FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[WahooThunder]

Thanks for the review of Ullrich.   I hope, for Wheaton's sake, he is as good as you say.   On a related subject, did you get the feeling this past year that the Wheaton coaching staff wanted to start Ullrich but just couldn't pull the trigger? 

That is a difficult question to answer.  Let's just say that it is hard to replace a well-liked, senior, returning two-year starter who is a former All-CCIW player with someone who is in their first year in the program, no matter how talented he may be, and especially while the team is still winning.  Chupp also worked out in the offseason with Joe and Chirs Fossum, and they had a year of seasoned experience under their belts, so it would have been hard to break up that trio.  That said, I was not a fan of the two quarterback system and had my own opinion on who should have been the starter, but it is hard to question a coaching staff of that caliber and I am sure they had good reasons for their decisions.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Could whoever put up the poll please remove it?!  It's embarassing to the 75% of us who answered something other than the first option!

(I confess to being in the plurality who though NCC would take down Cap.)

[Mugsy]

Thanks for the review of Ullrich.   I hope, for Wheaton's sake, he is as good as you say.   On a related subject, did you get the feeling this past year that the Wheaton coaching staff wanted to start Ullrich but just couldn't pull the trigger? 

That is a difficult question to answer.  Let's just say that it is hard to replace a well-liked, senior, returning two-year starter who is a former All-CCIW player with someone who is in their first year in the program, no matter how talented he may be, and especially while the team is still winning.  Chupp also worked out in the offseason with Joe and Chirs Fossum, and they had a year of seasoned experience under their belts, so it would have been hard to break up that trio.  That said, I was not a fan of the two quarterback system and had my own opinion on who should have been the starter, but it is hard to question a coaching staff of that caliber and I am sure they had good reasons for their decisions.

Well said.  Couldn't have stated it better myself.

[Mugsy]

Could whoever put up the poll please remove it?!  It's embarassing to the 75% of us who answered something other than the first option!

(I confess to being in the plurality who though NCC would take down Cap.)

I put it up, but can not remove it.  It requires someone with Pat's status (website access) to remove the poll.  I'll send him an email.

[Mugsy]

I know I am late, but had to get my daughter married off this weekend...just wanted to say that in 35 years as a Mount Union fan, I still have not seen a program with the class displayed by the head coach and players at Wheaton College.

Game was a lot closer than the score..good luck and hope to see you guys in the future....

First of all, congrats to you and your daughter.  Exciting times!

It is gratifying to hear this about Wheaton as an alum.  I truly hoped Wheaton would really give Mount Union a tough game.  I know the entire Wheaton program (from the administration to the players) is striving for the level of success experienced by MUC.  Over the past 20 years, Wheaton has continued to make strides. 

But at this point it is obvious MUC just has superior talent (especially in the area of speed), along with an outstanding coaching staff.  A tough combination to beat.  As much as we've taken our lumps at the hands of MUC, I'm hopeful that each year we'll make progress towards finally overtaking MUC.  We'll see...

[cardinaldad]

Congrats to NCC on a very good year...I was very impressed how hard they played throughout the entire game (except for the last minute - I am not sure about the timeouts they were using).  I feel the biggest difference maker amongst the two conferences is the speed!!  Believe me, Rocky is in a league of his own - especially when he is on.  This years difference in comparison to last year, is they have 2 WR's & 1 TE that can stretch the field on any given play.  Last year, they had 1 TE that could stretch the field & that was it.  NCC did a pretty good job of establishing drives, but once inside Cap territory, they could not execute td's.

Now, as far as the timeouts...can someone help me out on that??  I didn't see any substitutions taking place, but I could have missed that.  Hope everyone has a safe trip back to Naperville...hopefully we will see you next year!!

crusader26, the NCC fans, too, were wondering about the last minute time outs. We were not happy about them either. However, for each time out there were substitutions. Why, I don't know. It appeared that the coaches were getting the seniors OUT of the game. Again, we don't know why.

[crusader26]

Congrats to NCC on a very good year...I was very impressed how hard they played throughout the entire game (except for the last minute - I am not sure about the timeouts they were using).  I feel the biggest difference maker amongst the two conferences is the speed!!  Believe me, Rocky is in a league of his own - especially when he is on.  This years difference in comparison to last year, is they have 2 WR's & 1 TE that can stretch the field on any given play.  Last year, they had 1 TE that could stretch the field & that was it.  NCC did a pretty good job of establishing drives, but once inside Cap territory, they could not execute td's.

Now, as far as the timeouts...can someone help me out on that??  I didn't see any substitutions taking place, but I could have missed that.  Hope everyone has a safe trip back to Naperville...hopefully we will see you next year!!

crusader26, the NCC fans, too, were wondering about the last minute time outs. We were not happy about them either. However, for each time out there were substitutions. Why, I don't know. It appeared that the coaches were getting the seniors OUT of the game. Again, we don't know why.

Thanks cardinaldad...I guess we will never know??  Hope to see you guys for a 3rd consecutive year next season!!

[Brass Bell]

The intent of the time outs (good, bad or indifferent) was to allow the senior defensive players and opportunity to walk off the field for the last time.  The coaches recognized these seniors (offensive too) have done a lot for the program, e.g. CCIW Conference Title, Advancing to 2Nd round of NCAA playoff, leading various community service initiatives, etc.  Hence---- the TO's providing and opportunity to walk off the field for the final time

[Mugsy]

Hey Brass Bell,

Since NCC doesn't have the bell anymore, doesn't that mean you need to change your post moniker?   

[bison22]

Thanks for the review of Ullrich.   I hope, for Wheaton's sake, he is as good as you say.   On a related subject, did you get the feeling this past year that the Wheaton coaching staff wanted to start Ullrich but just couldn't pull the trigger? 

That is a difficult question to answer.  Let's just say that it is hard to replace a well-liked, senior, returning two-year starter who is a former All-CCIW player with someone who is in their first year in the program, no matter how talented he may be, and especially while the team is still winning.  Chupp also worked out in the offseason with Joe and Chirs Fossum, and they had a year of seasoned experience under their belts, so it would have been hard to break up that trio.  That said, I was not a fan of the two quarterback system and had my own opinion on who should have been the starter, but it is hard to question a coaching staff of that caliber and I am sure they had good reasons for their decisions.

Well said.  Couldn't have stated it better myself.

Agreed.   But, if I could probe a little further? Wheaton's Offensive Coordinator was in his first year on the job, right?  Do you think the legendary Coach Bishop would have been more likely to bump a senior QB?   Didn't Chupp, as a sophomore, start over an incoming all-conference QB named Bradley? 

[WahooThunder]

Thanks for the review of Ullrich.   I hope, for Wheaton's sake, he is as good as you say.   On a related subject, did you get the feeling this past year that the Wheaton coaching staff wanted to start Ullrich but just couldn't pull the trigger? 

That is a difficult question to answer.  Let's just say that it is hard to replace a well-liked, senior, returning two-year starter who is a former All-CCIW player with someone who is in their first year in the program, no matter how talented he may be, and especially while the team is still winning.  Chupp also worked out in the offseason with Joe and Chirs Fossum, and they had a year of seasoned experience under their belts, so it would have been hard to break up that trio.  That said, I was not a fan of the two quarterback system and had my own opinion on who should have been the starter, but it is hard to question a coaching staff of that caliber and I am sure they had good reasons for their decisions.

Well said.  Couldn't have stated it better myself.

Agreed.   But, if I could probe a little further? Wheaton's Offensive Coordinator was in his first year on the job, right?  Do you think the legendary Coach Bishop would have been more likely to bump a senior QB?   Didn't Chupp, as a sophomore, start over an incoming all-conference QB named Bradley? 

I appreciate your curiosity bison, but Coach Hardy knows what he is doing and I don't think the legitimacy of his decision can be decided by the fact that he was a first year offensive coordinator.  Chupp was the starter this year and Ullrich will be the starter next year.  I don't think any further probing is necessary or helpful at this point.

[Mugsy]

Thanks for the review of Ullrich.   I hope, for Wheaton's sake, he is as good as you say.   On a related subject, did you get the feeling this past year that the Wheaton coaching staff wanted to start Ullrich but just couldn't pull the trigger? 

That is a difficult question to answer.  Let's just say that it is hard to replace a well-liked, senior, returning two-year starter who is a former All-CCIW player with someone who is in their first year in the program, no matter how talented he may be, and especially while the team is still winning.  Chupp also worked out in the offseason with Joe and Chirs Fossum, and they had a year of seasoned experience under their belts, so it would have been hard to break up that trio.  That said, I was not a fan of the two quarterback system and had my own opinion on who should have been the starter, but it is hard to question a coaching staff of that caliber and I am sure they had good reasons for their decisions.

Well said.  Couldn't have stated it better myself.

Agreed.   But, if I could probe a little further? Wheaton's Offensive Coordinator was in his first year on the job, right?  Do you think the legendary Coach Bishop would have been more likely to bump a senior QB?   Didn't Chupp, as a sophomore, start over an incoming all-conference QB named Bradley? 

I don't think Coach Hardy's first year as offensive coordinator is the issue here.  Wheaton has rotated multiple QB's in other years as well (under Bishop).  This occurred in years where they have won the CCIW and have been successful.  Whereas I personally don't like that model, I don't know all the factors involved that played into the decision to do so.  Having played for and coached under Coach Bishop and Coach Swider, I know they have valid, sound reasoning for doing so.  I will not question their decision.

It is a difficult situation, though one I'm sure many teams wouldn't mind having.  You have a 2 year starter and All-CCIW QB returning (Chupp) and you have a highly regarded DI transfer coming in (Ullrich).  Chupp has the experience under the system and the respect of his teammates.  Ullrich might have the edge in talent (we'll see more about this next year). 

It is a nice problem to have from the standpoint of how key it is to have a solid QB running the offense.  What happens if Chupp went down with an injury?  By giving Ullrich 3-5 series a game, you are giving him real game experience with the offense.  That would have proven pivotal had Chupp went down with an injury.  Not to mention he now has a serious jumpstart towards the 2007 season.

There are a variety of ways it could have been handled:
1. Play Chupp exclusively and risk frustrating a highly touted transfer (along with slowing his progression under a new offensive system)
2. Start the newcomer who doesn't have as much of a handle on the offensive scheme over the seasoned veteran with enough talent to be deemed All-CCIW as a sophomore
3. Split time between the two.

As much as I don't necessarily like to see 2 QB's splitting time from an offensive flow and continuity standpoint, this seems like the best move.  Again... I don't know all the factors involved standing on the outside looking in.  There may be several more reasons why the coach staff decided to go this route.

As to any questions of whether or not a program can be successful doing this... just look at Mount Union.  They have done this on many occasions - including this year.

[raiderguy]

Go Thunder

" Mount Union had a check list of things to be concerned with heading into its second round playoff match-up with Wheaton (IL).  First-Team All-College Conference of Wisconsin and Illinois running back Chaz Black, an Ohio native, was a 1,000 yard rusher.  Quarterback Jeremy Chupp was a three-year starter with almost 2,000 passing yards.  Andy Studebaker, the junior defense end named CCIW Defensive Player of the Year, led the nation in sacks with 17.5 and tackles for loss with 24.5.

Black ran for 70 yards, which was the single best rushing day against the Raiders defense this season.  But he needed 28 carries to do so, averaging just 2.5 yards per carry, which was less than half his season average.  Chupp completed almost as many passes to Mount Union (three) as he did his own receivers (five), and Studebaker finished with less than impressive numbers, just two assisted tackles and two batted down passes.  And Mount Union ran at him all day long.

  Meanwhile, the Thunder allowed 397 rushing yards and finished minus three in turnover margin for the game.  Mount Union's defense picked off five passes as the Purple & White won 35-3 and sent Wheaton home winless in five trips now to Mount Union Stadium.  The Thunder is 0-5 against the Raiders in playoff action and 6-0 against everybody else." Quote from game recap.

I think any insinuation of "twisted ankles" is a cheap shot considering the above. I respect the Wheaton program and your coach very much....please show some respect for a hard fought win and stop with some lame attempt of unsportsmanlike play as an excuse. NOBODY HAS RUN SUCCESSFULLY AGAINST THE RAIDERS THIS YEAR AND YOUR GUY DID THE BEST OF ALL. With or without twisted ankles. I don't think the d-backs were all that upset. I saw the game too.

[usee]

I was at the MUC game.  Have had a severe cold and wasn't able to post.  Garson walked by me on the sidewalk before the game and I have to say he is the most intimidating looking player I have ever seen.  He looked like he was ready for a bodybuilding contest his arms are huge.  Probably less than 7% body fat.  I thought we did a fairly good job on him even though Pete Ittersagen was out.  His mom told me that his ankle was very sore before the game.  The Wheaton offense did a pretty good job though I'm sure you wouldn't be able to tell that on the radio.  They were able to run at first but Mount made adjustments and started sending everybody.  Which loosened up the passing a bit.  Two of Mounts D-backs were small and only use ankle tackles.  You could tell they were quite upset when we were able to run a little bit as they were trying to turn Chaz Blacks ankles after he was down.  They stopped doing that after they were able to stop the run. 

The Mount defense scheme was they tied up the line with three linemen while sending DE #5 as a type of monster.  He decided were he wanted to line up (usually the strong side and moving the other DE.  The others used the Wheaton O-line to help clog up the middle.  Those 3 didn't move much just were tying up the middle and not allowing or in a way blocking the Wheaton O-line from getting to the linebackers.  The linebackers, D-backs, and # 5DE quickly swarm you and we were in a second and 15 down after down.  The Wheaton defensive line is what I had the most problems with. They were not working together.  They were getting to much penetration and were staggered instead of working together in a straight line.  Kmic would go through the seam and in the open field forget it.  Kmic runs with a wide stance and on those long runs a lot of Wheaton defense tried to tackle by grabbing him with one hand or pushing him out of bounds.  That never worked he is not even close to being brought down like that.  One play three Wheaton people tried to push him out of bounds while he was running down the side line.  I was taught to throw my body across the runner's waist and land on top of him.  Which I believe is a much better technique as we were defending the wishbone option in which most plays were down the sideline with 5'9" backs.  Two plays the Mount offensive line pulled to the outside and didn't block anybody.  We over penetrasted and blocked ourselves as Kmic was running options to the outside.  The D-back play was pretty good job considering the injury.  To me Wheaton needs to figure out this D-line over penetration problem which also kills us every year against Augustana.  MUC is very good and fast in certain areas but we also hurt ourselves on the D-line and interceptions. 

This is one of the most incomprehensible posts I have ever read. I wouldn't even know where to begin.

And we move on....

[79jaybird]

I don't know why people are critiquing Coach Hardy or any Wheaton Coach, because I think 9 out of 10 non-Wheaton persons would say the Wheaton Staff is doing the right things/pushing the right buttons.
Just because this is Coach Hardy's first year, doesn't mean he hasn't gone through the ropes, knows what works/doesn't work, and hasn't had mentors to observe from.  They don't just "throw him to the fishes" and sink/swim.

From what I saw of Ullrich he is a solid QB and will do fine as a starter next year.  Speaking of QB's I think replacing Kniss is going to be the single, most difficult thing for NC to do next year.  That is probably the only "disadvantage" of having an All-American QB is that once he graduates, who's going to step up and pick up where he left off?