams they have put on the field, or are they the usual machine, with no discernible flaws from a D-III perspective?

I'm hoping to be able to welcome some of my fellow Wheaton alums to Virginia for the Stagg bowl.  But not counting on it . . .

I'll keep this as simple as possible....(and keep in mind this is one humble observer's opinion)

MUC this year vs. Last couple of years:

Wide Receivers:  Up (despite having one from last year competing in the NFL)--more diversified, more options
Offensive Line:  Down (however, the "inexperience factor" from earlier this year is starting to not be a bother any more)
QB:  Year older, year better
RB:  See QB
TE:  See RB
Offense creates a balanced attack compared to most schools....especially at this level. 

Defensive Line:  Same 'ol, Same 'ol (undersized for some, very athletic for others, great feet compared to past couple of years)
Linebackers:  More mobile compared to past couple of years, but not the "iso stuffers" like DeRiggi
Secondary:  Very athletic, but not the playmakers of the past couple of years.  It seemed that there was always a punt block or other big play occurring in the past.  This is more of a "don't make a big mistake" group.
Ends:  Make the defense special this year....have not really seen them blocked consistently all season
Defense, which was a big question mark at the beginning of the year (with lack of starter's returning) has been a pleasant surprise.

Special Teams:  Perhaps an area of concern--we seem to give up some yardage on kickoffs (which we get a lot of practice doing), and the punt return had some fakes executed in the 2nd round vs. Hobart.  That being said, due to Mount's depth, many good athletes reside on these special teams awaiting their turn.....and attempting to impress the coaches.

The concern with MUC this year was the general lack of experience on both sides of the ball, but in game 14 that is a long-gone concern.  They don't have the size of past squads, esp. on the O/D lines, but are just as athletic and quick, quick, quick.

Bottom Line, while the areas of strength are in different areas, this team is very comparable to the past couple of MUC teams......with one notable addition--I see a sense of drive and commitment that was perhaps missing last year (losing in the national championship will do that)

[Wheaton fan]: What are the chances of a team like Wheaton beating a team like Mount Union?

[Blutarsky, hscoach]: Well, that's pretty difficult to say.

[Wheaton fan]: Hit me with it! We've come a long way to get to Alliance. The least you can do is level with me. What are our chances?

[Blutarsky, hscoach]: Not good.

[Wheaton fan]: You mean, not good like one out of a hundred?

[Blutarsky, hscoach]: We'd say more like one out of a million.
[pause]

[Wheaton fan]: So you're telling me there's a chance.

[raiderpa]

Initial weather forecast for Saturday in Alliance....mid 30's for high and partly cloudy

[Mr. Ypsi]

Mugsy,

Nice adaptation - +k.

But I think it is 1 (maybe even 2 or 3) in a hundred.  WAY better than one in a million!

[Mugsy]

Problem I'm having is measuring whether or not this Wheaton team is any better than any other Wheaton team that has travelled to Alliance.

Whereas this is a very solid Wheaton team with quality players, an outstanding coaching staff and they have elevated their level of play considerably over the past 5 weeks, is there anything that supports the notion that the outcome this year will be any different than the last 5 meetings?  I question whether any of the Wheaton teams have had the defensive personnel to stop the MUC offensive attack enough to give Wheaton a chance.

MUC posters are probably tired of my speculating what might have been related to 2 of the 5 meetings.  I won't drudge up specifics because quite honestly it doesn't matter in the end... but 2 of the games should (I know... should!) have gone more to the wire, but huge turnovers by Wheaton in the redzone turned the tide of the game.

Does Wheaton have a chance on Saturday?  Absolutely.  It is a talented, well-coached team with a lot of heart.  But MUC has destroyed a lot of teams with similar characteristics.

I would say at this point the tipping point falls to the O & Dlines.  Several Wabash and Franklin posters have attested that Wheaton won the last 2 playoff games primarily because Wheaton controlled the LOS.  Can Wheaton have anywhere the same level of success or at least hold there own against MUC O & Dlines?  I dunno... I guess we'll see.

The other tipping point is turnovers and special teams.  In all 5 prior meetings, Wheaton turned the ball over WAY too much and at critical points.  Wheaton has also lost the special teams battle - kickoffs for TD's, blocked punt and punt returns to the redzone.

If Wheaton holds it's own on the LOS, wins the turnover battle and avoids big plays on special teams (or generates it's own big plays via Ittersagen), then it could be a close game.

I know... a lot of "ifs" and some would say not very optimistic for a "homer".  But 5 trips to Alliance has me thinking realistic...  I know Coach Swider and the team will have a solid plan and will lay it all on the line.  D3 football is a great game... anything can happen.

And for the king speculative comment (but I've heard similar thoughts from a variety of sources...), had Wheaton stayed healthy in 2007, that Wheaton team would have provided the best test to MUC of all Wheaton teams.  The 2007 team was absolutely loaded with talent, but obliterated by injuries.

I'm cheering on Wheaton with all I have on Saturday and holding out all hope...  

[Mr. Ypsi]

Mugsy, agree about 2007.  Healthy, that may have been the best CCIW team since the title streak by Augie.  No way does IWU (or probably NCC) beat them if half the team wasn't in ICU!

Since hscoach may be correct that Pete's main contributions will have to be on kickoffs, I figure the game plan is simple: Pete returns EVERY kickoff for a TD!  MUC can win the TOP 59:1, but CANNOT win (well, unless they go for 2-point conversions ).  Alas, even in this dream scenario, I suppose LK (after the first 4 or 5 times) would take to kicking out-of-bounds and give up the field position.

It's a huge uphill battle, but GO THUNDER!