FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[OldAuggie]

Is Wartburg that good or is the IIAC down a bit this year?  It looks like only them and Central were the only teams in the league that were all that good this year.  The bottom six in the league kind of beat up on each other.
What stands out to me is:
-They held Augsburg to 3 points in week one
-Put up 31 on BU in week two
-Have monkey stomped everyone from week 5 on

I saw them week one and they were on a mission. We had several first year starters with most of them on defense. Hard to judge just how good they were/are but Wartburg's defense was able to keep Augsburg out of the endzone. They looked like a power house to me.  I am counting on you guys to take them out if UST falters.

[art76]

With all the focus on the brackets, not much commentary on the games from Saturday.

What I am curious about is how in the heck did Bethel allow Augsburg to put up 60+ on them? I know the Bethel D has been hit with a lot of injuries, but they are a really good, athletic unit and very well coached. Was the footing such that the fast Augsburg receivers and backs were able to run through seams created by slipping and sliding defenders? From a physical standpoint, I would have thought the Bethel front 7 would have been able to mount a strong pass rush against Augsburg - did the footing negate this as well?

At the last moment on Saturday morning I made the call to stay home and watch on the internet and from that perspective it was a foot race. I was expecting BU to struggle through the injuries, but I did not expect them to be on the ropes for the entire game. Many new names being mentioned on the BU Defence confirmed the injuries being a factor in the game. While I didn't see a lot of additional pratfalls, it was very obvious that footing for changing direction was non-existent. In the podcast Pat mentions that another field was offered for the game (I'm guessing Northwestern, as the UMAC had no games in the last week.) Hindsight being 20/20, one has to wonder if it would have made much difference. Both teams had to play on the same surface and there is no guarantee that a better playing surface would have meant a win for Bethel. But a turf field would have been easier on the players and easier to clean off. If the defence could have "dug-in" and stymied Ayrton, then yeah, a turf field could have meant an extension of the season for the Royals, but there is no guarantee of it.

[AO]

While I didn't see a lot of additional pratfalls, it was very obvious that footing for changing direction was non-existent. In the podcast Pat mentions that another field was offered for the game (I'm guessing Northwestern, as the UMAC had no games in the last week.)

That was the rumor I heard, but I didn't bother to confirm with the AD when I went in to do the PA for hoops Saturday night.  Northwestern had shoveled it off and was probably going to use it to practice for the Victory bowl, but they declined the bid.

[GoldandBlueBU]

With all the focus on the brackets, not much commentary on the games from Saturday.

What I am curious about is how in the heck did Bethel allow Augsburg to put up 60+ on them? I know the Bethel D has been hit with a lot of injuries, but they are a really good, athletic unit and very well coached. Was the footing such that the fast Augsburg receivers and backs were able to run through seams created by slipping and sliding defenders? From a physical standpoint, I would have thought the Bethel front 7 would have been able to mount a strong pass rush against Augsburg - did the footing negate this as well?

At the last moment on Saturday morning I made the call to stay home and watch on the internet and from that perspective it was a foot race. I was expecting BU to struggle through the injuries, but I did not expect them to be on the ropes for the entire game. Many new names being mentioned on the BU Defence confirmed the injuries being a factor in the game. While I didn't see a lot of additional pratfalls, it was very obvious that footing for changing direction was non-existent. In the podcast Pat mentions that another field was offered for the game (I'm guessing Northwestern, as the UMAC had no games in the last week.) Hindsight being 20/20, one has to wonder if it would have made much difference. Both teams had to play on the same surface and there is no guarantee that a better playing surface would have meant a win for Bethel. But a turf field would have been easier on the players and easier to clean off. If the defence could have "dug-in" and stymied Ayrton, then yeah, a turf field could have meant an extension of the season for the Royals, but there is no guarantee of it.

That is my thought...not to take anything at all away from Augsburg, they played in the same conditions and came out on top....but, based on prior performances, I'd like to believe that BU's defense is able to pick up more stops that Aug's, and that makes the difference.

However: If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas. 

Just tough to see it end in that manner.



Very intrigued by the UST - Wart matchup, and then, whoever SJU plays in week 2 should be a blast to watch.

[OldAuggie]

With all the focus on the brackets, not much commentary on the games from Saturday.

What I am curious about is how in the heck did Bethel allow Augsburg to put up 60+ on them? I know the Bethel D has been hit with a lot of injuries, but they are a really good, athletic unit and very well coached. Was the footing such that the fast Augsburg receivers and backs were able to run through seams created by slipping and sliding defenders? From a physical standpoint, I would have thought the Bethel front 7 would have been able to mount a strong pass rush against Augsburg - did the footing negate this as well?

At the last moment on Saturday morning I made the call to stay home and watch on the internet and from that perspective it was a foot race. I was expecting BU to struggle through the injuries, but I did not expect them to be on the ropes for the entire game. Many new names being mentioned on the BU Defence confirmed the injuries being a factor in the game. While I didn't see a lot of additional pratfalls, it was very obvious that footing for changing direction was non-existent. In the podcast Pat mentions that another field was offered for the game (I'm guessing Northwestern, as the UMAC had no games in the last week.) Hindsight being 20/20, one has to wonder if it would have made much difference. Both teams had to play on the same surface and there is no guarantee that a better playing surface would have meant a win for Bethel. But a turf field would have been easier on the players and easier to clean off. If the defence could have "dug-in" and stymied Ayrton, then yeah, a turf field could have meant an extension of the season for the Royals, but there is no guarantee of it.

That is my thought...not to take anything at all away from Augsburg, they played in the same conditions and came out on top....but, based on prior performances, I'd like to believe that BU's defense is able to pick up more stops that Aug's, and that makes the difference.

However: If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas. 

Just tough to see it end in that manner.



Very intrigued by the UST - Wart matchup, and then, whoever SJU plays in week 2 should be a blast to watch.

Guys with all due respect you are full of hogwash. The Auggies practiced all week in their dome  and made a trip to Bethel's home tundra field to play outside in the cold and now you say that the footing was the difference in the outcome? No way. I don't know where Bethel practiced but they should have been ready. You can mention Bethel's Injuries but then you are admitting Augsburg has more depth. Everyone has injuries this time of year. I think/know the young guys improved during the year and we saw a preview of next year on Saturday.

[DuffMan]

I think/know the young guys improved during the year and we saw a preview of next year on Saturday.

Um, so Auggie Tech is going to give up 61 ppg next year?

[OzJohnnie]

I think/know the young guys improved during the year and we saw a preview of next year on Saturday.

Um, so Auggie Tech is going to give up 61 ppg next year?

No.  Jeez, you're so obtuse, Duff.  It's going to snow.

[OldAuggie]

I think/know the young guys improved during the year and we saw a preview of next year on Saturday.

Um, so Auggie Tech is going to give up 61 ppg next year?

Well that is a work in progress.......

[OzJohnnie]

Prediction #1 for this week:  SJU falls just short of a Double Monkey Stompout.  41-0.

Prediction #2 for this week: St Scholastica takes this as a learning exercise.  Kind of like how Iron Mike taught Marvis Frazier a thing or two.

[GoldandBlueBU]

Guys with all due respect you are full of hogwash. The Auggies practiced all week in their dome  and made a trip to Bethel's home tundra field to play outside in the cold and now you say that the footing was the difference in the outcome? No way. I don't know where Bethel practiced but they should have been ready. You can mention Bethel's Injuries but then you are admitting Augsburg has more depth. Everyone has injuries this time of year. I think/know the young guys improved during the year and we saw a preview of next year on Saturday.

You're right, nothing stands out about that last game.




Like I said, credit to Augsburg...same conditions for both teams, and they got it done...no sour grapes, just wondering "what if"...isn't that what fans of eliminated teams come on here to do?

[DuffMan]

I love the fact that you made a bar graph! 

[OzJohnnie]

I love the fact that you made a bar graph! 

ChicagoTommie: Bar?!?  Did someone say bar?

[DuffMan]

Not a single CSS poster to be found.  Talk about the most boring play-off week ever. 

[USTBench]

Prediction #1 for this week:  SJU falls just short of a Double Monkey Stompout.  41-0.

Prediction #2 for this week: St Scholastica takes this as a learning exercise.  Kind of like how Iron Mike taught Marvis Frazier a thing or two.

I was going to say that maybe CSS is better equipped to handle a first round opponent since their 2011, 49 - 2 drubbing by UST, but then I see a 55 - 10 loss to UWO in 2012 and a 70 - 13 loss to Bethel last year. So, yeah, it'll probably be pretty ugly. Perhaps the UMAC should consider Division IV football.

Also, Hamline beat a playoff team. Scots probably won't have too much fun in Whitewater this weekend.

[OzJohnnie]

Prediction #3: I hate to say it, but I think the Tommies play tough.  Wartburg at home is too much, though, and they win 34 - 21.