FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[ncc_fan]

In an interesting FYI: Ryan Kent at NCC is really hoping UWP finishes atop in the WIAC and makes the NCAA field again. Ryan has more than 20%(434) of his career yards (2,066) and over 25% (6)of his career rushing TD's (23) in 2 games against the Pioneers.

Here's hoping those percentages drop significantly on Oct. 25 at McCully Stadium!

[Gregory Sager]

No argument about Coach Thorne as the obvious (and only) selection as the Cards' greatest-ever football coach.  If, like 70 did, you're putting this in the context of 'who is the greatest coach' irrespective of the sport, then with all due respect to Coach Thorne's accomplishments, the conversation in Naperville the CCIW begins and ends with Al Carius.

Fixed it for you.

Al Carius is the greatest coach in CCIW history, irrespective of sport.

As far as North Park football is concerned, the history of the sport at NPU is so terrible that it's more a matter of identifying the least-bad coach than the greatest coach. That would probably be Norm Rathje, who coaxed North Park's last winning season out of the Vikings back in 1968 (5-3-1), helming the now-legendary 104-32 win over North Central and a historic 48-42 win over eventual CCIW champion Augustana, which was quarterbacked by future NFL MVP Ken Anderson. During his tenure at NPC, Rathje coached a couple of future pro football players in WR Paul Zaeske (Houston Oilers) and LB Chuck Burgoon (Minnesota Vikings), plus QB/P Bruce Swanson, who saw time on the reserve lists (known back then as the "taxi squads") of the Dallas Cowboys, Detroit Lions, and Kansas City Chiefs. Rathje managed to finish his North Park stint with a .500 record; he was only NPC's coach for two seasons, 1967 and 1968.

You could make an argument in favor of Harold Swanson, who coached the very successful teams that North Park put on the field when the school first transitioned to a four-year institution. Under Swanson's leadership, in 1958 the Vikings went 7-1 and in 1959 they went 6-1-1. However, North Park was not yet a member of the CCIW at that point; the Vikings played an independent schedule against the likes of Olivet, Eureka, Bethel, Lakeland, Concordia (IL), Rose-Hulman (then called Rose Polytechnic Institute), Benedictine (then called St. Procopius College), and Illinois-Chicago (then called the University of Illinois at Navy Pier). The fact that there were no CCIW schools on the schedule is historically significant, as far as I can tell, because I'm pretty sure that that's an indicator that the strength of schedule back then was inferior to what the Park would face once it commenced playing a CCIW schedule in football in the 1962-63 school year.

But I might actually opt for North Park's first-ever football coach, Edward "Dutch" Sternaman, out of historical significance if nothing else. Only serious Chicago Bears fans know this, but Dutch Sternaman, though now largely forgotten, was George Halas's partner in the early days of the Bears. He and Halas, both former University of Illinois football stars under legendary coach Bob Zuppke, were hired by A.E. Staley in 1920 to organize (and play for) the company football team of Staley's starch-manufacturing plant in Decatur. That year, the company team became a charter member of the American Professional Football Association (now the NFL), which was organized in a meeting attended by Halas in a Hupmobile auto showroom in Canton, Ohio. Halas and Sternaman moved the Decatur Staleys to Chicago the next year, buying out Old Man Staley's ownership of the team for $100. Halas and Sternaman were co-coaches of the Staleys (who changed their name to the Bears in 1922), and each played end (on both offense and defense, of course) on opposite sides of the line. Sternaman's younger brother Joey was the team's quarterback.

The Halas/Sternaman partnership survived the lean early years of the league -- the team managed to avoid folding only because it was able to sign another former Illini star, Harold "Red" Grange, and utilize him on a barnstorming tour in 1925 that raised the money necessary for the team to meet payroll -- and continued on into the Great Depression. Sternaman lost quite a bit of money in the Depression and sold out his share of the team to Halas following the Bears' 1932 championship season. Two years later, Sternaman, now working as a Chicago public schoolteacher, was hired by North Park Junior College to organize and run its first-ever football team. The Vikings actually had some moderate success in the '30s, finishing with winning records in 1937 and 1938 while playing such other local jucos as Morton, Wright, and Wilson (now Truman College), as well as such perennial foes as St. Procopius/Benedictine and Concordia (IL).

So, while Sternamen's record as North Park's coach was modest, his significance as both the first-ever coach of the program and as one of the crucial figures of the early history of both the Chicago Bears and the National Football League make him significant enough to mention alongside the likewise-modest likes of Harold Swanson and Norm Rathje.

Overall sports-wise? Well, leaving the legendary Ted Hedstrand aside -- since most of his tremendous accomplishments came as the coach of various North Park Academy teams, rather than for NPJC or NPC -- the greatest coach in North Park history would likely be either Hedstrand's protégé Dan McCarrell, who piloted the Vikings to three consecutive national championships in basketball from 1978-80, or McCarrell's protégé and assistant, Bosko Djurickovic, who won two national titles in basketball himself in 1985 and 1987, and won four CCIW titles in baseball as the head coach of the diamond version of the Vikings as well.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Greg, I realize it is WAY too early to say, but is Coach Conway at least in the discussion?  Maybe make a judgement after his son's have graduated.  (BTW, I forget, do Coach Conway and Mrs. Conway have any more in the pipeline? )

[79jaybird]

That's just like Julie Hall, the current volleyball coach at Elmhurst. I would say she is in the top 5 of best coaches Elmhurst has ever had. 

Coaching is one thing, but recruiting and having the kids talent on the field goes a long way too.

[Gregory Sager]

Greg, I realize it is WAY too early to say, but is Coach Conway at least in the discussion?  Maybe make a judgement after his son's have graduated.  (BTW, I forget, do Coach Conway and Mrs. Conway have any more in the pipeline? )

You're right, Chuck. It is way too early to say. As for other Conway progeny, it's not my place to offer commentary on that subject.

[Gregory Sager]

That's just like Julie Hall, the current volleyball coach at Elmhurst. I would say she is in the top 5 of best coaches Elmhurst has ever had.

Better example than North Park's Mike Conway -- and I say that with no disrespect to Mike. Julie Hall's won a pair of CCIW titles and has taken the 'jays to the Final Four. Mike Conway's only three games into his second season at the helm; i.e., he's still in the early stages of trying to turn NPU football around.

A pair of current NPU coaches, John Born (men's soccer) and Luke Johnson (baseball), are definitely on the top ten list of the school's all-time greatest coaches. In fact, John Born's pretty high up on that list now.

Coaching is one thing, but recruiting and having the kids talent on the field goes a long way too.

Uh, Mark, "recruiting and having the kids' talent on the field" is coaching. In fact, it's the most important part of coaching at the collegiate level.

Man, I get so frustrated by the constant implication by d3boards.com posters that recruiting is something that happens completely apart from what the coach and his/her assistants do for a living. You don't get athletes by having your admissions personnel sprinkle pixie dust, or by sowing magic beans (or, since we're talking football players, dragon's teeth) on the Field Turf. Coaches recruit players, people. It's Task Number One on their list of things to do.

[markerickson]

Hail Bosko!

[CardinalAlum]

Hail Bosko!

"Fi Fi Fo Fum, Bosko is a @#$% bum..."     

One of the more memorable chants from basketball games back in the day when the NCC/NP games used to get really nasty!

[joehakes]

I can't believe my name hasn't come up!   

[AndOne]

Naperville Sun article on NCC Sr. DT Peter Mann who returned to action this season after missing all of last year due to injury:

http://napervillesun.suntimes.com/2014/09/23/north-central-right-peter-mann-job/

[79jaybird]

Greg, I agree that recruiting and putting the (x player) in (x spot) at the (x time) is indeed coaching.  No argument there.   But, wouldn't you say executing and putting (x plan) into action, is on the player him/her self? 

[ExTartanPlayer]

But, wouldn't you say executing and putting (x plan) into action, is on the player him/her self?

This is a chicken-or-egg comment.

If the players aren't putting Plan X into action, it's the coaches' job to find guys that WILL execute Plan X.

[formerd3db]

But, wouldn't you say executing and putting (x plan) into action, is on the player him/her self?

This is a chicken-or-egg comment.

If the players aren't putting Plan X into action, it's the coaches' job to find guys that WILL execute Plan X.

ExTartan:

Just to add further "fire" to the discussion.  With regards to your post above, I am in agreement with you about 99%.  However, I will say that, while rare, it does happen that situations sometimes occur in some years such that no matter who the coaches might play, no one executes Plan X.  That is not the coaches fault.  I can attest to this without question because at Hope for the two-three years recently (i.e. the 3-7 seasons before last year's 7-3 season) at Hope, our players were not able to get the job done. It was most frustrating due to the repeated same mistakes each and every week regardless of who was in. 

That was not the coaches fault at all (some people will most likely disagree with that, however, I'm telling you that was absolutely not the case whatsoever-no way. Yes, again, a rare occurrence, but it does and did happen).  The coaches were/are excellent coaches and doing everything possible that anyone could think of to motivate, encourage, challenge, support, etc., etc. the players, all to no avail.  Most continued to make the same mistakes over and over again each week, despite repeated coaching, rehashing, reviewing of the game plans and in the daily practice session.  Of course, we had a few stellar individual players those years whose performances were tops.  Yet overall, the talent pool was poor-we simply did not have what I would call college level talent, even at the small college level.  Many of the players were just not good enough, unfortunately.  No amount of coaching or coaching talent will help that.

Again, another interesting discussion you all are having-thanks.  Always enjoy those. 

   

[Gregory Sager]

I can't believe my name hasn't come up!   

Left plenty of room in the top ten for you, Joe.

But, wouldn't you say executing and putting (x plan) into action, is on the player him/her self?

This is a chicken-or-egg comment.

If the players aren't putting Plan X into action, it's the coaches' job to find guys that WILL execute Plan X.

ExTartan:

Just to add further "fire" to the discussion.  With regards to your post above, I am in agreement with you about 99%.  However, I will say that, while rare, it does happen that situations sometimes occur in some years such that no matter who the coaches might play, no one executes Plan X.  That is not the coaches fault.  I can attest to this without question because at Hope for the two-three years recently (i.e. the 3-7 seasons before last year's 7-3 season) at Hope, our players were not able to get the job done. It was most frustrating due to the repeated same mistakes each and every week regardless of who was in. 

That was not the coaches fault at all (some people will most likely disagree with that, however, I'm telling you that was absolutely not the case whatsoever-no way. Yes, again, a rare occurrence, but it does and did happen).  The coaches were/are excellent coaches and doing everything possible that anyone could think of to motivate, encourage, challenge, support, etc., etc. the players, all to no avail.  Most continued to make the same mistakes over and over again each week, despite repeated coaching, rehashing, reviewing of the game plans and in the daily practice session.  Of course, we had a few stellar individual players those years whose performances were tops.  Yet overall, the talent pool was poor-we simply did not have what I would call college level talent, even at the small college level.  Many of the players were just not good enough, unfortunately.  No amount of coaching or coaching talent will help that.

I disagree, because your argument puts us right back at square one: Recruiting. Your reasoning for the inability of the players to execute Plan X -- "Many of the players were just not good enough, unfortunately" -- indicates a personnel issue. And who is responsible for the lack of personnel who have the ability to execute Plan X? The coaches. You claim that "no amount of coaching or coaching talent will help that," but the facts deem otherwise. One of the most important talents a college football coach can have is salesmanship and the ability to close a deal. Recruiting, as I've already said, is a key aspect of what college coaching is all about, and if a coach is unable to land the players whose mental and physical abilities make them capable of executing Plan X, then that's his fault. He failed to put the personnel on his roster who could do what he needed to get done on the football field. And that's on him.

And, yes, I realize that there are any number of things that tie a coach's hands when it comes to recruiting. Believe me, after watching my alma mater's football teams for three and a half dismal decades now, I know all about what sort of obstacles can stand between even a coach who is adept at recruiting and his goal of landing players who are competent (or have the potential to be competent) within his league. After all, it's not as though NPU has deliberately hired a long string of dummies and screw-ups to run the school's football program. Nevertheless, when you shake hands with the AD and you accept the job he's just offered to you, you are then committed to winning football games. That's one of the main ways that success or failure are measured at this level (not the only one, of course, since admissions numbers and graduation rates are important at the D3 level as well). If you don't win games, you're probably not going to last long -- even if circumstances beyond your control make it well-nigh impossible to put together a decent football team by your league's standards. C'est la vie.

[formerd3db]

I can't believe my name hasn't come up!   

Left plenty of room in the top ten for you, Joe.

But, wouldn't you say executing and putting (x plan) into action, is on the player him/her self?

This is a chicken-or-egg comment.

If the players aren't putting Plan X into action, it's the coaches' job to find guys that WILL execute Plan X.

ExTartan:

Just to add further "fire" to the discussion.  With regards to your post above, I am in agreement with you about 99%.  However, I will say that, while rare, it does happen that situations sometimes occur in some years such that no matter who the coaches might play, no one executes Plan X.  That is not the coaches fault.  I can attest to this without question because at Hope for the two-three years recently (i.e. the 3-7 seasons before last year's 7-3 season) at Hope, our players were not able to get the job done. It was most frustrating due to the repeated same mistakes each and every week regardless of who was in. 

That was not the coaches fault at all (some people will most likely disagree with that, however, I'm telling you that was absolutely not the case whatsoever-no way. Yes, again, a rare occurrence, but it does and did happen).  The coaches were/are excellent coaches and doing everything possible that anyone could think of to motivate, encourage, challenge, support, etc., etc. the players, all to no avail.  Most continued to make the same mistakes over and over again each week, despite repeated coaching, rehashing, reviewing of the game plans and in the daily practice session.  Of course, we had a few stellar individual players those years whose performances were tops.  Yet overall, the talent pool was poor-we simply did not have what I would call college level talent, even at the small college level.  Many of the players were just not good enough, unfortunately.  No amount of coaching or coaching talent will help that.

I disagree, because your argument puts us right back at square one: Recruiting. Your reasoning for the inability of the players to execute Plan X -- "Many of the players were just not good enough, unfortunately" -- indicates a personnel issue. And who is responsible for the lack of personnel who have the ability to execute Plan X? The coaches. You claim that "no amount of coaching or coaching talent will help that," but the facts deem otherwise. One of the most important talents a college football coach can have is salesmanship and the ability to close a deal. Recruiting, as I've already said, is a key aspect of what college coaching is all about, and if a coach is unable to land the players whose mental and physical abilities make them capable of executing Plan X, then that's his fault. He failed to put the personnel on his roster who could do what he needed to get done on the football field. And that's on him.

And, yes, I realize that there are any number of things that tie a coach's hands when it comes to recruiting. Believe me, after watching my alma mater's football teams for three and a half dismal decades now, I know all about what sort of obstacles can stand between even a coach who is adept at recruiting and his goal of landing players who are competent (or have the potential to be competent) within his league. After all, it's not as though NPU has deliberately hired a long string of dummies and screw-ups to run the school's football program. Nevertheless, when you shake hands with the AD and you accept the job he's just offered to you, you are then committed to winning football games. That's one of the main ways that success or failure are measured at this level (not the only one, of course, since admissions numbers and graduation rates are important at the D3 level as well). If you don't win games, you're probably not going to last long -- even if circumstances beyond your control make it well-nigh impossible to put together a decent football team by your league's standards. C'est la vie.

I totally disagree with you on this one.  You are correct that that recruiting is the bottom line here, which was the original premise of the discussion.  You are also a smart guy Gregory, however, with all due respect, you don't know anything about the situation at Hope with regards to the recruiting and admissions aspects and how that has translated to the, let's say "challenges", performance and talent level in recent years there.  I am also sure our head coach is no less committed to winning games than yours is when they both "shook the hands of their respective ADs in accepting the job.  No one likes to lose game a large percentage of the time, however, depending on the school, that is not always going to translate 100% of the time in getting the head coach fired, even after several years.

Moreover, I distinctly noted the caveat in my post that this is a rare situation, but it does happen.  It may not be that way at your NPU, however, you or anyone can't say that situation doesn't or can't exist because you are simply not there and do not know or understand the specifics of what the underlying parameters are at Hope.  Likewise, I apply the same to myself with regard to your school's situation because I obviously don't know, am not there and you are, knowing the "behind the scenes" philosophy, framework and decisions of those who have the authority to make the decisions at NPU.  So, to use that old cliché/saying..."we agree to disagree" on this one.