FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Gregory Sager]

Speaking of the bell and with regards to the context of the earlier passage... when we upset Wheaton 22-16.  We kept the score on the scoreboard all night.   A few of us with a little bit of Mary Jane in us,   were ringing that bell in the middle of the night.  Campus police finally came by and escorted us back to the dorms (thankfully not the Police Station).  It was arguably our biggest win since 1980 when the Jays last won the conference. 

IMO,  it's not about injuries, depth, etc. for Elmhurst on the large scale.  There are some visible gaps right now that expose how we have dropped a few rungs on the ladder, since their predecessors.

I remember this vividly 79jaybird... still haunts my dreams. A very good, talented Wheaton team (7-0) loses on the road to Elmhurst (0-7) in 1999.

Let's not shortchange the 'jays. They were 1-6 going into that game, not 0-7. They beat Ripon in their season opener.

This is arguably one of the biggest upsets in CCIW history, not just Elmhurst history.

What amuses me is that Elmhurst had lost to North Park -- at Langhorst, no less -- two weeks earlier.

GS- I remember you telling me at Fitz's Pub you were tossing Elmhurst around as a possible school to attend.

Just as a side note to anyone reading this, "GS" in this context refers to New Tradition, not me.

[79jaybird]

Sorry Greg-  Yes, I meant New Tradition.   

We did beat Ripon first week of the season hence why I said 3-4 wins was a short term goal for us. 

[79jaybird]

And if memory serves,  North Park played a dynamite game against us at Langhorst.  They shut down our offense (which unfortunately, at times was easy to do that year.        but definitely earned that victory

[Gregory Sager]

My favorite memory of a football win over Elmhurst is from the year before that, 1998, when the Vikings beat the 'jays at Hedstrand Field, 18-15. After the game I was walking down the Foster Avenue sidewalk back to campus amidst the clack-clack-clack of cleats on concrete, as football players from both teams trudged back to their respective locker rooms in the gym basement a block away. One Elmhurst player was walking in front of me alongside his parents, and he was practically sobbing as he said, "I can't believe this. We lost to North Park, and now I have to walk down a city sidewalk to get to my locker room."

I thought that he was a little overwrought, especially considering that both teams walked off the field with 2-4 records (en route to matching 2-7 final ledgers). You'd think that the players from both programs would've been numbed by all of the losses that they suffered in that era. But what tickled me is that he seemed even more put out by the fact that he had to walk on a city sidewalk to get back to the locker room than he was by either the loss or the fact that it had come at the hands of NPU.

[79jaybird]

Too funny. I can tell you that was NOT me a I was an incoming freshman in 1998 and not yet joined the FB team.     

Similarly,  I was broadcasting a game at Benedictine right after their pressbox fire.  So it was opening day and they used a RR "container"  and cut some holes out so people could view.   That thing was HOT! Combined with a 80+ day,   by the 4th quarter we were all sweating bullets.   I was alerted that the closest phone jack was the adjacent building so we had to go find a larger cord and run it across the stadium to be able to get the game on the air.

[Warren Thompson]

My favorite memory of a football win over Elmhurst is from the year before that, 1998, when the Vikings beat the 'jays at Hedstrand Field, 18-15. After the game I was walking down the Foster Avenue sidewalk back to campus amidst the clack-clack-clack of cleats on concrete, as football players from both teams trudged back to their respective locker rooms in the gym basement a block away. One Elmhurst player was walking in front of me alongside his parents, and he was practically sobbing as he said, "I can't believe this. We lost to North Park, and now I have to walk down a city sidewalk to get to my locker room."

I thought that he was a little overwrought, especially considering that both teams walked off the field with 2-4 records (en route to matching 2-7 final ledgers). You'd think that the players from both programs would've been numbed by all of the losses that they suffered in that era. But what tickled me is that he seemed even more put out by the fact that he had to walk on a city sidewalk to get back to the locker room than he was by either the loss or the fact that it had come at the hands of NPU.

Greg: do you think the player mentioned above might have been more comfortable stomping through a freshly plowed cornfield?   

[Gregory Sager]

One never knows, WT. All kinds of sardonic retorts ran through my head when the kid said that, but for once in my life I showed good judgment and refrained from mocking a total stranger in front of his parents.

[Gregory Sager]

I remember when the Big Ten was called the Big Two Little Eight. I don't think the CCIW is quite there especially with IWU in the mix but this has been a very important game in the conference race. I would like to see it at the end of the season.

The CCIW isn't going to accommodate two schools at the expense of everybody else by allowing them to opt out of the scheduling rotation for football ... and it isn't going to accommodate football in a way that doesn't accommodate any of the other sports when it comes to scheduling procedures, either.

[USee]

Dude, if you wanted some way to measure how the CCIW is perceived AND also brought up the Kickoff conference ranking all on your own, then why should we ignore the year over year delta in those rankings?  My entire point was that, yes, IWU losing that game the way they did wasn't a great look BUT it also doesn't impact significantly (really key word there) the way the league is viewed by people that follow the division.  The rankings bear that out, no?  7th before that IWU loss, 7th after the IWU loss.  I just don't see how you can claim that that result was...hang on, checking my notes... ah yes, "very damaging" to the league's reputation.  It wasn't.  The evidence is dispositive. 

When I looked this up, I fully expected to see that the CCIW got dropped one, maybe two places in the rankings and I STILL would have argued that the result wasn't very significant to the overall perception of the league.  But the ranking wasn't affected at all!  So my post proves exactly what I thought, only more emphatically than I expected.

Dude, So you now know the thinking of reasonable people to know why they ranked people where they did?  You seem to know why the NJAC (after they cake-walked to the quarterfinals) jumped over the CCIW despite 2 marquee wins over teams ranked high in conferences #1 and #2 but those reasons have nothing to do with the headline on the rankings page referencing the CCIW champs loss at home in round 1. Kudos.

I'm glad you are excited you proved your point to yourself. Again, I don't pretend to know the thinking of d3.com and the subjective exercise of ranking conferences. I believe IWU's shutout loss at home significantly affected the perception of the CCIW in the short term. You don't. Neither of us can prove it, despite your attempt.

You're really hung up on that one liner when the nuts and bolts of the thing is that the conference's ranking among all D3 conferences didn't change.  I'm not sure how that is disputable, yet here we are.  Also, I agree that the quick hitter there on the CCIW is odd given that the conference's ranking didn't change, but I think it's also worthwhile to remember that Kickoff is something like a 300+ page publication with (unofficially) 7,000,000 words and there is a really small team of people that curate, edit, and publish the whole thing.  Is that line wonky?  Sure.  Is it the end all?  Nah.

I am not disputing the ranking Wally, just disputing that it doesn't adress my overall point, which you continue to ignore. No wait, you didn't ignore, you explained it away neatly to fit your narrative (it's a 300 page document so pay no attention to the one liner that is the only thing most people read...). Again, I can also go back through the pages of posts that discuss IWU's loss in the playoffs and the surprise by most everyone that the CCIW Champ got handled at home. But I'm sure that doesn't affect anyone's perception, rather you would have us believe that people actually remember enough to understand IWU played a defacto 4 vs 5 game that wasn't really much of an upset instead of seeing #7 ranked conference champ lost badly at home to the #10 ranked conference Champ. That's why it's really a subjective discussion, despite your attempts to make it objective.

I have a different opinion, supported by facts, than your opinion, supported by different facts.

As I mentioned, I believe its a short term perception and if a CCIW team wins the Stagg Bowl (which is code for making a deep playoff run) this year, or if 2 teams make it and win a couple games, it all changes. My original point (which was a subpoint to the idea of how people perceive the Bell game this weekend vis a vis the CCIW) was that I think people perceive the OAC to be stronger when another team or 2 from that conference give UMU a close game and/or beat them. That's because the relative strength of conferences is subjectively determined by primarily using out of conference results, mostly playoffs.

[Mr. Ypsi]

One never knows, WT. All kinds of sardonic retorts ran through my head when the kid said that, but for once in my life I showed good judgment and refrained from mocking a total stranger in front of his parents.

ESPECIALLY a football player!

[wally_wabash]

Dude, if you wanted some way to measure how the CCIW is perceived AND also brought up the Kickoff conference ranking all on your own, then why should we ignore the year over year delta in those rankings?  My entire point was that, yes, IWU losing that game the way they did wasn't a great look BUT it also doesn't impact significantly (really key word there) the way the league is viewed by people that follow the division.  The rankings bear that out, no?  7th before that IWU loss, 7th after the IWU loss.  I just don't see how you can claim that that result was...hang on, checking my notes... ah yes, "very damaging" to the league's reputation.  It wasn't.  The evidence is dispositive. 

When I looked this up, I fully expected to see that the CCIW got dropped one, maybe two places in the rankings and I STILL would have argued that the result wasn't very significant to the overall perception of the league.  But the ranking wasn't affected at all!  So my post proves exactly what I thought, only more emphatically than I expected.

Dude, So you now know the thinking of reasonable people to know why they ranked people where they did?  You seem to know why the NJAC (after they cake-walked to the quarterfinals) jumped over the CCIW despite 2 marquee wins over teams ranked high in conferences #1 and #2 but those reasons have nothing to do with the headline on the rankings page referencing the CCIW champs loss at home in round 1. Kudos.

I'm glad you are excited you proved your point to yourself. Again, I don't pretend to know the thinking of d3.com and the subjective exercise of ranking conferences. I believe IWU's shutout loss at home significantly affected the perception of the CCIW in the short term. You don't. Neither of us can prove it, despite your attempt.

You're really hung up on that one liner when the nuts and bolts of the thing is that the conference's ranking among all D3 conferences didn't change.  I'm not sure how that is disputable, yet here we are.  Also, I agree that the quick hitter there on the CCIW is odd given that the conference's ranking didn't change, but I think it's also worthwhile to remember that Kickoff is something like a 300+ page publication with (unofficially) 7,000,000 words and there is a really small team of people that curate, edit, and publish the whole thing.  Is that line wonky?  Sure.  Is it the end all?  Nah.

I am not disputing the ranking Wally, just disputing that it doesn't adress my overall point, which you continue to ignore. No wait, you didn't ignore, you explained it away neatly to fit your narrative (it's a 300 page document so pay no attention to the one liner that is the only thing most people read...). Again, I can also go back through the pages of posts that discuss IWU's loss in the playoffs and the surprise by most everyone that the CCIW Champ got handled at home. But I'm sure that doesn't affect anyone's perception, rather you would have us believe that people actually remember enough to understand IWU played a defacto 4 vs 5 game that wasn't really much of an upset instead of seeing #7 ranked conference champ lost badly at home to the #10 ranked conference Champ. That's why it's really a subjective discussion, despite your attempts to make it objective.

I have a different opinion, supported by facts, than your opinion, supported by different facts.

As I mentioned, I believe its a short term perception and if a CCIW team wins the Stagg Bowl (which is code for making a deep playoff run) this year, or if 2 teams make it and win a couple games, it all changes. My original point (which was a subpoint to the idea of how people perceive the Bell game this weekend vis a vis the CCIW) was that I think people perceive the OAC to be stronger when another team or 2 from that conference give UMU a close game and/or beat them. That's because the relative strength of conferences is subjectively determined by primarily using out of conference results, mostly playoffs.

Ultimately, I think it's a really small number of people that would even remember that IWU was in last year's tournament, let alone whether or not they won a game, let alone who they might have played and possibly lost to.  Teams that exit in the first round are very rapidly forgotten.  The tournament- she is a cruel mistress. 

CCIW is doing just fine.  It might be the most intriguing league to watch this year, iyam.  Saturday is going to be really fun.  And it looks like you all might start and finish on the same day, so that's nice as well.   

[thunderdog]

Wally and USee,
I agree with both of yous. I disagree with both of yous. And that's all I have to say 'bout that.

[Kovo]

I remember when the Big Ten was called the Big Two Little Eight. I don't think the CCIW is quite there especially with IWU in the mix but this has been a very important game in the conference race. I would like to see it at the end of the season.

The CCIW isn't going to accommodate two schools at the expense of everybody else by allowing them to opt out of the scheduling rotation for football ... and it isn't going to accommodate football in a way that doesn't accommodate any of the other sports when it comes to scheduling procedures, either.

Why not?  The Big 10 accommodates Michigan vs Ohio State the Pac 12 accommodates USC vs UCLA and the ACC and SEC have to work together to accommodate Florida  vs Florida State. Can anyone seriously argue that North Central vs Wheaton isnt bigger than those games?!

[Augie6]

I remember when the Big Ten was called the Big Two Little Eight. I don't think the CCIW is quite there especially with IWU in the mix but this has been a very important game in the conference race. I would like to see it at the end of the season.

The CCIW isn't going to accommodate two schools at the expense of everybody else by allowing them to opt out of the scheduling rotation for football ... and it isn't going to accommodate football in a way that doesn't accommodate any of the other sports when it comes to scheduling procedures, either.

Why not?  The Big 10 accommodates Michigan vs Ohio State the Pac 12 accommodates USC vs UCLA and the ACC and SEC have to work together to accommodate Florida  vs Florida State. Can anyone seriously argue that North Central vs Wheaton isnt bigger than those games?

Because the Big 10 is the Big 10 and the CCIW is D3.  Also, don't kid your self about the history of NCC vs Wheaton in CCIW football.  It is not even close to being comparable to Michigan/Ohio State or the others you mention.  This game has only taken on true importance (from a standpoint of determining the CCIW champion) starting in the 2006 season.  Since that time, NCC and/or Wheaton has finished in 1st and 2nd place 7 times.  To say the CCIW should change the scheduling rotation to accommodate a last game NCC/Wheaton match up based on that history, is kind of ridiculous.  What about the 59 seasons prior to that.   

[Augie6]

I remember when the Big Ten was called the Big Two Little Eight. I don't think the CCIW is quite there especially with IWU in the mix but this has been a very important game in the conference race. I would like to see it at the end of the season.

The CCIW isn't going to accommodate two schools at the expense of everybody else by allowing them to opt out of the scheduling rotation for football ... and it isn't going to accommodate football in a way that doesn't accommodate any of the other sports when it comes to scheduling procedures, either.

Why not?  The Big 10 accommodates Michigan vs Ohio State the Pac 12 accommodates USC vs UCLA and the ACC and SEC have to work together to accommodate Florida  vs Florida State. Can anyone seriously argue that North Central vs Wheaton isnt bigger than those games?

Because the Big 10 is the Big 10 and the CCIW is D3.  Also, don't kid your self about the history of NCC vs Wheaton in CCIW football.  It is not even close to being comparable to Michigan/Ohio State or the others you mention.  This game has only taken on true importance (from a standpoint of determining the CCIW champion) starting in the 2006 season.  Since that time, NCC and/or Wheaton has finished in 1st and 2nd place 7 times.  To say the CCIW should change the scheduling rotation to accommodate a last game NCC/Wheaton match up based on that history, is kind of ridiculous.  What about the 59 seasons prior to that.

I got curious to see the answer to the number of times the Wheaton/NCC game was really important in determining the CCIW champion.  It would actually be looking at 49 seasons in history (Wheaton was out of the league for the decade of the 60s) and the Wheaton/NCC combination finished in 1st and 2nd place twice in those 49 seasons, in 1947 and 1958.