FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[sjusection105]

Here's a what if scenario...If Augsburg managed to win the Skyline division they would host the MIAC championship game. Edor Nelson field can barely accommodate 2,000 fans...last year Bethel at SJU had around 7,000 and the year before at Bethel there was approximately 5,000.
Where else could a championship game be played that would allow spectators actually watch the game?
St Paul Central high school comes to mind....it probably has double the seating of Edor Nelson and is geographically close to Augsburg. Also would cost a lot less than playing at a place like Huntington Bank (and gophers are at home).

Don't they put up the dome over Edor Nelson Field sometime in mid- to late-November?

The Toms are on the road in San Diego that weekend. I'm sure they'd do the MIAC a favor for ol' times sake. 

What would be really funny is having a game like SJU-Augsburg outdraw the Tommies on their own FCS football field.

I was wrong...Gophers are at West Lafayette...but their stadium would cost too much.
I'm sure the Tommie$ would love nothing more than to charge a MIAC team a wheelbarrow full of money to play on their turf.

I don't think Augsburg would move the game.  If the game stays at Edor Nelson Field Lamker can limit the number of Johnnie fans at the game.

That would be a great way to promote the MIAC.

The only scenario I see for moving the game would be unplayable field conditions ie: ice storm and in that case, I would believe they would delay & play Sunday morning because the play off seeding needs to happen.

[OldAuggie]

Here's a what if scenario...If Augsburg managed to win the Skyline division they would host the MIAC championship game. Edor Nelson field can barely accommodate 2,000 fans...last year Bethel at SJU had around 7,000 and the year before at Bethel there was approximately 5,000.
Where else could a championship game be played that would allow spectators actually watch the game?
St Paul Central high school comes to mind....it probably has double the seating of Edor Nelson and is geographically close to Augsburg. Also would cost a lot less than playing at a place like Huntington Bank (and gophers are at home).

Don't they put up the dome over Edor Nelson Field sometime in mid- to late-November?

The Toms are on the road in San Diego that weekend. I'm sure they'd do the MIAC a favor for ol' times sake. 

What would be really funny is having a game like SJU-Augsburg outdraw the Tommies on their own FCS football field.

I was wrong...Gophers are at West Lafayette...but their stadium would cost too much.
I'm sure the Tommie$ would love nothing more than to charge a MIAC team a wheelbarrow full of money to play on their turf.

I don't think Augsburg would move the game.  If the game stays at Edor Nelson Field Lamker can limit the number of Johnnie fans at the game.

We have a winner. There is no chance Swenson and Lamker allow a potential game like that to move off campus. Some years ago the undefeated clash between UST and Augsburg was potentially going to sell out and overflow with fans and Swenson rented bleachers to increase the capacity of Edor Nelson Field. That was Ayrton Scott's sophomore year if I recall correctly. The UST game during Scott's senior year was at Edor Nelson and the atmosphere was outstanding. Augsburg lost both games to UST but that was possibly the best atmosphere at Edor Nelson I saw and certainly better than when I played there, but I never saw the 1997 team play. We had our first daughter that year so I was busy.

[DuffMan]

Auggie Tech beats the GACies on a last-second hail Mary and we're all talking about them in the MIAC title game?    Bethel and the Corn Cobs might have something to say about that.

[OldAuggie]

Auggie Tech beats the GACies on a last-second hail Mary and we're all talking about them in the MIAC title game?    Bethel and the Corn Cobs might have something to say about that.

We all saw Reusse's article a couple of weeks ago.

[SagatagSam]

Auggie Tech beats the GACies on a last-second hail Mary and we're all talking about them in the MIAC title game?    Bethel and the Corn Cobs might have something to say about that.

We all saw Reusse's article a couple of weeks ago.

Auggie has our attention early. The next three weeks will give us much more information on this squad. They get Bethel in mid-October this year, whereas last year they had to wait until the last game before Championship Weekend to take their shot.

Massey has Augsburg around +30 this week against the Johnnies.

We will also find out how GAC measures up against Bethel this weekend. That's a game that could tell us a lot about the rest of the season.

[DuffMan]

We all saw Reusse's article a couple of weeks ago.

[AO]

MIAC PICK-EMS
WEEK 4 STANDINGS

WEEK 5
Conference: 3pts
#7 St. John's @ Augsburg (+24.5)
Carleton (+6.5) @ Concordia
Gustavus (+8.5) @ Bethel
St. Olaf @ Hamline (+12.5)
St. Scholastica (+10.5) @ Macalester

Other games: 1pt
St. Thomas @ Dayton (+5.5)
#1 North Central @ #10 Wheaton (+14.5)

[SagatagSam]

#19 Bethel (+10.5) @ #8 St. John's - A scoreless first quarter followed by a relatively evenly matched second quarter (one which Bethel led for over seven minutes) probably had many spread watchers thinking the Johnnies may escape with the win but fail to cover the spread. Another Connor Murphy field goal midway through the third quarter could not get the Johnnies over the spread, but a 74-yard touchdown pass and catch from Syverson to Nick VanErp late in the third quarter put the Johnnies over the top. An Alex Larson touchdown catch with 4:25 to play was the dagger. Johnnies win the game 27-7 and cover the spread by 9.5 points.

Concordia @ St. Scholastica (+24.5) - The Saints drew first blood on a 31-yard Jacob Andrews field goal, and the Saints defense kept the Cobbers scoreless for the first quarter. The Cobbers kept hammering the ball on the ground, had a scoop and score on defense, and had the spread covered at the half. The Cobbers managed three more rushing touchdowns in the second half and piled up 292 rushing yards for the game en route to a 49-16 victory, covering the spread by 8.5 points.

Gustavus @ Augsburg (+9.5) - Augsburg jumped out to a two-score lead and held the Golden Gusties scoreless in the first quarter. For a moment it looked like the Auggies would not only easily cover the spread, but run away with the game outright. The Golden Gusties showed signs of life at the very end of the first half as Matt Carreon hauled in a one-yard touchdown pass from George Sandven with 18 seconds to play, cutting the Auggie lead to 14-10 at halftime. The Golden Gusties battled back to take the lead with 22 seconds remaining in the game, but the Auggies had clearly beaten the spread. Not satisfied with mere domination of the spread, the Auggies scored on a 34-yard Cade Sheehan touchdown pass to Tyrone Wilson. Auggies win the game 33-31 and beat the spread by 11.5 points.

Hamline (+24.5) @ Carleton - Hamline gave Carleton everything it had putting up 353 yards passing with four passing touchdowns by Alejandro Villanueva. The Pipers looked to make some of their own super dog magic taking an early fourth quarter lead, 27-24. The Piper defense held the Knights to 23 yards on ten plays on its first two fourth quarter drives. The Knights managed to string together a seven play 55-yard drive to score the game winning touchdown on a one-yard Antonio Barrera run with 1:58 to play. Carleton wins the game, 31-27, but Hamline beats the spread by 20.5 points.

Macalester (+10.5) @ St. Olaf - St. Olaf held the NCAA's second top passing offense under 300 total yard and the defense turned the Fighting Scots over on downs four times in the second half. Theo Doran carried the Ole offense on 16/23 passing for 271 yards and two touchdowns while Embry Jordan gained 144 yards on 27 carries. It took until late in the third quarter for the Oles to cover the spread for good and the Ole defense held the Fighting Scots offense scoreless in the second half. St. Olaf wins, 38-13 and covers the spread by 14.5 points.

Morehead State (+16.5) @ St. Thomas - An offensively stagnant first half yielded only one score as Morehead State led, 7-0, at halftime. The spread was never really in question as the Toms largest lead was a single touchdown at several points in the second half. Jacob Wildermuth hauled in a 26-yard touchdown pass with nine seconds to play to secure the 35-28 victory, but Morehead State beats the spread by 9.5 points. (For any Johnnies who may have recently ingested poison, read the game story--the UST story called the end of the game "O'Shaughnessy magic")

#17 John Carroll @ Heidelberg (+10.5) - Heidelberg scored first, but that was the only bright spot for The Berg all day. John Carroll shut down The Berg offense holding it to 236 yards total (92 rushing, 144 passing) and, most importantly, scoreless for the remainder of the day and had the spread covered shortly after halftime. JCU wins the game, 34-7, and covers the spread by 16.5 points.

[faunch]

Just saw this on Twitter...I mean X: https://x.com/brett_mcmurphy/status/1706654416986644550?s=46&t=g-or2FfQwhfEf-aUIDwBoA

Reminds me that there was a drone above Clemens Stadium, south of the field. I also don't think it was directly above the playing field. Wonder if the MIAC has any drone regulations?

[SagatagSam]

Just saw this on Twitter...I mean X: https://x.com/brett_mcmurphy/status/1706654416986644550?s=46&t=g-or2FfQwhfEf-aUIDwBoA

Reminds me that there was a drone above Clemens Stadium, south of the field. I also don't think it was directly above the playing field. Wonder if the MIAC has any drone regulations?

No drone regulation that I can find.

However, related to our recent discussion of targeting, I found this part of the conference policies interesting:

3.9   REPLAY REVIEW. The MIAC will not automatically adopt any NCAA-approved instant replay rules. Any adoption of instant replay rules must be approved through the MIAC's legislative process to take action in the conference. (added 12/2016)
3.9.1 HALFTIME TARGETING EJECTION VIDEO REVIEW. Require halftime targeting ejection video review. (added 5/18)

[Pat Coleman]

Just saw this on Twitter...I mean X: https://x.com/brett_mcmurphy/status/1706654416986644550?s=46&t=g-or2FfQwhfEf-aUIDwBoA

Reminds me that there was a drone above Clemens Stadium, south of the field. I also don't think it was directly above the playing field. Wonder if the MIAC has any drone regulations?

No drone regulation that I can find.

However, related to our recent discussion of targeting, I found this part of the conference policies interesting:

3.9   REPLAY REVIEW. The MIAC will not automatically adopt any NCAA-approved instant replay rules. Any adoption of instant replay rules must be approved through the MIAC's legislative process to take action in the conference. (added 12/2016)
3.9.1 HALFTIME TARGETING EJECTION VIDEO REVIEW. Require halftime targeting ejection video review. (added 5/18)

And an ejection in the second half can't be reviewed until after the game, to restore the player's eligibility for the first half of the next game.

[SagatagSam]

Just saw this on Twitter...I mean X: https://x.com/brett_mcmurphy/status/1706654416986644550?s=46&t=g-or2FfQwhfEf-aUIDwBoA

Reminds me that there was a drone above Clemens Stadium, south of the field. I also don't think it was directly above the playing field. Wonder if the MIAC has any drone regulations?

No drone regulation that I can find.

However, related to our recent discussion of targeting, I found this part of the conference policies interesting:

3.9   REPLAY REVIEW. The MIAC will not automatically adopt any NCAA-approved instant replay rules. Any adoption of instant replay rules must be approved through the MIAC's legislative process to take action in the conference. (added 12/2016)
3.9.1 HALFTIME TARGETING EJECTION VIDEO REVIEW. Require halftime targeting ejection video review. (added 5/18)

And an ejection in the second half can't be reviewed until after the game, to restore the player's eligibility for the first half of the next game.

Right, I was unaware they had any procedure in place to allow the officials to review a first half ejection for targeting.

[faunch]

Just saw this on Twitter...I mean X: https://x.com/brett_mcmurphy/status/1706654416986644550?s=46&t=g-or2FfQwhfEf-aUIDwBoA

Reminds me that there was a drone above Clemens Stadium, south of the field. I also don't think it was directly above the playing field. Wonder if the MIAC has any drone regulations?

No drone regulation that I can find.

However, related to our recent discussion of targeting, I found this part of the conference policies interesting:

3.9   REPLAY REVIEW. The MIAC will not automatically adopt any NCAA-approved instant replay rules. Any adoption of instant replay rules must be approved through the MIAC's legislative process to take action in the conference. (added 12/2016)
3.9.1 HALFTIME TARGETING EJECTION VIDEO REVIEW. Require halftime targeting ejection video review. (added 5/18)

And an ejection in the second half can't be reviewed until after the game, to restore the player's eligibility for the first half of the next game.

Right, I was unaware they had any procedure in place to allow the officials to review a first half ejection for targeting.

Any idea how quickly they make decisions about appeals for the next week?

[Pat Coleman]

That's handled on a conference level, all I know.

[SagatagSam]

Just saw this on Twitter...I mean X: https://x.com/brett_mcmurphy/status/1706654416986644550?s=46&t=g-or2FfQwhfEf-aUIDwBoA

Reminds me that there was a drone above Clemens Stadium, south of the field. I also don't think it was directly above the playing field. Wonder if the MIAC has any drone regulations?

No drone regulation that I can find.

However, related to our recent discussion of targeting, I found this part of the conference policies interesting:

3.9   REPLAY REVIEW. The MIAC will not automatically adopt any NCAA-approved instant replay rules. Any adoption of instant replay rules must be approved through the MIAC's legislative process to take action in the conference. (added 12/2016)
3.9.1 HALFTIME TARGETING EJECTION VIDEO REVIEW. Require halftime targeting ejection video review. (added 5/18)

And an ejection in the second half can't be reviewed until after the game, to restore the player's eligibility for the first half of the next game.

Right, I was unaware they had any procedure in place to allow the officials to review a first half ejection for targeting.

Any idea how quickly they make decisions about appeals for the next week?

My guess is we will know by tomorrow evening when they record Football Weekly.