FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[robertgoulet]

I have to get this off my chest because it  has been bothering all day.  Why or what possessed Lovie Smith and the Bears to squib kick that kickoff after they just took the lead with 11 seconds?  For the life of me, I cannot understand why you wouldn't kick it deep? 
If they kick it deep and Atlanta has a good return then THEY earned it.  But, IMO squib kicking the ball was a huge advantage for the Falcons almost appearing as if they "handed them the game".    Uggh!  We should be 6-0 but instead 3-3.

Way off-topic as you said - the Bears team is paying big-time for Lovie's loyalty to his defensive coordinator.  Why did the Bears rush only four on the last offensive play.  The best pass defense is always a good pass rush.  And why with seven guys in pass coverage was their only one Bears defender anywhere near the last play.  Were the other guys just mesmerized by the pass.

No that was bad defensive play calling - and its cost the Bears three games - but Lovie has proved that loyalty to his defensive coordinator is more important than winning games - he should have called him out.

dgp

In light of the fact that the Falcons previous kickoff return went 85 yrds and that the Bears had a number of their kickoff coverage guys hurt and out of the game, the decision to proceed with a squib kick was sound.  However, the execution of the squib by Gould was horrible.  I do not blame Lovie for that decision.  I do however, blame him and Ron Turner for failing to score when they had 3rd and Goal from the 1.  Horrible play calling on those two plays.

Agreed.  It should not have come to that squib kick if the Bears execute on 3rd and Goal from the 1.

It also did not help that Bears were without their starting DB's.

I don't disagree with the squib kick...I disagree with the execution of the squib kick. Should have kicked it harder (much like teams do to the Bears), you need that to go to at least the other team's 30, otherwise you are just as well off kicking it out of bounds.

Also, wouldnt you rather be playing a Cover 3 or 4 on the final play? The sideline IS the goalline at that point. I know Hamilton froze when the underneath WR came in front of him and he let Jenkins slip behind him, but in a Cover 3 or 4 you've got the safety help already on the outside, do you not?

[Tailgater]

From Mugsy;
I'm not saying that at all, but I am trying to get some dialogue as to whether or not Carthage should be considered a "very good" team at this point in time.  

I'll try and keep this as unbiased as possible. At this point, the way Carthage has been playing (actual play on the field), Carthage is an above average team with a ton of potential. A very good team does not continually shoot itself in the foot with mistakes. Carthage has the personal, defensive and offensive schemes to be a very good top tier team today if not for the mistakes. Their two losses (IMO) were a result more because they beat themselves...no disrespect intended (8 turnovers against Campbell, 5 against Elmhurst). In each game they still had opportunities to win late or put their opponent away early. Even with their "defensive issues" (which I can't put my finger on) the offense is capable of erasing opponents points very quickly. The offensive scheme, with a young first year QB starting, is prone to create turnovers. I forget which high profile coach said it, but it goes something like "there are only 2 things that can happen when you put the ball in the air....and both of them are bad". Carthage can and will compete with everyone left on their schedule. If they play as they have the first 5 weeks they will go 2-3 the rest of the way. With the ongoing  maturity process of their young QB I'm hoping mistakes/turnovers will begin to decline. If they can get a grip on the turnovers Carthage will finish the second half at least 3-2 as I believe they can beat any of the top 3 teams.

[Mugsy]

From Mugsy;
I'm not saying that at all, but I am trying to get some dialogue as to whether or not Carthage should be considered a "very good" team at this point in time.  

I'll try and keep this as unbiased as possible. At this point, the way Carthage has been playing (actual play on the field), Carthage is an above average team with a ton of potential. A very good team does not continually shoot itself in the foot with mistakes. Carthage has the personal, defensive and offensive schemes to be a very good top tier team today if not for the mistakes. Their two losses (IMO) were a result more because they beat themselves...no disrespect intended (8 turnovers against Campbell, 5 against Elmhurst). In each game they still had opportunities to win late or put their opponent away early. Even with their "defensive issues" (which I can't put my finger on) the offense is capable of erasing opponents points very quickly. The offensive scheme, with a young first year QB starting, is prone to create turnovers. I forget which high profile coach said it, but it goes something like "there are only 2 things that can happen when you put the ball in the air....and both of them are bad". Carthage can and will compete with everyone left on their schedule. If they play as they have the first 5 weeks they will go 2-3 the rest of the way. With the ongoing  maturity process of their young QB I'm hoping mistakes/turnovers will begin to decline. If they can get a grip on the turnovers Carthage will finish the second half at least 3-2 as I believe they can beat any of the top 3 teams.

Thanks for your assessment.  I do not mean to judge where Carthage will end up or to explicitly put a "stake in the ground" on how good Carthage is.  I just don't know.  It is puzzling to me.   

Everything I hear and at a high level see indicates that Carthage can be as good as anyone.  Yet when I started to drill down into key elements that usually separate the great teams from the ok teams, Carthage does not stack up - red zone execution, turnover ratio, defense, field position (kick/punt coverage), etc...  In fact in many of these categories they are the worst in the CCIW.  I hear "potential" getting kicked around and I see the mind boggling pass statistics, but something is missing for me.

Based on potential... I agree Carthage can be right there in the end.  But I think they need to start executing on a number of levels if they wish to get there.  I guess we'll see starting this weekend.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Tailgater, I'm pretty sure it was Woody Hays who said "There are three things that can happen when you pass, and two of them are bad."

[sac]

Tailgater, I'm pretty sure it was Woody Hays who said "There are three things that can happen when you pass, and two of them are bad."

I've heard that quote attributed to Vince Lombardi, and since both coached in nearly the same era, both probably said it at least once.

[Tailgater]

From Mugsy;
I'm not saying that at all, but I am trying to get some dialogue as to whether or not Carthage should be considered a "very good" team at this point in time.  

I'll try and keep this as unbiased as possible. At this point, the way Carthage has been playing (actual play on the field), Carthage is an above average team with a ton of potential. A very good team does not continually shoot itself in the foot with mistakes. Carthage has the personal, defensive and offensive schemes to be a very good top tier team today if not for the mistakes. Their two losses (IMO) were a result more because they beat themselves...no disrespect intended (8 turnovers against Campbell, 5 against Elmhurst). In each game they still had opportunities to win late or put their opponent away early. Even with their "defensive issues" (which I can't put my finger on) the offense is capable of erasing opponents points very quickly. The offensive scheme, with a young first year QB starting, is prone to create turnovers. I forget which high profile coach said it, but it goes something like "there are only 2 things that can happen when you put the ball in the air....and both of them are bad". Carthage can and will compete with everyone left on their schedule. If they play as they have the first 5 weeks they will go 2-3 the rest of the way. With the ongoing  maturity process of their young QB I'm hoping mistakes/turnovers will begin to decline. If they can get a grip on the turnovers Carthage will finish the second half at least 3-2 as I believe they can beat any of the top 3 teams.

Thanks for your assessment.  I do not mean to judge where Carthage will end up or to explicitly put a "stake in the ground" on how good Carthage is.  I just don't know.  It is puzzling to me.   

Everything I hear and at a high level see indicates that Carthage can be as good as anyone.  Yet when I started to drill down into key elements that usually separate the great teams from the ok teams, Carthage does not stack up - red zone execution, turnover ratio, defense, field position (kick/punt coverage), etc...  In fact in many of these categories they are the worst in the CCIW.  I hear "potential" getting kicked around and I see the mind boggling pass statistics, but something is missing for me.

Based on potential... I agree Carthage can be right there in the end.  But I think they need to start executing on a number of levels if they wish to get there.  I guess we'll see starting this weekend.

Absolutely correct. I agree with all that you have noted and ponder. If Carthage were statistically anywhere in the top half of the conference in many of the "key elements", which you point out, this could be a scary good team. Even with their poor rankings they have won or could have won all 5 contests so far. It is fair to say nobody should look past the Red Men for what might appear to be a more significant game on their schedule or assume that Carthage will continue to make the high number of mistakes which have hurt them to date.

[New Tradition]

I believe they can beat any of the top 3 teams.

I'm super nervous this week.  If the Cards don't manage to clean up the mistakes that they have been making the last few weeks and play sharper football, and Carthage does, this one could go the way of the Redmen.  NCC keys to the winning:

A) Be healthy.  They are a different team with Fanthorpe at the helm.  I think the offense has a different feel and they execute better in all areas, not just the quarterback and receivers.  This was evident last week against NPU.  The Cards have already lost a couple of key offensive players for the season, which brings me to my next point:

B) To protect Fanthorpe, who is coming off of an injury, NCC needs to fix the situation on the offensive line.  Wes Welnack going down takes away a seasoned offensive lineman and a leader who has been in the system for 4 years.  The Cards have the experience and the talent to overcome this, but the move that they made in starting a freshman on the edge at tackle and moving Delancy inside is not the right move, IMO.  Larson and Iossi have both been doing very well rotating at center, aside from a couple of errant gun snaps by either.  I think, to promote consistency at center, Iossi should be moved to guard, Larson can stay at center, and you move Delancy back to tackle.  This will let Larson settle down and get into a snapping rhythm, which will allow the offense to be more even-keeled.

C)  Penalties need to be limited, especially the 15 yarders.  NCC might be able to get away with committing them against Millikin and NPU, but against any of the rest of the teams on the schedule they can potentially kill (or extend opponent's) drives.  The Cards round out their season with Carthage, Wheaton, Wesleyan, Augie, and Elmhurst.  That is a very tough end to the conference schedule, and if you make those mistakes against those teams, it WILL cost you at least one of those games.  All quality opponents.

D)  Carthage's air attack scares the crap out of me.  Usee said it best:

Carthage is a talented team and, if I can be even more obvious, the giveaways are the only thing between them and a 5-0 record with a top 25 ranking.

Unless the Cards can continue to take the football away from Carthage as all of their other opponents have done so far this season, I think that the Cards could be in a dog fight late into this game.

And finally:
E)  Hold on to the ball, key in any game.  Not that the Cards have turned the ball over a whole ton, but having a +5 turnover ratio in this game will help out immensely.


Just a few thoughts...

[DIIIinVA]

Tailgater, I'm pretty sure it was Woody Hays who said "There are three things that can happen when you pass, and two of them are bad."

I've heard that quote attributed to Vince Lombardi, and since both coached in nearly the same era, both probably said it at least once.

I've heard it attributed to Bear Bryant.  It would fit with any of the 3 guys mentioned.  Probably someone who preceded them came up with the saying, and they all said it at some point in their careers.

[Carthage Fan]

USee-  I see your point with regards to Carthage, however after the game Saturday I was thinking "This is a great team, capable of beating anybody in the conference, yet how did we come out on top?" 

I think Coach Rucks is going to be pretty hard on his players in practice this week, focusing on "finishing" tackles/games, and recapturing that attitude that helps you win games.  I the combination of A) opportunity to defeat the defending CCIW co-champs, and B) the bitter taste of last week's homecoming loss, is going to give the Red Men momentum to put up a good fight in Naperville. 
I agree with any earlier poster that if Carthage coughs up the ball 3-5 times @ NC they are in for a long day.  However that could be said for any team regarding turnovers.

Jaybird,

You clearly don't understand the magnitude of the problem. I took a look around to try to find another team, any team, in the country that has turned it over anywhere close to the number of times Carthage has through 5 games (24 times). In the CCIW the next worst is Elmhurst with 14 turnovers. I looked at the OAC (Marietta 18x, Heidelberg 13x), the NCAC (Hiram 17x, Kenyon 17x), the NATHC (Lakeland 16x). I had to go to the 25th rated conference (per D3.com), the SLIAC to find Prinicpia with 28 turnovers (through 6 games) and Blackburn (25 turnovers) to find a winner.

Those are the BOTTOM dwellers of those conferences. I looked back at the CCIW stats for 5 years and the worst number of turnovers for an ENTIRE SEASON was North Park with 36 (no other team had more than 28 in any season). Carthage is on pace to have 45-50 turnovers in 2008. That is an eye opener.

So what's amazing is this: Carthage is talented enough to be a top 25 team and compete for the CCIW title this year but their turnover ratio is lower than almost all of the worst teams in D3.

BTW, Carthage led the CCIW last year in turnover margin in 2007 with a +9 (34 takeaways on 25 giveaways). In 2008 they are currently last with a -12 (12 takeaways to 24 giveaways).

16 INT's in 5 games - over 3 INT's per game.   If Carthage keeps it up, they are on pace for over 30 INT's for the season.  How many teams have thrown over 30 INT's in a season and won a conference title, must less contend for one?

I think there may be other areas of question for Carthage through 5 games. Carthage plays a very aggressive defensive scheme that is high risk, high reward.  In years past, their defense has generated a ton of turnovers, sacks and general chaos. 

I haven't seen Carthage play this year, but from the outside the rewards of a very aggressive defense haven't been as obvious. 

- Allowing 30.6 points a game: 7th in CCIW
- Allow 253 ypg passing: 8th in CCIW
- Generated 3 fumbles & 9 INTs, while giving up 8 fumbles & 16 INTs for a turnover ratio of -2.40: 8th in CCIW, next worst is -0.60
- Total defense of 340.0 ypg: 6th in CCIW (3.6 ypg from 7th)
- They do have 15 sacks (3 sacks a game), but that is a bit down from previous years if I'm not mistaken
- 92 ypg in penalties: 8th in CCIW
- 53.8% red-zone offense, with 4 turnovers in the red-zone: 8th in CCIW
- 0 for 4 on FG's: 8th in CCIW
- 77.3% red-zone defense: 7th in CCIW
- 7.8 yards per punt return: 8th in CCIW
- net avg of 35.3 yards on kickoff coverage: 6th in CCIW
- 102 opponent first downs: 8th in CCIW
- opponent 4th down conversions at 56.2%: 8th in CCIW

Again... I haven't seen Carthage play yet, but from a purely stats standpoint if you take away the prolific passing attack, there are a lot of areas to be concerned over.  Last in turnover ratio, a net last in field positon categories, a net last in red-zone categories, last in several defensive categories. Carthage could well go on to win the CCIW, but they had better address a number of areas if they wish to do so - IMO.

Some Observations:

- Allow 253 ypg passing: 8th in CCIW 8 yds per game separates 6-8 We are actually 4th in rushing defense at 86.6 yd per game.
- Generated 3 fumbles & 9 INTs, while giving up 8 fumbles & 16 INTs for a turnover ratio of -2.40: 8th in CCIW, next worst is -0.60 Reason we are 3-2
- Total defense of 340.0 ypg: 6th in CCIW (3.6 ypg from 7th)10 ypg from 5th
- They do have 15 sacks (3 sacks a game), but that is a bit down from previous years if I'm not mistaken
- 92 ypg in penalties: 8th in CCIW The other heel
- 77.3% red-zone defense: 7th in CCIW  Ave field position after 9 turnovers on Carthage side of the field is the Carthage 30, 4 within the 20
- 102 opponent first downs: 8th in CCIW Best in the CCIW at opponent 3rd down conversion 26.7%

So while we certainly aren't leading the pack in D statistics they have played well enough to win.  We are very young with a new D coordinator and system.  Our starters are or will be 3 Sr, 3 Jr, 3 So and 2 Fr.  Also we moved guys to new postitions from O to D and within the D.  I am not trying to make excuses, just stat the facts as they are.  Yes we have to get better but don't forget teams went down on us early and had to throw so I think you have to take that into consideration. 

[Carthage Fan]

Carthage Fan, I  did meander around the Carthage Tailgate looking for Tailgater.  I am always impressed with the Carthage Tailgate which by far, has the most members and most varieties of food/beverages going. 

Your Son is a great ball player and I know that the Red Men are down emotionally.  Turnovers and penalties was the story for both teams.  I.E. Elmhurst defense stopping the Red Men only to give the ball back as the punt bounces off an EC upback,  or Kudyba throwing an INT early in the 3rd quarter etc.

While there were numerous penalties and turnovers I still direct the credit towards the EC defense and Kudyba/Long for stepping up in the 4th quarter to climb their way back into the game.

Good luck to Carthage next weekend.  I know I will be rooting for a red team, just don't know which red 

Thanks Jaybird, good luck to Elmhurst too.

[Carthage Fan]

If carthage turns it over 5 times in Naperville they will have no chance. You can bet on that.

Gee, ya think?     I read a post on here referencing an achilles' heel.   This is ours, especially when and where we have been turning it over.  We have to play a perfect game to win this weekend, no turnovers, no penalties, hold the ball and score on O stop long drives on D.  No biggie!        

It certainly seems obvious but Carthage has averaged close to 5 turnovers a game and still managed a 3-2 record. Carthage is a talented team and, if I can be even more obvious, the giveaways are the only thing between them and a 5-0 record with a top 25 ranking. Clearly they will not beat the best teams with turnovers. I see nothing to indicate that's improving so I think the Redmen are in for a long day this weekend in Naperville.

We are our own worst enemy at this point.  We will get better, I know it.  I just hope soon!

[Mugsy]

Some Observations:

- Allow 253 ypg passing: 8th in CCIW 8 yds per game separates 6-8 We are actually 4th in rushing defense at 86.6 yd per game.
- Generated 3 fumbles & 9 INTs, while giving up 8 fumbles & 16 INTs for a turnover ratio of -2.40: 8th in CCIW, next worst is -0.60 Reason we are 3-2
- Total defense of 340.0 ypg: 6th in CCIW (3.6 ypg from 7th)10 ypg from 5th
- They do have 15 sacks (3 sacks a game), but that is a bit down from previous years if I'm not mistaken
- 92 ypg in penalties: 8th in CCIW The other heel
- 77.3% red-zone defense: 7th in CCIW  Ave field position after 9 turnovers on Carthage side of the field is the Carthage 30, 4 within the 20
- 102 opponent first downs: 8th in CCIW Best in the CCIW at opponent 3rd down conversion 26.7%

So while we certainly aren't leading the pack in D statistics they have played well enough to win.  We are very young with a new D coordinator and system.  Our starters are or will be 3 Sr, 3 Jr, 3 So and 2 Fr.  Also we moved guys to new postitions from O to D and within the D.  I am not trying to make excuses, just stat the facts as they are.  Yes we have to get better but don't forget teams went down on us early and had to throw so I think you have to take that into consideration. 

True to an extent.  Even with your adjustments, they are still middle of the pack at best in these categories and have yet to play the meat of the CCIW schedule. 

Regardless... this year's Redman D is not to the same level as years past - to this point.

[Gregory Sager]

Usee- good points and I agree with you that turnovers are an achilles heel for Carthage right now.

Twenty-four turnovers in five games? Holy cow! Turnovers aren't an Achilles heel for Carthage, 79jb. They're an open belly wound with guts hanging out of the hole.

[Gregory Sager]

Tailgater, I'm pretty sure it was Woody Hays who said "There are three things that can happen when you pass, and two of them are bad."

I've heard that quote attributed to Vince Lombardi, and since both coached in nearly the same era, both probably said it at least once.

I've heard it attributed to Bear Bryant.  It would fit with any of the 3 guys mentioned.  Probably someone who preceded them came up with the saying, and they all said it at some point in their careers.

I've seen it attributed online to Bear Bryant, Duffy Daugherty, Woody Hayes (I noticed that Chuck, perhaps as a sign of his Maize and Blue loyalty, misspelled the great Ohio State coach's name ), and General Robert Neyland. Hayes gets credit for it more often than not, but my informal online research indicates that Neyland is most likely the source of the quote. He was the earliest of all of these coaches, and he seems to have been a fountain of football- and life-related aphorisms; he authored what were once known as the "Seven Maxims of Football" (none of which were the quote in question, however).

I think that the reason why Hayes gets credit for the quote more often than anyone else is because he's still somewhat fresh in the memories of a lot of football fans, whereas only Tennesseans (and U.S. Army buffs) still recognize Neyland's name. That's a shame, since Neyland sounds like a very interesting man. He was not only the coach who built the Volunteers' football program (and won four national titles as its coach), he was also UT's athletic director and a full professor for many years, a veteran of both world wars, a man who retired from the Army as a brigadier general, and was once Douglas MacArthur's aide when MacArthur was the superintendant of West Point. Most intriguing of all, Neyland is the man who designed the stadium at UT that bears his name. Now that is a Renaissance man.

[AndOne]

As I said after the NCC-Millikin game---If North Central is going to win against stronger opponents, it must cut down on the penalties. Evidently, as pointed out by Greg above, stupid penalties continue to be a problem. If this continues, chances seem high that NC will screw itself out of a win somewhere down the road when they meet stiffer competition.

C)  Penalties need to be limited, especially the 15 yarders.  NCC might be able to get away with committing them against Millikin and NPU, but against any of the rest of the teams on the schedule they can potentially kill (or extend opponent's) drives.  The Cards round out their season with Carthage, Wheaton, Wesleyan, Augie, and Elmhurst.  That is a very tough end to the conference schedule, and if you make those mistakes against those teams, it WILL cost you at least one of those games.  All quality opponents.

New---

Thanks for confirming what I said about NCC's penalties after the Millikin game, and which continued to be a problem vs NP.

Many of our posters have recently offered their analysis of Carthage. After reviewing all of these posts, I would say that a good word to summarize Carthage would be "dangerous." It seems they have the capability to either blast an opponent or to basically self destruct, depending on whether they bring their A or B game to the field on any given day.