FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[iwu70]

I expect IWU to stick with the sophomore from Lexington, #10, who played so well last week against MU.  Doubt Warner is back as yet, and don't expect Bolden to play for another week or two either, after his emergency surgery.  If IWU plays like last week, I expect a 2-3 TD win over Augie for Homecoming afternoon festivities.  Then things get a whole lot tougher -- EC, WC and NCC -- senior day at home vs. NPU.  The meat of the season now.  Too bad the Titans are only 3-2 so far. 

IWU70

[thunderdog]

Since we're on the subject of QB's... can anyone shed some light on the decision to move Johnny Peltz to WR?  Wasn't he a highly recruited QB (possibly passing on offers from bigger schools?) coming out of Wheaton North?  I haven't seen any games yet this year, but the reviews I'm reading on Bowers & Butler are less than flattering.

I was pretty pumped when he committed to Wheaton, was hoping to see him lead the Orange & Blue someday.  Is the switch a permanent move?

Any info, opinions would be appreciated, TIA.

[thunderdog]

Since we're on the subject of QB's... can anyone shed some light on the decision to move Johnny Peltz to WR?  Wasn't he a highly recruited QB (possibly passing on offers from bigger schools?) coming out of Wheaton North?  I haven't seen any games yet this year, but the reviews I'm reading on Bowers & Butler are less than flattering.

I was pretty pumped when he committed to Wheaton, was hoping to see him lead the Orange & Blue someday.  Is the switch a permanent move?

Any info, opinions would be appreciated, TIA.

Bowers 5'9"
Butler 5'10"
Peltz 6'3"

I know height's not everything... just sayin'...

[Gregory Sager]

The height thing works both ways. A 6'3 WR is a bigger target than a 5'9 WR.

[shepherd]

Since we're on the subject of QB's... can anyone shed some light on the decision to move Johnny Peltz to WR?  Wasn't he a highly recruited QB (possibly passing on offers from bigger schools?) coming out of Wheaton North?  I haven't seen any games yet this year, but the reviews I'm reading on Bowers & Butler are less than flattering.

I was pretty pumped when he committed to Wheaton, was hoping to see him lead the Orange & Blue someday.  Is the switch a permanent move?

Any info, opinions would be appreciated, TIA.

Bowers 5'9"
Butler 5'10"
Peltz 6'3"

I know height's not everything... just sayin'...

On the first Swider Insider he was talking about how Butler was the only one of them at the time 1st game could run all the offense. 
These issues were discussed last year in which the new playbook was being graduated in while running some of the previous years plays.  Peltz also plays baseball and this is a big complicated playbook.  Butler knows it best, Bowers is getting familiar with it and Peltz was limited. 

I have seen 90% of the HS games the two Wheaton North players, Butler and Peltz. 
Butler was a good touch passer like  Sean Norris,  with a good roll out.
Peltz was awesome with all the tools.


IMHO:
Peltz is the most talented but does not know the playbook. 
So if it were my decision I would play Butler as he is the most familiar and hasn't thrown like he is capable of.  Last year he was trying to throw like Roberts fast quick throws and made some mistakes.  He is very good when he is the Qb using the talents he has.
Bowers is talented but is making mistakes. 
We will definitely see more of Bowers and Butler this year and begin to see Peltz and Bowers next year.

[AndOne]

On the subject of quarterbacks, Dylan Warden moves back into the starting role for NCC this week, replacing Tyler Dicken. Freshman Gabriel Isaak will be the backup.

Additionally, Matt Randolph will be the starting RB in place of usual starter, Ryan Kent.

[robertgoulet]

On the subject of quarterbacks, Dylan Warden moves back into the starting role for NCC this week, replacing Tyler Dicken. Freshman Gabriel Isaak will be the backup.

Additionally, Matt Randolph will be the starting RB in place of usual starter, Ryan Kent.

I'm assuming this has to due w/ Dicken's leaving the game injured last week? Hopefully nothing that will keep him out too long.

What's the word on Kent?

[USee]

Since we're on the subject of QB's... can anyone shed some light on the decision to move Johnny Peltz to WR?  Wasn't he a highly recruited QB (possibly passing on offers from bigger schools?) coming out of Wheaton North?  I haven't seen any games yet this year, but the reviews I'm reading on Bowers & Butler are less than flattering.

I was pretty pumped when he committed to Wheaton, was hoping to see him lead the Orange & Blue someday.  Is the switch a permanent move?

Any info, opinions would be appreciated, TIA.

I doubt its a permanent move. Don't be surprised to see Peltz at QB again. After a promising debut 2 weeks ago Bowers appears to be ailing and Butler hasn't been effective. They have to do something.

[USee]

Pretty interesting Pool C discussion from the Pool C board I will repost here:

Wally,

Are you saying a 9-1 Wheaton would not make the Pool C field based on your current projections? That would be unprecedented. But I understand the SOS and lack of non-conference strength is not helping.

Right now, we've got Wheaton as the third at-large team in the North and we learned last year "you're not gonna get three from the same region". 

Now, Wheaton does have some advantages in the schedule (non of which are related to SOS, unfortunately).  Both of the teams that the North region voters have placed ahead of Wheaton, should they both end as runners up in their leagues, will have lost AFTER Wheaton hypothetically loses to North Central.  When you lose isn't a criteria per se, but we've followed the rankings enough to know that it absolutely matters and teams that wind up with one loss generally cycle around each other based on who lost last.  JCU will lose in Week 11.  Witt (or Wabash) play in Week 10.  Wheaton's Brass Bell game is Week 8.

And, you're right- it would be weird for Wheaton or any 9-1 CCIW runner up to not get invited.  Wheaton's name and Wheaton's league carry weight (also not criteria, but I've seen enough now to know that that stuff matters whether people openly admit it or not).  So reputation also works in Wheaton's favor.  But right now Wheaton's SOS ranks 220 (out of 231).  That will come up some as they go through league play, but not as much as usual because the CCIW didn't bank as many September wins as they usually do.  And Kalamazoo and Eau Claire probably won't win four games between them.  I think when you add it all up, Wheaton is going to look an awful lot like Thomas More from 2013, and Thomas More wasn't really in the conversation last year (poor SOS, no quality wins). 

Really I think Wheaton getting in or not depends on whether or not they cycle to the front of the North's at-large queue after JCU and whoever winds up 2nd in the NCAC lose.  If Wheaton is first in line, they'll get in.  If not, it could be a difficult sell.

Based on Wally's analysis (and I completely agree) there is a very real chance a 9-1 Wheaton (assuming a loss to NCC) does not get into the playoffs. Thundernation would tear there clothes and cover themselves in ashes if that were to happen but I think this is the year we could see it. The conferences dismal September will take the blame but Wheaton's penchant for scheduling middle tier non-conference games could bite them this year.

[CardinalAlum]

Pretty interesting Pool C discussion from the Pool C board I will repost here:

Wally,

Are you saying a 9-1 Wheaton would not make the Pool C field based on your current projections? That would be unprecedented. But I understand the SOS and lack of non-conference strength is not helping.

Right now, we've got Wheaton as the third at-large team in the North and we learned last year "you're not gonna get three from the same region". 

Now, Wheaton does have some advantages in the schedule (non of which are related to SOS, unfortunately).  Both of the teams that the North region voters have placed ahead of Wheaton, should they both end as runners up in their leagues, will have lost AFTER Wheaton hypothetically loses to North Central.  When you lose isn't a criteria per se, but we've followed the rankings enough to know that it absolutely matters and teams that wind up with one loss generally cycle around each other based on who lost last.  JCU will lose in Week 11.  Witt (or Wabash) play in Week 10.  Wheaton's Brass Bell game is Week 8.

And, you're right- it would be weird for Wheaton or any 9-1 CCIW runner up to not get invited.  Wheaton's name and Wheaton's league carry weight (also not criteria, but I've seen enough now to know that that stuff matters whether people openly admit it or not).  So reputation also works in Wheaton's favor.  But right now Wheaton's SOS ranks 220 (out of 231).  That will come up some as they go through league play, but not as much as usual because the CCIW didn't bank as many September wins as they usually do.  And Kalamazoo and Eau Claire probably won't win four games between them.  I think when you add it all up, Wheaton is going to look an awful lot like Thomas More from 2013, and Thomas More wasn't really in the conversation last year (poor SOS, no quality wins). 

Really I think Wheaton getting in or not depends on whether or not they cycle to the front of the North's at-large queue after JCU and whoever winds up 2nd in the NCAC lose.  If Wheaton is first in line, they'll get in.  If not, it could be a difficult sell.

Based on Wally's analysis (and I completely agree) there is a very real chance a 9-1 Wheaton (assuming a loss to NCC) does not get into the playoffs. Thundernation would tear there clothes and cover themselves in ashes if that were to happen but I think this is the year we could see it. The conferences dismal September will take the blame but Wheaton's penchant for scheduling middle tier non-conference games could bite them this year.

Recent history says otherwise.  I would think and hope that the conference's strong showings in the playoffs would be a consideration for either a 9-1 Wheaton or any other conference team.

[USee]

Recent history? Wabash got left at the table last year, Thomas More the year before. Playoff history, conference history, none of it is a criteria. The fact is are you going to pick a 9-1 Wheaton over a 9-1 John Carroll? Over a 9-1 Wabash? Maybe, maybe not. And the way the system works Wheaton will be ranked in the North with those teams and only 1 of them will be considered at a time. Go read the Pool C board and look over Wally's mock draft of Pool C to this point. I think he's right and I think Wheaton is in trouble at a minimum, even at 9-1.

[wally_wabash]

Recent history says otherwise.  I would think and hope that the conference's strong showings in the playoffs would be a consideration for either a 9-1 Wheaton or any other conference team.

Like 41-7 in the first round?  I made note that the CCIW's name carries weight, but in 2014 this league is not what many people have been conditioned to believe this league to be. 

[ExTartanPlayer]

Recent history says otherwise.  I would think and hope that the conference's strong showings in the playoffs would be a consideration for either a 9-1 Wheaton or any other conference team.

Like 41-7 in the first round?  I made note that the CCIW's name carries weight, but in 2014 this league is not what many people have been conditioned to believe this league to be.

Bingo.  The CCIW has a strong playoff history over the past decade, but the most relevant data (2013-2014) do not support that.

- 2 of the CCIW's 3 flagship programs lost OOC games to teams who are not going to win their conferences
- The middle/bottom of the league dropped several games to the MIAA (not just to the "best" MIAA teams, either)

As wally has been (correctly) pounding, teams should not be plopped in because "9-1 CCIW runner up" or "9-1 OAC runner up" merits inclusion.  You're going to have some very tough discussions between several 9-1 and 8-2 candidates from good conferences with good playoff histories; just throwing your hat in the ring as a 9-1 runnerup from a traditionally-strong conference is not enough in and of itself.

[USee]

As far as recent data in playoff history is concerned, I don't think JCU has an edge over the CCIW.

The losses this year are represented in the criteria, specificially the SOS numbers and that will weigh heavily. Any further consideration is really "double counting". It doesn't mean it won't happen, but it shouldn't.

If we are all really honest, If Wheaton is the lone 9-1 team on the North board, they are getting in. But the ranking of potentially 3 North 9-1 teams is where it gets dicey. JCU, Wabash, Witt, Depauw and Wheaton are the likely teams and there will only be 3 of those 4 as either Witt, Bash or Depauw will win the NCAC AQ by some yet-to-be-determined/revealed formula (good luck with that).

So how the North Regional Committee ranks the 3 candidates will likely determine each of their fate. As Wally points out, Wabash was #3 North a year ago and got left behind. Subsequently the chair of the National Committee revealed on the public airwaves that "We aren't taking 3 from one region" (What???). So the precedent is there. We can hash over the criteria all we want but there are what we can refer to as "Unseen subjective" criteria that will determine the outcome of these three teams.

And here is the group that gets to unsort the North rankings:

Erik Raeburn, co-chair Wabash North Coast
Chris Martin, co-chair CCIW CCIW
Patrick Etherton Millikin CCIW
Mike Leonard Franklin Michigan Intercol.
Jack Hatem Denison North Coast
Mark Walsh Aurora Northern Athletics
Mike Leonard Franklin Heartland Collegiate
John Snell Baldwin Wallace OAC

The top two names participate on the national committee as reps  from the North

[ExTartanPlayer]

But the ranking of potentially 3 North 9-1 teams is where it gets dicey. JCU, Wabash, Witt, Depauw and Wheaton are the likely teams and there will only be 3 of those 4 as either Witt, Bash or Depauw will win the NCAC AQ by some yet-to-be-determined/revealed formula (good luck with that).

Just to be clear: the NCAC sorts itself out neatly if either Witt runs the table or Wabash runs the table.  If Wittenberg runs the table, the Bell game will leave either a 9-1 Wabash standing or a 9-1 DePauw standing, not both.  The only messy scenario that creates a three-way tie with two one-loss* NCAC teams NOT getting a Pool A bid is Wabash>Wittenberg and then DePauw>Wabash.

*Wittenberg would actually be 8-2, with an 8-1 Division III record.

Still, that does potentially leave 9-1 Wheaton, 9-1 John Carroll, and at least one NCAC "runner-up" on the table at 9-1/8-1. 

But I think we're doing an awful lot of projecting here, and taking some really good games yet to be played for granted.  We've done a lot of poking holes in some pretty good teams this year, saying that X looked bad against Y or whatever, but ultimately anybody that has gotten to 4-1 or 5-0 has had to beat someone along the way and should not be counted out until the rest of the games are played.  Even Heidelberg this weekend against Mount.  That's potentially the last stand for a big group of Berg seniors.  I hope they go down swinging, if they must go down.