FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[hazzben]

One interesting comment from the podcast.

Keith noted that Bethel is an outlier amidst the other top 6 teams in the Top 25 in terms of 'explosive playmakers.' I think it's the second time I've seen the comment from a d3fooball moderator. It was a comment in last weeks Top 25 recap or rankings. Can't remember where.

I'll bite and push back a bit. I just don't think this is the case with Bethel, especially this year.

They actually appear loaded at the skill positions. They have depth and high end players at RB and WR. Marquardt is averaging 7.5 ypc and has 10 TD's. Hallstrom is a threat every time he makes a catch, likewise with Hilbrands. One reason no WR has monster ypg is that Peterson is doing such a great job of spreading the ball around. The field is littered with playmakers and it makes it very difficult to hone in on even just 2 or 3 options. Schults, Walker, Klitske, Neuville and Mitchell are all capable of a long score.

One reason you might make the comment is that in the past (from 04-11 anyway) Bethel has been a much more run dominant team. Our makeup was a physical, punishing rushing attack that controlled the pace of the game. Flannery and Porta were the definition of playmakers. But they weren't 'Oregon explosive.'

Maybe there's still some latent bias in how the national perception regards Bethel. But this is not who Bethel is this year. They are very balanced. And they are a threat in multiple ways from anywhere on the field. They average 5.3 ypc and 200 rushing yds a game, 27 TD's. They average 9.4 yards/attempt and 13.4 yds/catch for 264 yds/gm and 16 TD's. Overall, they average 7.1 yds/play and 465 yds/gm to go along with almost 42 points/game.

That, and they've played the 9th toughest schedule in all d3. So they aren't putting up these numbers against weak competition.

I guess I was just struck by the comment. Especially when during the same podcast they discussed Mount having a more 'normal' (by Mount's standards) receiving corps. Whitewater has a dominant D, and their offense is coming together. But I wouldn't regard their offense as more explosive than Bethel. Linfield and UMHB are putting up tons of points. But again, the comment was that Bethel was the only one of the top tier teams that lacked the explosive playmaking element. I disagree.

[Pat Coleman]

One interesting comment from the podcast.

Keith noted that Bethel is an outlier amidst the other top 6 teams in the Top 25 in terms of 'explosive playmakers.' I think it's the second time I've seen the comment from a d3fooball moderator. It was a comment in last weeks Top 25 recap or rankings. Can't remember where.

I'll bite and push back a bit. I just don't think this is the case with Bethel, especially this year.

They actually appear loaded at the skill positions. They have depth and high end players at RB and WR. Marquardt is averaging 7.5 ypc and has 10 TD's. Hallstrom is a threat every time he makes a catch, likewise with Hilbrands. One reason no WR has monster ypg is that Peterson is doing such a great job of spreading the ball around. The field is littered with playmakers and it makes it very difficult to hone in on even just 2 or 3 options. Schults, Walker, Klitske, Neuville and Mitchell are all capable of a long score.

One reason you might make the comment is that in the past (from 04-11 anyway) Bethel has been a much more run dominant team. Our makeup was a physical, punishing rushing attack that controlled the pace of the game. Flannery and Porta were the definition of playmakers. But they weren't 'Oregon explosive.'

Maybe there's still some latent bias in how the national perception regards Bethel. But this is not who Bethel is this year. They are very balanced. And they are a threat in multiple ways from anywhere on the field. They average 5.3 ypc and 200 rushing yds a game, 27 TD's. They average 9.4 yards/attempt and 13.4 yds/catch for 264 yds/gm and 16 TD's. Overall, they average 7.1 yds/play and 465 yds/gm to go along with almost 42 points/game.

That, and they've played the 9th toughest schedule in all d3. So they aren't putting up these numbers against weak competition.

I guess I was just struck by the comment. Especially when during the same podcast they discussed Mount having a more 'normal' (by Mount's standards) receiving corps. Whitewater has a dominant D, and their offense is coming together. But I wouldn't regard their offense as more explosive than Bethel. Linfield and UMHB are putting up tons of points. But again, the comment was that Bethel was the only one of the top tier teams that lacked the explosive playmaking element. I disagree.

That's Keith's opinion, yes. I have tried to emphasize that they can pass the ball well and have a couple of quality receivers, but ... well, yeah.

It's worth you posting that comment to the blog post where the podcast sits.

[hazzben]

I'm going to ammend my earlier comments about Bethel and the Regional Ranking, after taking a closer look (and listening to the podcast), here's my prediction from the Pool C thread:

My take:

Bethel (8-0) RRO: 2-0 or 3-0 (see bottom three)
UW-Whitewater (7-0) RRO: 2-0
Linfield (8-0) RRO: 1-0
Pacific Lutheran (7-1) RRO: 2-1
Concordia-Moorhead (6-1) RRO: 0/1-1 (see bottom three)
UW-Oshkosh (6-1) RRO: 0-1
Pacific (6-1) RRO: 0-1
UW-Plattevielle (7-1) RRO: 0-1
Redlands (5-2) RRO: 0-2
UST/Wartburg/SJU (2 losses each)

You could make the argument for IC, but their SOS is 185. Wartburg and UST have almost identical SOS numbers, but UST could be credited with playing Bethel tougher, more recently. SJU could also be swapped in for either Wartburg or UST (who they hold the H2H over). I wimped out and listed all three because I think the committee could go any way they want with these and justify it.

How the bottom 3-4 slots play out will determine who gets top billing between Bethel, UWW and Linfield. Bethel and UWW have nearly identical SOS numbers and will have very similar results vs. RRO. Linfield's SOS numbers a notch lower, with weaker RRO results. Given this, as Pat and Keith acknowledge on the podcast, the committee could look at UWW and Bethel as dead even, in which case last years playoff results become relevant. Strange that Bethel could get the nod in this case. Makes Buff St. hurt all over again.

[hazzben]

That's Keith's opinion, yes. I have tried to emphasize that they can pass the ball well and have a couple of quality receivers, but ... well, yeah.

It's worth you posting that comment to the blog post where the podcast sits.

Good point on Keith having made the comment. I'll repost it when I have time.

[Retired Old Rat]

Having seen Bethel play, I would certainly consider Hallstrom and Hilbrands to be playmakers.  Agree with Haz, ball is spread around so much stats don't pop.  Those two guys are the ones that really scare me.

[art76]

Having seen Bethel play, I would certainly consider Hallstrom and Hilbrands to be playmakers.  Agree with Haz, ball is spread around so much stats don't pop.  Those two guys are the ones that really scare me.

What I see is a team playing good football, not a couple of play makers with 8 or 9 other guys on the field. Just an observation.

[Retired Old Rat]

Having seen Bethel play, I would certainly consider Hallstrom and Hilbrands to be playmakers.  Agree with Haz, ball is spread around so much stats don't pop.  Those two guys are the ones that really scare me.

What I see is a team playing good football, not a couple of play makers with 8 or 9 other guys on the field. Just an observation.

I don't disagree.  But these two stand out, in my opinion.  Teams that go deep in the playoffs have guys that are playmakers, guys that stand out.

[hazzben]

Having seen Bethel play, I would certainly consider Hallstrom and Hilbrands to be playmakers.  Agree with Haz, ball is spread around so much stats don't pop.  Those two guys are the ones that really scare me.

What I see is a team playing good football, not a couple of play makers with 8 or 9 other guys on the field. Just an observation.

I don't disagree.  But these two stand out, in my opinion.  Teams that go deep in the playoffs have guys that are playmakers, guys that stand out.

Yeah, this isn't an either/or. The entire team is operating at a high level and playing with a great degree of confidence. And there are a lot of very good players contributing and playing selflessly for this to happen. Phenow is a great example. His role isn't as prominent as it was a few years back. But he is doing a ton of little things to help the team win. Blocking, short yardage situations and even playing NG here and there. His leadership, toughness & willingness to put the team first are huge.

That said, Peterson, Hallstrom, Marquardt and Hilbrands are the guys that keep a defense up at night. The fact there are a bunch of other solid contributors makes them even more dangerous. Come playoff time, having a complete team AND playmakers are what separate.

Every Natn'l champ in the d3football.com era, from PLU in '99 to Mount last year had both. We'll find out in the weeks ahead which teams this year can make the same claim. I'm hoping Bethel can do just that!

[speedybigboy]

NCAA football overtime sucks, it is nothing more than a glorified penalty shots.  The NFL's is bad enough but the NCAA is regoddamndiculous.

I'm in total agreement here...and no this isn't sour grapes from SJU's loss over the weekend. Though they are now 4-4 all-time in OT games.

In principle I don't mind each team getting an equal number of possessions from a fixed spot. My problem is with where that fixed spot starts from. By starting at the 25 yard line a team doesn't have to gain any yards to at least have a chance at a makeable FG. This was basically the case during the 2nd OT at GAC. Both teams attempted their final FG on 4th and 5 from the 20 yard line. It puts the defense in a tough spot while rewarding the offense for simply not turning it over.

I'd prefer each team start with the ball at the opponents 40 yard line. From this starting position a team would have to pick up at least one first down before feeling comfortable with a FG attempt. It would take some pressure off the defense and give OT a similar feel and flow of an actual game.

I doubt it will change. At the higher levels TV seems to enjoy the inflated scores that multiple OTs provide and for the most part I don't think fans mind the current version.

I think the current college OT is the best thing to come to football since the forward pass, at least at the d3 level where a 35+ yard FG is no gimmee for most teams.  What I would like to see is an elimination of the statistics in OT counting and the points.  I think the score should go in the books as a one point win for the team that pulls out the OT, or possibly a 2 point win if by 6 and a 1 point win if by 3 or less.

[art76]

Before this train goes too far down the tracks, let me go on record to clarify. There are elements of both ROR's comment and Hazzben's that I concur with - that teams that go far have team mates that step up to the challenge of the moment and that I was not making an either/or comparison. What I was trying to point out is that it is really a lot of fun to see those guys from BU playing together as a unit, to see the genuine joy when a team mate does well and to pick up and encourage a team mate when he didn't do so well.

I think those of us that have played team sports have been on teams that have "hot-shots" who know they are and while you are a contributor to the whole, you do not feel like it, as all the accolades go towards the "hot-shots" - whether they have the skill to back up their positions on the team or not. If we've been lucky, we've also had the opportunity to play on a selfless team, where team mates are team mates through thick and thin, win or lose. Those are the kind of teams that are fun to be on. That's the kind of team I see Bethel as right now. I share this having been to the alumni breakfast where we got to see a bit (via skype) of the team pre-game meeting before the St. Thomas game. I'll go on record as saying my perception of the team changed that morning - for the better. I already knew they could play football, but to see how they were interacting with one another and the coaching staff was really neat. If they do not bring home the Walnut and Bronze they will be disappointed, but if they don't, they know that they have given their best on the field for all the world to see. And they're having fun doing it! I'll say it again - it's fun to watch them play together as a team.

Go Royals!

[sjusection105]

All the chatter should be about CCM vs UST.
I think AO may be a bit generous with his line. I see a 3 point game & the Cobbers coming out on top. 

[Knightstalker]

NCAA football overtime sucks, it is nothing more than a glorified penalty shots.  The NFL's is bad enough but the NCAA is regoddamndiculous.

I'm in total agreement here...and no this isn't sour grapes from SJU's loss over the weekend. Though they are now 4-4 all-time in OT games.

In principle I don't mind each team getting an equal number of possessions from a fixed spot. My problem is with where that fixed spot starts from. By starting at the 25 yard line a team doesn't have to gain any yards to at least have a chance at a makeable FG. This was basically the case during the 2nd OT at GAC. Both teams attempted their final FG on 4th and 5 from the 20 yard line. It puts the defense in a tough spot while rewarding the offense for simply not turning it over.

I'd prefer each team start with the ball at the opponents 40 yard line. From this starting position a team would have to pick up at least one first down before feeling comfortable with a FG attempt. It would take some pressure off the defense and give OT a similar feel and flow of an actual game.

I doubt it will change. At the higher levels TV seems to enjoy the inflated scores that multiple OTs provide and for the most part I don't think fans mind the current version.

I think the current college OT is the best thing to come to football since the forward pass, at least at the d3 level where a 35+ yard FG is no gimmee for most teams.  What I would like to see is an elimination of the statistics in OT counting and the points.  I think the score should go in the books as a one point win for the team that pulls out the OT, or possibly a 2 point win if by 6 and a 1 point win if by 3 or less.

I totally disagree, it is one of the worst things to happen.  It changes the rules of the game for overtime, stupid move.  Play a shorter timed period just like basketball does (basketball overtime is the best overtime system going) play the game the way it is supposed to be played.  If they have to eliminate the kickoff in overtime, fine, place the ball in play at the opposing teams 20 yard line just like a touch back and make the teams earn the win.

[DuffMan]

I just want to say that I am done reading the SC Times chats with Frank R, not because of his responses, but because of the downright idiotic comments and questions.  Frank, lots of us appreciate what you do, and I'd like to apologize on behalf of those of us that aren't complete cynical arse-holes.

[D3MAFAN]

NCAA football overtime sucks, it is nothing more than a glorified penalty shots.  The NFL's is bad enough but the NCAA is regoddamndiculous.

I'm in total agreement here...and no this isn't sour grapes from SJU's loss over the weekend. Though they are now 4-4 all-time in OT games.

In principle I don't mind each team getting an equal number of possessions from a fixed spot. My problem is with where that fixed spot starts from. By starting at the 25 yard line a team doesn't have to gain any yards to at least have a chance at a makeable FG. This was basically the case during the 2nd OT at GAC. Both teams attempted their final FG on 4th and 5 from the 20 yard line. It puts the defense in a tough spot while rewarding the offense for simply not turning it over.

I'd prefer each team start with the ball at the opponents 40 yard line. From this starting position a team would have to pick up at least one first down before feeling comfortable with a FG attempt. It would take some pressure off the defense and give OT a similar feel and flow of an actual game.

I doubt it will change. At the higher levels TV seems to enjoy the inflated scores that multiple OTs provide and for the most part I don't think fans mind the current version.

I think the current college OT is the best thing to come to football since the forward pass, at least at the d3 level where a 35+ yard FG is no gimmee for most teams.  What I would like to see is an elimination of the statistics in OT counting and the points.  I think the score should go in the books as a one point win for the team that pulls out the OT, or possibly a 2 point win if by 6 and a 1 point win if by 3 or less.

I totally disagree, it is one of the worst things to happen.  It changes the rules of the game for overtime, stupid move.  Play a shorter timed period just like basketball does (basketball overtime is the best overtime system going) play the game the way it is supposed to be played.  If they have to eliminate the kickoff in overtime, fine, place the ball in play at the opposing teams 20 yard line just like a touch back and make the teams earn the win.

I think it's fair, because both teams equally have the same opportunity as the other. Both teams start at the same spot and follow the same rules. However, I do think stats should be considered.

[sjusection105]

I just want to say that I am done reading the SC Times chats with Frank R, not because of his responses, but because of the downright idiotic comments and questions.  Frank, lots of us appreciate what you do, and I'd like to apologize on behalf of those of us that aren't complete cynical arse-holes.

Is this in response to the volleyball questions....