FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[RoyalsFan]

Maybe the terminology needs to be changed to alternate site home game. Calling it a neutral site doesn't make sense. Neutral carries with it the implication of impartiality.

I think the neutral term refers to the site/field. Since neither team had ever played at Target Field before, neither team had an advantage of knowing the field better than the other team so from that standpoint it was impartial.

Except for that extra walkthrough that UST got to do before their "home" game which made some folks mad.

Yeah, I'm sure that gave UST a huge advantage. 

[art76]

Although this year has been a great bounce back year, but I'm still curious how good this team really is because the top of the WIAC didn't really push UWW this year like in years past. We'll see.

Whoever wins the game between Bethel and North Central will probably be the first test for the Warhawks for the year. Trust me, I'm not saying the remainder f the WIAC is chopped liver, far from it, but unlike the MIAC this year, UWW stands heads and shoulders above the remainder of the conference, as I see things. I am really hoping the Royals defense gets a crack at the Warhawk running game. I know, I know, be careful what you wish for. 

Yup, I pretty much said the same thing (almost word for word) on the WIAC thread.

02 - What's your take on the bad weather developing for Saturday? I've already posted earlier that I think it "helps" Bethel because it limits the Warhawk air attack. I think this is going to be a fun game to watch and I hope it is well fought on both sides. Good luck to the Warhawks, but I hope Bethel has another minor upset still in its bag of tricks.

[02 Warhawk]

Although this year has been a great bounce back year, but I'm still curious how good this team really is because the top of the WIAC didn't really push UWW this year like in years past. We'll see.

Whoever wins the game between Bethel and North Central will probably be the first test for the Warhawks for the year. Trust me, I'm not saying the remainder f the WIAC is chopped liver, far from it, but unlike the MIAC this year, UWW stands heads and shoulders above the remainder of the conference, as I see things. I am really hoping the Royals defense gets a crack at the Warhawk running game. I know, I know, be careful what you wish for. 

Yup, I pretty much said the same thing (almost word for word) on the WIAC thread.

02 - What's your take on the bad weather developing for Saturday? I've already posted earlier that I think it "helps" Bethel because it limits the Warhawk air attack. I think this is going to be a fun game to watch and I hope it is well fought on both sides. Good luck to the Warhawks, but I hope Bethel has another minor upset still in its bag of tricks.

Both Bethel and UWW are running teams, so it shouldn't change their offensive approach too much. If this was NCC playing in the game, then they might be in trouble. That's why we don't see any pass happy teams make it deep in the playoffs. As the weather turns nasty you have to run the ball and play great defense. i.e. Mount and UWW for the better part of 15 years.

[UMHB03]

For some perusing...

UHMB stats: http://stats.ncaa.org/teams/450417

SJU stats: http://stats.ncaa.org/teams/450344


UHMB dominate the national stats to a scary degree.  The question is: have they padded them in a conference of cream puffs by building a huge program in a minnow pond or are they insanely dominant? We'll find out soon enough.

I am confident in thinking their defensive stats are legit.  The offensive ones are built on the back of drilling below average teams.  MHB has the penchant for burying teams by 70 if they can which inflates the scoring higher than it actually should be.

On the contrary. UMHB puts up big points in spite of the fact that the 2nd/3rd stringers are usually in the game in the 3rd quarter. If UMHB were interested in inflating their numbers, and left their starters in for most of the game, they could have scored 100 several times, including last week in a second round playoff game, and against a Southwestern team that beat Mount Union's 'mighty' first round opponent earlier in the year.

[OzJohnnie]

For some perusing...

UHMB stats: http://stats.ncaa.org/teams/450417

SJU stats: http://stats.ncaa.org/teams/450344


UHMB dominate the national stats to a scary degree.  The question is: have they padded them in a conference of cream puffs by building a huge program in a minnow pond or are they insanely dominant? We’ll find out soon enough.

I am confident in thinking their defensive stats are legit.  The offensive ones are built on the back of drilling below average teams.  MHB has the penchant for burying teams by 70 if they can which inflates the scoring higher than it actually should be.

On the contrary. UMHB puts up big points in spite of the fact that the 2nd/3rd stringers are usually in the game in the 3rd quarter. If UMHB were interested in inflating their numbers, and left their starters in for most of the game, they could have scored 100 several times, including last week in a second round playoff game, and against a Southwestern team that beat Mount Union's 'mighty' first round opponent earlier in the year.

  Snooze.  Every top team only plays one half of football.  The fact that the Johnnies played starters in four quarters twice this year isn't a testament to the Johnnies' weakness but to the strength of the MIAC.

Texas creampuffs are on the menu for UHMB week in and week out.  We'll see if the Jays can serve a more filling meal.

[repete]

Yeah, Oz, glad got that Erdmann got some 4th quarter work after playing a total of 16 seconds the previous two second halves.

[hazzben]

If UMHB were interested in inflating their numbers, and left their starters in for most of the game, they could have scored 100 several times, including last week in a second round playoff game, and against a Southwestern team that beat Mount Union's 'mighty' first round opponent earlier in the year.

Yeah, I don't think the ability to score 100 says all that much about UMHB being better than SJU. I think it's more about the quality of the MIAC. Sure, UST could put a century mark on a bad St. Olaf team last year, but there was some bad blood 'plot lines' behind that score. And St. Olaf was in really bad shape.

Concordia is a good example. They were a middle of the pack MIAC team this year. But here's the point totals they gave up to quality playoff caliber opponents:

@ UWW - 24
UST - 46
@ Bethel - 41
SJU - 42

[GoldandBlueBU]

Really well done game summary from NCC - I like how they've got the commentary to go along with the plays, and then wrap it up with the interviews. (though I assume that's just a playoff thing) 

Well done NCC athletic dept.!

https://youtu.be/nqnF1978iAc

[OzJohnnie]

If UMHB were interested in inflating their numbers, and left their starters in for most of the game, they could have scored 100 several times, including last week in a second round playoff game, and against a Southwestern team that beat Mount Union's 'mighty' first round opponent earlier in the year.

Yeah, I don't think the ability to score 100 says all that much about UMHB being better than SJU. I think it's more about the quality of the MIAC. Sure, UST could put a century mark on a bad St. Olaf team last year, but there was some bad blood 'plot lines' behind that score. And St. Olaf was in really bad shape.

Concordia is a good example. They were a middle of the pack MIAC team this year. But here's the point totals they gave up to quality playoff caliber opponents:

@ UWW - 24
UST - 46
@ Bethel - 41
SJU - 42

Dang.  CON ran the gauntlet this year.

[wm4]

For some perusing...

UHMB stats: http://stats.ncaa.org/teams/450417

SJU stats: http://stats.ncaa.org/teams/450344


UHMB dominate the national stats to a scary degree.  The question is: have they padded them in a conference of cream puffs by building a huge program in a minnow pond or are they insanely dominant? We'll find out soon enough.

I am confident in thinking their defensive stats are legit.  The offensive ones are built on the back of drilling below average teams.  MHB has the penchant for burying teams by 70 if they can which inflates the scoring higher than it actually should be.

On the contrary. UMHB puts up big points in spite of the fact that the 2nd/3rd stringers are usually in the game in the 3rd quarter. If UMHB were interested in inflating their numbers, and left their starters in for most of the game, they could have scored 100 several times, including last week in a second round playoff game, and against a Southwestern team that beat Mount Union's 'mighty' first round opponent earlier in the year.

It's the playoff games where UMHB plays their first string the entire game where the rubber meets the road.  The last few years their offensive output has been slashed the deeper they've gone in the playoffs.  Granted, this is generally true for all teams as they advance, but for UMHB it's pretty telling. 

[hazzben]

If UMHB were interested in inflating their numbers, and left their starters in for most of the game, they could have scored 100 several times, including last week in a second round playoff game, and against a Southwestern team that beat Mount Union's 'mighty' first round opponent earlier in the year.

Yeah, I don't think the ability to score 100 says all that much about UMHB being better than SJU. I think it's more about the quality of the MIAC. Sure, UST could put a century mark on a bad St. Olaf team last year, but there was some bad blood 'plot lines' behind that score. And St. Olaf was in really bad shape.

Concordia is a good example. They were a middle of the pack MIAC team this year. But here's the point totals they gave up to quality playoff caliber opponents:

@ UWW - 24
UST - 46
@ Bethel - 41
SJU - 42

Dang.  CON ran the gauntlet this year.

Yeah, makes that 5-5 record look a little different doesn't it.

Whitewater was a really early game, and the Cobbers are a quirky offense to gameplan against if you don't see them each year. So I don't think the spread says much in that one. But interesting how similar the results were against SJU, UST, and Bethel.

[bluenote]

On my work computer so I'm not going to click that Bluenote link, but I always just assumed Bluenote's technology was some mixture of moonshine, everclear, and bottom shelf Romanian vodka.

Grey Goose on the rocks with a dash of dry vermouth and a tad of green olive juice..... along with a fine Cuban cigar. 4-5 of those and I'm ready to start posting. 

[OzJohnnie]

It's the playoff games where UMHB plays their first string the entire game where the rubber meets the road.  The last few years their offensive output has been slashed the deeper they've gone in the playoffs.  Granted, this is generally true for all teams as they advance, but for UMHB it's pretty telling. 

Interesting.  You inspired me to go have a look.  Just eyeballing the numbers it looks like:

* 2017, about 50 point in-conference scoring average (even with HSU holding them down), low 20's out of conference (against the big boys)
* 2016, high 50's, low teens (but enough to win it all)
* 2015, low 60's, mid 30's
* 2014, high 60's, high 20's

Isn't that something.  How do the Johnnies compare?  Is this an anomaly or every team faces the same struggle?

* 2017, low 40's, teens
* 2016, low 50's, teens
* 2016, 40's, teens

Obviously, the Johnnies have had a similar pattern so I can't say it's too unique to UHMB.  But the difference is that the Johnnies this year have a new offensive scheme.  And this year the conference vs the big boys (BU, UST, I would say TM but it was a thumping and would distort the numbers too much) is a different story.

* 2018, about 50, high 30's (put TM in and there's no difference)


My conclusion, we could be looking at something special.  I hope the boys are focused.

[hazzben]

Really well done game summary from NCC - I like how they've got the commentary to go along with the plays, and then wrap it up with the interviews. (though I assume that's just a playoff thing) 

Well done NCC athletic dept.!

https://youtu.be/nqnF1978iAc

Yeah, really nice production quality! Cool to hear Coach Thorne's love for his players too. I think that's one of the things that makes D3 so awesome. Most of these coaches really love their guys and want the absolute best for them.

[HScoach]

It's the playoff games where UMHB plays their first string the entire game where the rubber meets the road.  The last few years their offensive output has been slashed the deeper they've gone in the playoffs.  Granted, this is generally true for all teams as they advance, but for UMHB it's pretty telling. 

Interesting.  You inspired me to go have a look.  Just eyeballing the numbers it looks like:

* 2017, about 50 point in-conference scoring average (even with HSU holding them down), low 20's out of conference (against the big boys)
* 2016, high 50's, low teens (but enough to win it all)
* 2015, low 60's, mid 30's
* 2014, high 60's, high 20's

Isn't that something.  How do the Johnnies compare?  Is this an anomaly or every team faces the same struggle?

* 2017, low 40's, teens
* 2016, low 50's, teens
* 2016, 40's, teens

Obviously, the Johnnies have had a similar pattern so I can't say it's too unique to UHMB.  But the difference is that the Johnnies this year have a new offensive scheme.  And this year the conference vs the big boys (BU, UST, I would say TM but it was a thumping and would distort the numbers too much) is a different story.

* 2018, about 50, high 30's (put TM in and there's no difference)


My conclusion, we could be looking at something special.  I hope the boys are focused.

One would sure hope the scoring averages go down a bit come playoff time, but if it drops a ton then that leads me to believe one or both of the following factors:
1.  you're running up the score on lesser opponents in the regular season ala St Glenn that can't be duplicated in the playoffs
2.  your regular season opponents drastically pale in comparison to those seen in the playoffs

If you scores don't drop much, then that could point too:
1.  your regular season competition was similar to the playoff competition as a whole
2.  you really held back in the regular season and could have drilled people much worse than you did

I'm too lazy to go thru 25 years of Mount scores, but here's the last few:
2017:  regular season = 63.1 / playoffs = 38.2
2016:  regular season = 49.2 / playoffs = 37.0
2015:  regular season = 53.8 / playoffs = 52.4
2014:  regular season = 60.8 / playoffs = 54.0