FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[formerd3db]

I wish all of you CCIW'ers an enjoyable and blessed Thanksgiving Day and weekend wherever you are spending it.

[bleedpurple]

Bleed,

fair question. To be honest, my comment was really meant for less trained eyes than you. Both UWW and NCC are run first type schemes, both of them have similar running plays (though from what I can tell UWW runs a little more power and counter than outside/inside zone) and both have linemen with great feet, excellent technique, that try to punish you off the ball. UWW is definitely bigger and, as a result, more physical up front. They also run a lot more Power G from what I can see, which requires a double team at the point of attack and then a backside pulling guard with a huge TE/FB type blocking kicking out. I would also say UWW's tight ends are much bigger and more physical than anything we have seen.

Wheaton's D has speed and aren't small but the size advantage is clearly toward UWW. Does size trump speed? sometimes it does. Sometimes it doesn't

That's definitely a great description of line play and makes sense. Thank you for that.  It will be an interesting trench war for sure. If Wheaton can be disruptive enough to slow down the UW-W power/ inside zone run (I believe they still run both) game without compromising the integrity of their base defense, they will be in good shape. It looks to me like 44 will make it difficult for UW-W to run outside. He is really fast. On the other hand, as you mention, especially now that TE Campbell is back, UW-W has some big boys who can set the edge.  But to get outside, they've got to make sure Dansdill gets caught up in the traffic. If he runs free, UW-W isn't going anywhere wide.  I'm sure Wheaton would love to take away the run and make the Warhawks one dimensional. But they need to do it without bringing an 8th man in the box. My guess is UW-W will make the Thunder prove they can deal with their straight ahead power/counter game. And they will bang away for four quarters.  Do you know what kind of rotation Wheaton has on the defensive line? Depth on the defensive line is almost mandatory against UW-W.

[USee]

Tim Lovett was a starter last year and Jack Nussbaum, Michael Stanley, and Bobby Puggsley all have played or started games this year.  There is depth and most of those guys will see time.

Wheatons offensive line and TE have a similar size advantage over the UWW Defensive front.  The Thinder are 285-290 at 4 of the 5 spots and the TE is 240. I feel better than I ever have about Wheatons ability to compete up front.  If they can neutralize the LOS then the skill guys really matter. Wheatons wild card is Andrew Bowers.  For Wheaton to have a chance they need to compete up front and Bowers needs to protect the football and make plays. 

[HScoach]

Tim Lovett was a starter last year and Jack Nussbaum, Michael Stanley, and Bobby Puggsley all have played or started games this year.  There is depth and most of those guys will see time.

Wheatons offensive line and TE have a similar size advantage over the UWW Defensive front.  The Thinder are 285-290 at 4 of the 5 spots and the TE is 240. I feel better than I ever have about Wheatons ability to compete up front.  If they can neutralize the LOS then the skill guys really matter. Wheatons wild card is Andrew Bowers.  For Wheaton to have a chance they need to compete up front and Bowers needs to protect the football and make plays.

Same recipe as Mount against UWW.  Stalemate the line of scrimmage and win with skill people.  If you lose the LOS badly, you lose the game.  Compete up front and you have a shot.

[Craft_Beermeister]

Tim Lovett was a starter last year and Jack Nussbaum, Michael Stanley, and Bobby Puggsley all have played or started games this year.  There is depth and most of those guys will see time.

Wheatons offensive line and TE have a similar size advantage over the UWW Defensive front.  The Thinder are 285-290 at 4 of the 5 spots and the TE is 240. I feel better than I ever have about Wheatons ability to compete up front.  If they can neutralize the LOS then the skill guys really matter. Wheatons wild card is Andrew Bowers.  For Wheaton to have a chance they need to compete up front and Bowers needs to protect the football and make plays.

Same recipe as Mount against UWW.  Stalemate the line of scrimmage and win with skill people.  If you lose the LOS badly, you lose the game.  Compete up front and you have a shot.

I totally agree with HScoach in that if you lose the battle of LOS no matter what a team tries to game plan on either side of the ball they won't be effective.  I wish all a very Special holiday and look forward to an entertaining DIII playoff.  The real fun begins this Saturday with a lot of good match ups.

[GoPerry]

Some local coverage of tomorrow's game:

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20151125/sports/151129145/

[shepherd]

Current weather forecast for the game in Wheaton
40 deg cloudy 0% chance of rain. from the internet
Skilling said on the 10 o'clock news mid 40's partly sunny.
Go Thunder!
Lets roll!

[thunderdog]

Current weather forecast for the game in Wheaton
40 deg cloudy 0% chance of rain. from the internet
Skilling said on the 10 o'clock news mid 40's partly sunny.
Go Thunder!
Lets roll!

Calling all crusaderin' Thunder fans... We have a beautiful day for football! Get ready to make some noise! It's time to get all rowdy down at McCully!

Roll Thunder!

[USee]

Obviously a huge game for the Thunder today in Wheaton. UWW will be the best team they have played so far this year. The problem is the same may not be true for UWW. That doesn't mean anything to the Thunder's chances but it means the Warhawks have experience and poise. That's an advantage for Whitewater. This is the first time the Thunder face UWW but the 7th time for them against a purple power.

The stats are very similar for these teams but the biggest one that sticks out to me is turnover margin. UWW is +16. If the Thunder hope to win the game they have to be equal to positive in turnover margin. Andrew Bowers, Sola Olateju, and Luke Thorson need to make plays. Zach Lindquist needs to make a few big catches.

On defense I believe the Warhawks will line up with two TE and try to pound it at the Thunder defense. They have a big size advantage and they will try and force their will for 4 Qtrs. The Thunder will try and stop the run with their front 7 and protect the long ball, which is how they have played defense all season. This is where the game will be won or lost. Can the Thunder stop the best running team from running it? Does speed trump size?

Stay tuned.

[GoPerry]

Congratulations to the Warhawks on a deserving win to advance.  Whitewater really got rolling in that 1st half and Wheaton couldn't adjust quickly enough.  The secondary had no answer for the Warhawk passing game which seemed to complete key pass after pass. Plus some of the damage to the Thunder was self-inflicted (which is not to take anything away from UWW).  As some had suspected all along, WC kicking game did play a field position role it seems.

Thank you coach Swider and crew for another enjoyable season.

[emma17]

Congratulations to the Warhawks on a deserving win to advance.  Whitewater really got rolling in that 1st half and Wheaton couldn't adjust quickly enough.  The secondary had no answer for the Warhawk passing game which seemed to complete key pass after pass. Plus some of the damage to the Thunder was self-inflicted (which is not to take anything away from UWW).  As some had suspected all along, WC kicking game did play a field position role it seems.

Thank you coach Swider and crew for another enjoyable season.

And congratulations to the Wheaton players and coaches as well.  As the UWW players said in their post game press conference, Wheaton was fast and physical.  This was an unfortunate bracket arrangement to have such good teams play each other in the second round. 

[USee]

First of all congratulations to UWW. The Warhawks beat a good football team at McCully Stadium yesterday. I was very impressed with Chris Nelson. He made all the right decisions. With that line and Ratliffe, they don't have to throw it often but when they do they complete 70% of their passes. I thought there were 3 key plays that made huge impact's on the outcome. The first was Nelson's long post pattern to Worth in the first quarter. Nelson used a hard count to get the Thunder defense offsides and then, when he knew he had a "free play" he threw the deep ball and his receiver had better position. I was disappointed the Thunder defense stopped on the play, they clearly thought the play was dead with the offside. That was a costly mistake and led to UWW's first TD.

The second play was the aforementioned KO return with a minute left in the half. That led to 3 points and made it a 3 score game at half. As the 3rd quarter wore on and both defenses were digging in, the strategy for both teams was greatly affected. UWW got a little more conservative and Wheaton had to pass the ball more when 2 of their most effective offensive weapons were the feet of Olateju and Bowers. The pass happy strategy took those two options away.

The third huge play to me was the Warhawks stop on 4th down of the opening Thunder drive of the second half. Wheaton opened the half with a long pass to Thorson, a play they had hit once already and was open another time earlier in the game. They moved the ball from their own 25 to the Warhawk 35 and on 3rd and one, Brandon Tamsett made his 7th tackle for loss of the year and his biggest play of the day, hitting Olateju in the backfield for a 1 yard loss. On 4th and two Olateju rand a wide zone  play, which had worked several times that day, but UWW's Foster and Strasburg defeated their blocks and made the play for no gain. That killed Wheaton's momentum and the subsequent Warhawk drive, though it was stopped on 4th and 1, ended at the Wheaton 16 and took 4:46 off the clock which again changed field position. From that point on Wheaton was really fighting the clock and had to pass more often.

Observations for the Thunder:

-They really missed Johnny Peltz yesterday. Bowers is a great QB but JP11 is as well and JP11 is a better passer than Bowers. Andrew threw for 349 yds but completed only 50% of his passes.

-There was no real mismatch up front for either side. I though both sides were pretty equal up front and the Warhawks made more key plays with their skill guys. Wheaton's OLine was tremendous. They threw it 50 times and gave up only 2 sacks. One sack was by a running back trying to block Foster and the other was Chad Reitz, our backup T, who got beat by Flood on a 4th and 10.

-Dandsdill was awesome. He had 16 hits and forced the Ratliffe fumble inside the 4 in the second half. His play on Canton Larson in the second half on the reverse was sick. He must have known it was coming.

-Olateju has some juice. He ran away from some very good UWW defenders a couple of times. Their exceptional tackling kept him from having a much bigger day, though he did average the same yards per carry as Ratliffe on a third of the carries (for reasons stated earlier). He has a chance to have a special year next year.

-Snebold was an all american out there I thought. The Gagliardi candidate didn't allow a sack while playing Tackle and Guard (Wheaton bumped him down to guard in long passing situations so he could block Tamsett).

-This was a fun team to watch this year. We aren't very far from the top in my view. We have a lot of good players returning. Both QB's, Olateju, 4 of 5 O linemen and a solid core on defense. The Thunder will be back.

Thoughts on the Warhawks:

-Really well coached team with a lot of great players. Ratliffe is faster than I thought.
-Zach Franz is a difference maker. I know he has been banged up but he was all over the field yesterday and caused a lot of chaos.
-Winske is a great tackler. All of the UWW secondary tackle well and fly to the ball but he specifically impressed me.
-Bachar was a key to the game as well. His long field goal and his booming kick offs really affected the outcome
-Ratliffe is a stud. 38 carries  is a lot of work. He should take the rest of the weekend off.
-The UWW coaches should get a lot of credit. They made many key decisions that put their guys in position to win. The clock management at the end of the game, the play recognition as the game wore on, they began to spy Bowers in the second half, and multiple subsititutions to keep fresh guys on the field.

It will take a great team playing solid football to beat this UWW team.

[thunderdog]

I'll try to find time later to post my thoughts on UWW @ WC game, but for now, would just like to get everyone's opinion on the "illegal batting" call that went against Wheaton in that disastrous 2nd qtr. Here's what happened: Ratliffe took the handoff and headed towards the Wheaton sideline. He fumbled the ball and the trajectory of the ball was straight towards the Thunder sidelines. It took a high bounce from inbounds, broke the vertical plane of the sideline (which is insignificant in itself). #44 Dansdill made an incredibly athletic play to jump from inbounds, breaking the vertical plane of the sidelines, was midair while out-of-bounds, and basically caught the ball and immediately threw it back towards the in bounds, directly towards another Wheaton defender (yes it went "forward" by maybe a yard) who was fully in bounds and recovered the ball. The refs called Dansdill for "illegal batting". UWW kept possession in addition to the 10 yard penalty. IMO, this is a gross misinterpretation of "illegal batting". Can anyone shed some light on this? Been scouring the NCAA rule book and I think I've found the sections that address the play, but honestly, some of the "legalese" makes it tough to interpret. If you could please show me in the rule book why that was the appropriate call, I would appreciate it. From what I've found, pages 87 (rule 8, section 7- Responsibility and Impetus) , 101-102 (rule 9 section 4- Batting) and page 205 (rule interpretation 9, section 4, part 7) are where we find the answers, just need help with the interpretation.

Not saying the outcome of the game would have been different in any way, but that play in particular totally erased some much needed momo for Wheaton...

[thunderdog]

...and on a lighter note Wheaton fans, there is no "Steve" on the UWW coaching staff. Referee Tom Berns must have been talking to line judge Steve Martin when he mistakenly left his microphone on and said "I will not be talked to like that Steve..."

I bet Steve is the one who called the illegal batting on us

[thunder38]

I'll try to find time later to post my thoughts on UWW @ WC game, but for now, would just like to get everyone's opinion on the "illegal batting" call that went against Wheaton in that disastrous 2nd qtr. Here's what happened: Ratliffe took the handoff and headed towards the Wheaton sideline. He fumbled the ball and the trajectory of the ball was straight towards the Thunder sidelines. It took a high bounce from inbounds, broke the vertical plane of the sideline (which is insignificant in itself). #44 Dansdill made an incredibly athletic play to jump from inbounds, breaking the vertical plane of the sidelines, was midair while out-of-bounds, and basically caught the ball and immediately threw it back towards the in bounds, directly towards another Wheaton defender (yes it went "forward" by maybe a yard) who was fully in bounds and recovered the ball. The refs called Dansdill for "illegal batting". UWW kept possession in addition to the 10 yard penalty. IMO, this is a gross misinterpretation of "illegal batting". Can anyone shed some light on this? Been scouring the NCAA rule book and I think I've found the sections that address the play, but honestly, some of the "legalese" makes it tough to interpret. If you could please show me in the rule book why that was the appropriate call, I would appreciate it. From what I've found, pages 87 (rule 8, section 7- Responsibility and Impetus) , 101-102 (rule 9 section 4- Batting) and page 205 (rule interpretation 9, section 4, part 7) are where we find the answers, just need help with the interpretation.

Not saying the outcome of the game would have been different in any way, but that play in particular totally erased some much needed momo for Wheaton...

The play you're referring to took place in the first quarter with Wheaton up 7-0. It probably didn't change the outcome but given the way Wheaton drove the field on their first possession and taking over around the Warhawk 40, it certainly would've been interesting to see what would've happened if that play had unfolded differently.

I talked to a couple of the Wheaton coaches after the game and they agreed with the call. It ultimately boils down to the fact that Dansdill sent the ball forward when he kept it in play. Because he hadn't established possession, it couldn't be considered a forward lateral penalty which would've allowed Wheaton to keep the ball. Had he kept in in bounds even with where he scooped it up or sent it backwards from that point, the play would've been legal.