FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Kovo]

Newcardfan, which NCC defender got snubbed? Who would you remove to add an NCC defender? If you ar going to identify the problem, feel free to add a solution.

I think Kukuc is one o the top 3-4 RBs in the country. He should have been on there.

Usee,

Good luck getting a response.  I've asked twice for NCF to justify the uninformed comments made, and it's been complete silence (other than saying "love the post" from Kovo86).  NCC had a very good defense this year, but as CardAlum pointed out, they really didn't have that dominant player that would have clearly stood out as an AA.  I counted 6 teams that actually had better overall defensive stats (although none play in a conference as tough as the CCIW) that didn't have a player named to one of the AA teams.  The point is, a very good defensive team doesn't always translate into All American selections.  My huge issue with NCF was not the frustration over no Cardinal players being selected, but the negative (and classless) comments about a very deserving player from Augie who was.  IMHO, an apology to Mr. Westerberg would be in order.

Perhaps NCF meant to reference (trying to give a Cardinal a little help!) the LB on the 3-7 team that finished with 84 tackles and 4 sacks, as opposed to Westerberg who finished with 118 tackles and 4 sacks.  NC's leader (who deserves to be in the debate IMHO) finished with 79 tackles and 3.5 sacks.  But I haven't looked at the LB's in any depth at this point.

[Mugsy]

Newcardfan, which NCC defender got snubbed? Who would you remove to add an NCC defender? If you ar going to identify the problem, feel free to add a solution.

I think Kukuc is one o the top 3-4 RBs in the country. He should have been on there.

Usee,

Good luck getting a response.  I've asked twice for NCF to justify the uninformed comments made, and it's been complete silence (other than saying "love the post" from Kovo86).  NCC had a very good defense this year, but as CardAlum pointed out, they really didn't have that dominant player that would have clearly stood out as an AA.  I counted 6 teams that actually had better overall defensive stats (although none play in a conference as tough as the CCIW) that didn't have a player named to one of the AA teams.  The point is, a very good defensive team doesn't always translate into All American selections.  My huge issue with NCF was not the frustration over no Cardinal players being selected, but the negative (and classless) comments about a very deserving player from Augie who was.  IMHO, an apology to Mr. Westerberg would be in order.

Perhaps NCF meant to reference (trying to give a Cardinal a little help!) the LB on the 3-7 team that finished with 84 tackles and 4 sacks, as opposed to Westerberg who finished with 118 tackles and 4 sacks.  NC's leader (who deserves to be in the debate IMHO) finished with 79 tackles and 3.5 sacks.  But I haven't looked at the LB's in any depth at this point.

I doubt that.

[Kovo]

Newcardfan, which NCC defender got snubbed? Who would you remove to add an NCC defender? If you ar going to identify the problem, feel free to add a solution.

I think Kukuc is one o the top 3-4 RBs in the country. He should have been on there.

Usee,

Good luck getting a response.  I've asked twice for NCF to justify the uninformed comments made, and it's been complete silence (other than saying "love the post" from Kovo86).  NCC had a very good defense this year, but as CardAlum pointed out, they really didn't have that dominant player that would have clearly stood out as an AA.  I counted 6 teams that actually had better overall defensive stats (although none play in a conference as tough as the CCIW) that didn't have a player named to one of the AA teams.  The point is, a very good defensive team doesn't always translate into All American selections.  My huge issue with NCF was not the frustration over no Cardinal players being selected, but the negative (and classless) comments about a very deserving player from Augie who was.  IMHO, an apology to Mr. Westerberg would be in order.

Perhaps NCF meant to reference (trying to give a Cardinal a little help!) the LB on the 3-7 team that finished with 84 tackles and 4 sacks, as opposed to Westerberg who finished with 118 tackles and 4 sacks.  NC's leader (who deserves to be in the debate IMHO) finished with 79 tackles and 3.5 sacks.  But I haven't looked at the LB's in any depth at this point.

I doubt that.

But it's true.  I haven't looked at the LBs in any depth. 

[Langhorst_Ghost]

Everyone thinks they know how to pick an All-American team. I'd be glad to send someone the 929 players considered and let them have a whack at it.

As for Erik Westerberg, for the complaints here, there was also a complaint on Twitter that Westerberg wasn't high enough on the team. Some will ever be satisfied and we will not attempt to satisfy everyone.

RE: the All-American debate

Totally get your point, Pat, it's an impossible task to please everyone.  But, as one of the more outspoken and unapologetic homers on this board, i do however get where the Naperville guys are coming from on the other side - you always want a little D3.com love to sprinkle on your respective school's program - makes us feel warm and fuzzy during the Winter months and gets us through the 8 month layover before fall camp.  I would imagine that i would feel especially salty about it as a Cardinal fan, especially since we are talking about a perennial conference champ with one of the most dominant defenses in the Midwest.

This NCC love (which is probably deserving), however, should not come at the expense of a kid like Westerberg - his AA selection is mutually exclusive of the Cardinal kids.  i would echo the sentiments of some of the other posters here: the Coaches saw the kid play every week, in person and on film - if he's good enough to be named the DPOY by the 8 Head Ball Coaches in this league, then he's good enough for me. 

As far as his spot on the All-America team talk...this is obviously not an exact science (as Pat mentioned the 900+ players).  But Augie's team record should really have nothing to do with this.  Just to highlight that point, i would draw your attention to a certain Bluejay linebacker from 2008 who set a precedent vs. similar competition with similar credentials:

Randy Wright's stat line from the 2008 season: 119 tackles, 22.5 TFL, 11 sacks, 1 FR, 1 FF 1 Def TD, team record (7-3)
Westerberg's stat line from the 2012 season: 117 tackles, 14 TFL, 4 sacks, 1 FR, 1 FF, team record (5-5)

Both were 3rd Team D3 All-Americans on non-playoff teams based largely on their individual accomplishments.

To be noted: In Wright's year, however, a certain stud linebacker by the name of Wenger was DPOY in the conference and was even more dominant (137 tackles, 8 picks, 12.5 sacks, 1 def TD) and was named 2nd team AA - by the way - hard to imagine 3 LBs with better seasons than Wenger's that year!

[HScoach]

I have no dog in this fight, nor do I have an opinion on any of the individual players, but big defensive numbers, especially # of tackles, is often created by a good player on an otherwise bad defense that can't get off the field.   Hence, a lot of tackles are racked up.

[Gregory Sager]

Newcardfan, which NCC defender got snubbed? Who would you remove to add an NCC defender? If you ar going to identify the problem, feel free to add a solution.

I think Kukuc is one o the top 3-4 RBs in the country. He should have been on there.

Usee,

Good luck getting a response.  I've asked twice for NCF to justify the uninformed comments made, and it's been complete silence (other than saying "love the post" from Kovo86).  NCC had a very good defense this year, but as CardAlum pointed out, they really didn't have that dominant player that would have clearly stood out as an AA.  I counted 6 teams that actually had better overall defensive stats (although none play in a conference as tough as the CCIW) that didn't have a player named to one of the AA teams.  The point is, a very good defensive team doesn't always translate into All American selections.  My huge issue with NCF was not the frustration over no Cardinal players being selected, but the negative (and classless) comments about a very deserving player from Augie who was.  IMHO, an apology to Mr. Westerberg would be in order.

Perhaps NCF meant to reference (trying to give a Cardinal a little help!) the LB on the 3-7 team that finished with 84 tackles and 4 sacks, as opposed to Westerberg who finished with 118 tackles and 4 sacks.  NC's leader (who deserves to be in the debate IMHO) finished with 79 tackles and 3.5 sacks.  But I haven't looked at the LB's in any depth at this point.

I doubt that.

I doubt it, too. This is what she said:

All American teams were revealed.  I have a really hard time believing there were 8 RB's in the country better than Nick Kukuc. 

And not a soul from the defense who held the best running back in the country under 100 yards.  Cardinals the only team with a share of the CCIW title to get zero love.  I suppose it speaks to the overall team effort?

So you snub the guys that got the job done? And give a spot to a guy from a mediocre 5-5 team. A slap in the face and a farce. In four years Wiliams had ZERO rushing TD's and only one receiving (and that came as a soph). What a shame.

She specifically singled out "a guy from a mediocre 5-5 team" in her diatribe, not "the LB on the 3-7 team" (Andre Carter of LaGrange). Substituting two different numbers that aren't next to each other in sequence (5-5 instead of 3-7) is no typo. And the only 5-5 team that had a linebacker represented on the d3football.com All-American list was Augustana. St. John's also finished 5-5, but it was represented by a first-team cornerback, Bobby Fischer. Nobody "gives a spot" to a first-teamer when there are four full teams' worth of All-Americans. In other words, she clearly meant Westerberg rather than Carter or Fischer.

Hey, I understand a mother's love. Heck, I've got a mom, too. Joey Michals was a tremendous linebacker who had a terrific season for NCC. But Augie6 hit the nail on the head: Dumping on Erik Westerberg just because neither Michals nor any of his Cardinals defensive mates made the d3football.com All-American team is just plain wrong.

This NCC love (which is probably deserving), however, should not come at the expense of a kid like Westerberg - his AA selection is mutually exclusive of the Cardinal kids.  i would echo the sentiments of some of the other posters here: the Coaches saw the kid play every week, in person and on film - if he's good enough to be named the DPOY by the 8 Head Ball Coaches in this league, then he's good enough for me. 

As far as his spot on the All-America team talk...this is obviously not an exact science (as Pat mentioned the 900+ players).  But Augie's team record should really have nothing to do with this.

Precisely. And I'll add my two cents. As NPU's webcaster, I had the chance to see every CCIW team this season from up in the league's various press boxes. And as I said several weeks ago, before the All-CCIW team was named, I thought that Westerberg was the prime DPOY candidate. I thought that the coaches made the right call in making Westerberg the DPOY -- and, given the strength of the CCIW in football, the league's DPOY should almost automatically be deserving of All-American status. And, as far as Augie's mediocre record is concerned, to paraphrase Ghost: Record, shmecord.

[Langhorst_Ghost]

I have no dog in this fight, nor do I have an opinion on any of the individual players, but big defensive numbers, especially # of tackles, is often created by a good player on an otherwise bad defense that can't get off the field.   Hence, a lot of tackles are racked up.

DPOY is not determined solely by numbers - it is the collective opinion of the coaches in the league.  And while numbers can inform the decision in some respect, the selection is not often swayed by the guys that fill up the box score on bad teams (in fact, it has not gone in that direction at all recently)...

Case in point, 2011: NCC's Peter Bulandr played in 11 games and recorded 30 tackles- 7.5 TFL to go with 10 sacks (only 4 in CCIW play), no FF, no FR.  He was 9th on his own team in tackles and not even in the top 50 in tackles in conference play.  But, he was the anchor in the middle of the stingiest D in the CCIW (12.6 ppg), freed up Hayes and Garza to get to the QB (17 sacks between them), and was clearly the most dominant single player in the league as recognized by the coaches.

Before Bulandr, back to 2005 = Wenger, Nikolich, Wenger (again), Ittersagen, and Studebaker - all studs on really good teams.  No one is "snubbing" guys from really good defenses in favor of stat monsters, clearly given the track record of recognizing outstanding players in this conference by the folks that gameplan for and coach against these young men.

Again, i do get the disappointment from the Redbirds, but dragging Westerberg into the conversation just seems incredibly spiteful and uninformed.  Perhaps it just may be that Westerberg was the best individual player in the league and NCC simply had a really good collective unit without any clearly special standout players - i would think that is a compliment to the entire defensive unit in Naperville.  As to the AA selection - i agree with Professor Sager - the DPOY in this league should then naturally translate to National recognition given the overall quality of the CCIW. 

[NCF]

Leave it be, Ghost. She deleted the post, as is her right.

I think it's a wise policy to treat a post that's deleted within a few hours of being posted as though it was never sent. Almost everybody who has spent a lot of time on the boards has had occasions in which they've had second thoughts about what they've posted, especially if it was a controversial post or had a harsh tone. We should extend each other the grace to let such a post go if it's retracted, since we may be in that person's shoes somewhere down the road.

Thanks, I just came on here to say the same thing, however you said it much better than I ever could. My apologies to all.

[lakeshore]

Leave it be, Ghost. She deleted the post, as is her right.

I think it's a wise policy to treat a post that's deleted within a few hours of being posted as though it was never sent. Almost everybody who has spent a lot of time on the boards has had occasions in which they've had second thoughts about what they've posted, especially if it was a controversial post or had a harsh tone. We should extend each other the grace to let such a post go if it's retracted, since we may be in that person's shoes somewhere down the road.

Thanks, I just came on here to say the same thing, however you said it much better than I ever could. My apologies to all.

Meador Opoy in'11 and dod not recieve AA

[Pat Coleman]

Leave it be, Ghost. She deleted the post, as is her right.

I think it's a wise policy to treat a post that's deleted within a few hours of being posted as though it was never sent. Almost everybody who has spent a lot of time on the boards has had occasions in which they've had second thoughts about what they've posted, especially if it was a controversial post or had a harsh tone. We should extend each other the grace to let such a post go if it's retracted, since we may be in that person's shoes somewhere down the road.

Thanks, I just came on here to say the same thing, however you said it much better than I ever could. My apologies to all.

Meador Opoy in'11 and dod not recieve AA

Yes but you are missing a key piece here. We didn't pick a different CCIW QB as All-American, so the comparison isn't exactly valid.

[NCF]

This is a great story not just about Mount Union and LK, but about D3 football in general.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8757311/division-iii-mount-union-football-team-head-coach-larry-kehres

It is amazing to note that EVERY Mount player from 1993-2016 (and counting?) will graduate (or has graduated) with at least one national championship!

[AndOne]

"...disappointing finish by both teams"?

I don't think Elmhurst had a disappointing finish at all. We had our best year ever in terms of distance, and 3rd CCIW title, first since 1980, I think Elmhurst is very happy with their season and can build off it.  To say Elmhurst had a poor playoff run is incorrect. 

"...disappointing finish by both teams"?

I don't think Elmhurst had a disappointing finish at all. We had our best year ever in terms of distance, and 3rd CCIW title, first since 1980, I think Elmhurst is very happy with their season and can build off it.  To say Elmhurst had a poor playoff run is incorrect.

And, that's the problem with you Jaybird.  You have the same affliction that I suffer from.  Which is, that you are happy with conference titles, players receiving national honors, and the team playing an exciting brand of competitive playoff football. 

Haven't they taught that this is not enough?  Isn't second place first loser?  Isn't it time that you start considering whether the coaching staff has taken you as far as they can go?  I mean---have they really ever won the BIG one?  And, looking back on the season---didn't you have lots of games that were a little too close for comfort?  Shouldn't you be able to smash and humiliate everyone you play?

You can tell that over the past 7 years as an NC alum that I am learning-----but there is still that part of me that feels very satisfied that we have a piece of the CCIW title this year, and had the joy of winning a playoff game (I know, I know, go lie down until the feeling passes).

79jaybird----

I agree with almost everything you said. EC had a fabulous season. In the playoffs they took a 4 1/2 hour bus ride and defeated the then #10 team in the country that they were supposed to lose to. They then took a 7 1/2 hour ride to MN and lost by 1 TD to the #4 team that eventually made it to the championship game. They were squashed by NCC in the regular season matchup, but even good teams are entitled to an occasional bad game.
My minor disagreement---just please don't refer to your Jays as winning their "3rd CCIW title." They were CCIW TRI-Champs. 
EC should be very proud of its 2012 season. #8 in the country in the final poll. Pretty damn good!

Kovo86---

I apologize if I misunderstood your post, but if not........

I think you need to change your name to Vince Lombardi Jr.
Whats not to be happy about when you tie for a conference championship, have players receive national honors, and play an exciting brand of playoff football?
As far as not having won the BIG One, keep in mind the "big one" is exactly that--ONE game. It doesn't define a whole season.
And 2nd place being 1st loser--Please explain how being 2nd best at something makes you a loser. You would be a pretty damn successful guy if you went through life being the 2nd best at everything you tried and did throughout your life. 2nd place doesn't make you a loser. It only means that there was only one other person or team that was better then you among all the others that tried for the championship trophy or prize.
Sure, be disappointed you didn't finish 1st, but don't consider yourself or your team a failure for being 2nd.. 
"Shouldn't you be able to smash and humiliate everyone you play?"----Yep, we're ahead 50-0 in the 4th quarter, but lets keep passing. After all, a 50 point win is never enough. Just wondering at what point you throw any semblance of sportsmanship out the window?
Lastly, its fricken D3 football, not the G-- D--- NFL! 

[NCF]

"...disappointing finish by both teams"?

I don't think Elmhurst had a disappointing finish at all. We had our best year ever in terms of distance, and 3rd CCIW title, first since 1980, I think Elmhurst is very happy with their season and can build off it.  To say Elmhurst had a poor playoff run is incorrect. 

"...disappointing finish by both teams"?

I don't think Elmhurst had a disappointing finish at all. We had our best year ever in terms of distance, and 3rd CCIW title, first since 1980, I think Elmhurst is very happy with their season and can build off it.  To say Elmhurst had a poor playoff run is incorrect.

And, that's the problem with you Jaybird.  You have the same affliction that I suffer from.  Which is, that you are happy with conference titles, players receiving national honors, and the team playing an exciting brand of competitive playoff football. 

Haven't they taught that this is not enough?  Isn't second place first loser?  Isn't it time that you start considering whether the coaching staff has taken you as far as they can go?  I mean---have they really ever won the BIG one?  And, looking back on the season---didn't you have lots of games that were a little too close for comfort?  Shouldn't you be able to smash and humiliate everyone you play?

You can tell that over the past 7 years as an NC alum that I am learning-----but there is still that part of me that feels very satisfied that we have a piece of the CCIW title this year, and had the joy of winning a playoff game (I know, I know, go lie down until the feeling passes).

79jaybird----

I agree with almost everything you said. EC had a fabulous season. In the playoffs they took a 4 1/2 hour bus ride and defeated the then #10 team in the country that they were supposed to lose to. They then took a 7 1/2 hour ride to MN and lost by 1 TD to the #4 team that eventually made it to the championship game. They were squashed by NCC in the regular season matchup, but even good teams are entitled to an occasional bad game.
My minor disagreement---just please don't refer to your Jays as winning their "3rd CCIW title." They were CCIW TRI-Champs. 
EC should be very proud of its 2012 season. #8 in the country in the final poll. Pretty damn good!

Kovo86---

I apologize if I misunderstood your post, but if not........

I think you need to change your name to Vince Lombardi Jr.
Whats not to be happy about when you tie for a conference championship, have players receive national honors, and play an exciting brand of playoff football?
As far as not having won the BIG One, keep in mind the "big one" is exactly that--ONE game. It doesn't define a whole season.
And 2nd place being 1st loser--Please explain how being 2nd best at something makes you a loser. You would be a pretty damn successful guy if you went through life being the 2nd best at everything you tried and did throughout your life. 2nd place doesn't make you a loser. It only means that there was only one other person or team that was better then you among all the others that tried for the championship trophy or prize.
Sure, be disappointed you didn't finish 1st, but don't consider yourself or your team a failure for being 2nd.. 
"Shouldn't you be able to smash and humiliate everyone you play?"----Yep, we're ahead 50-0 in the 4th quarter, but lets keep passing. After all, a 50 point win is never enough. Just wondering at what point you throw any semblance of sportsmanship out the window?
Lastly, its fricken D3 football, not the G-- D--- NFL! 

I think he was being sarcastic- And One, I don't think people consider themselves failures when they are #2, I think they are disappointed in not achieving their original goal. That feeling passes with a little time and most athletes will be proud of everything they DID accomplish. Who would have thought 7 years ago the Cardinals first conference title would turn into this kind of run? I wasn't around in the begining, but looking at how hard it is to stay on top, I would hope this would be considered a great achievement.

[AndOne]

I hope Kovo was being sarcastic. The possibility of such is why I apologized in case I read it the wrong way. I actually want to have misinterpreted his post and to be wrong in this case.  If i was worng, I hope he'll forgive me.
However, whether or not I misinterpreted his post, I believe what I said about 2nd place is still applicable. To much emphasis on if you don't get it all, you have nothing. And, with regard to the sportsmanship issue, on the basketball side of things we just had an incident where a coach fully supported a kid scoring a record number of points in an individual game wherein the opponent was one that a substantial number of high school teams could have probably beaten. 

[Gregory Sager]

My minor disagreement---just please don't refer to your Jays as winning their "3rd CCIW title." They were CCIW TRI-Champs. 

I'm not sure if you're kidding about this or not, Mark, given the emoticon. But in case you're not: A shared title still counts as a title, so 79JB's reference to this being Elmhurst's third CCIW championship is perfectly legitimate. Heck, plenty of your fellow NCC fans have made mention of the fact that the Cardinals have now won seven straight CCIW championships -- and since four of those seven titles have been shared (2006, 2007, 2009, and 2012), it would appear that those fellow NCC fans are likewise convinced that a shared title is a legitimate title.