FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[DustySJU]

I think the part you guys are missing is the fact the interview was done over the phone, and not in studio.

nuggs;  We are all dumber now for having read what you just wrote.   

[Redtooth]

After reading and listening to Steve Johnson outline his "punch them in the mouth" gameplan earlier today I did a little research on Ric's Mount Union Football website to determine if any teams have recently had success running the ball against Mount.  What I found does not bode well for Bethel (no worries for me as I am pulling for Mount).

The last two teams to run effectively were MHB in 2004-- 68 carries/308 yards and SJU in 2003-- 48/247 yards.   The SJU rushing effort in 2003 was one part finesse and ten parts Blake Elliott in the backfield on a bad hammy.

What should scare O-Coordinators around the country is a trend at Mount Union that looks like Tiger Woods retooling his swing at the top of his game (see below):

Rushing Yards Allowed Season
2000-- 1340 National Champion
2001-- 1610 National Champion
2002-- 1667 National Champion
2003-- 1509 Lost to SJU in Stagg
2004-- 1051 Lost to MHB in semis
2005-- 1255 National Champion
2006-- 450 National Champion
2007-- 206 Semis now, ??

In the midst of an incredible run of 5 titles in 7 years (going for 6 in 8 ), they have completely eliminated other teams ability to run the ball.  Keep in mind the early years listed were great statistically (100 yards/game)  In the last two seasons they have given up 30 yards/game in 06 to this season giving up 15.8/game not to mention only 59 points all year!!!!  I seem to remember some level of concern amongst Mount Union fans when Montgomery left that the defense would suffer..........Whatever Vince Kehres is cooking on that side of the ball is working. 

[johnnie_esq]

After reading and listening to Steve Johnson outline his "punch them in the mouth" gameplan earlier today I did a little research on Ric's Mount Union Football website to determine if any teams have recently had success running the ball against Mount.  What I found does not bode well for Bethel (no worries for me as I am pulling for Mount).

The last two teams to run effectively were MHB in 2004-- 68 carries/308 yards and SJU in 2003-- 48/247 yards.   The SJU rushing effort in 2003 was one part finesse and ten parts Blake Elliott in the backfield on a bad hammy.

What should scare O-Coordinators around the country is a trend at Mount Union that looks like Tiger Woods retooling his swing at the top of his game (see below):

Rushing Yards Allowed Season
2000-- 1340 National Champion
2001-- 1610 National Champion
2002-- 1667 National Champion
2003-- 1509 Lost to SJU in Stagg
2004-- 1051 Lost to MHB in semis
2005-- 1255 National Champion
2006-- 450 National Champion
2007-- 206 Semis now, ??

In the midst of an incredible run of 5 titles in 7 years (going for 6 in 8 ), they have completely eliminated other teams ability to run the ball.  Keep in mind the early years listed were great statistically (100 yards/game)  In the last two seasons they have given up 30 yards/game in 06 to this season giving up 15.8/game not to mention only 59 points all year!!!!  I seem to remember some level of concern amongst Mount Union fans when Montgomery left that the defense would suffer..........Whatever Vince Kehres is cooking on that side of the ball is working. 

Just to add to this, let's keep in mind two things about the OAC:  (1.)  It is a pass-happy conference, so teams are less apt to concentrate on running the ball, and (2.) when you get down three scores to MUC in the first half, you almost have to abandon the run in favor of the pass. 

This isn't to take away from the MUC defense, but it may further the discussion and partially explain why they have been unbelievable this year.

But I would also have to say they are pretty good, too.  Averaging the allowance of only 15 yds per game is amazing, no matter what conference you are in.

[TC]

Rushing Yards Allowed Season
2000-- 1340 National Champion
2001-- 1610 National Champion
2002-- 1667 National Champion
2003-- 1509 Lost to SJU in Stagg
2004-- 1051 Lost to MHB in semis
2005-- 1255 National Champion
2006-- 450 National Champion
2007-- 206 Semis now, ??

Just to add to this, let's keep in mind two things about the OAC:  (1.)  It is a pass-happy conference, so teams are less apt to concentrate on running the ball, and (2.) when you get down three scores to MUC in the first half, you almost have to abandon the run in favor of the pass. 

There are, of course, a couple of easy ways to account for these two factors and make the statistics much more informative.  In regards to point (1), we can simply look at yards allowed per rushing attempt to see Mount Union's defense against the run on a per play basis rather than per game (or season).  Here's how that chart looks:

2000-- 1340 yds. allowed-- 2.9 yards per carry
2001-- 1610 yds. allowed-- 3.1 yards per carry
2002-- 1667 yds. allowed-- 3.2 yards per carry
2003-- 1509 yds. allowed-- 3.0 yards per carry
2004-- 1051 yds. allowed-- 2.2 yards per carry
2005-- 1255 yds. allowed-- 2.2 yards per carry
2006-- 450   yds. allowed-- 1.1 yards per carry
2007-- 206   yds. allowed-- 0.5 yards per carry

Based on these numbers, it looks like MUC's run defense reached a new level in 2004 and again in 2006.  Then there's 2007, which is at another different--better!--level.

In response to point (2), you are absolutely correct in that passing nearly 100% of the time when trying to play catch-up will have a negative impact on a team's rushing numbers.  While sacks are definitely helpful for a defense, they do mask a team's true ability against the run.  Here is the table above, again with a new column.  The third set of numbers is Mount Union's rush defense on a per-play basis with sacks and yards lost omitted:

2000-- 1340 yds. allowed-- 2.9 yards per rush-- 3.5 yards per true rush attempt (.6 difference)
2001-- 1610 yds. allowed-- 3.1 yards per rush-- 3.7 yards per true rush attempt (.6 difference)
2002-- 1667 yds. allowed-- 3.2 yards per rush-- 3.9 yards per true rush attempt (.7 difference)
2003-- 1509 yds. allowed-- 3.0 yards per rush-- 3.7 yards per true rush attempt (.7 difference)
2004-- 1051 yds. allowed-- 2.2 yards per rush-- 3.2 yards per true rush attempt (1.0 difference)
2005-- 1255 yds. allowed-- 2.2 yards per rush-- 3.0 yards per true rush attempt (.8 difference)
2006-- 450   yds. allowed-- 1.1 yards per rush-- 2.4 yards per true rush attempt (1.3 difference)
2007-- 206   yds. allowed-- 0.5 yards per rush-- 1.7 yards per true rush attempt (1.2 difference)

It looks like the ridiculous amount of sacks the Mount Union defense has created over the last couple of years has exaggerated how good the run defense is (shown by the difference between columns 2 and 3), but the run defense is also decidedly better than it was right after the turn of the century.  These numbers make it pretty clear that Bethel's run offense has its work cut for it on Saturday--they appear to be going against the best MUC run defense in at least 8 years.  The run defense that Blake Elliott effectively shredded in 2003 allowed more than twice the true rushing yardage, on a per-play basis, than this year's team.

[Kira & Jaxon's Dad]

TC has too much time on his hands! 

JK, nice work!!

[sjusection105]

Rushing Yards Allowed Season
2000-- 1340 National Champion
2001-- 1610 National Champion
2002-- 1667 National Champion
2003-- 1509 Lost to SJU in Stagg
2004-- 1051 Lost to MHB in semis
2005-- 1255 National Champion
2006-- 450 National Champion
2007-- 206 Semis now, ??

Just to add to this, let's keep in mind two things about the OAC:  (1.)  It is a pass-happy conference, so teams are less apt to concentrate on running the ball, and (2.) when you get down three scores to MUC in the first half, you almost have to abandon the run in favor of the pass. 

There are, of course, a couple of easy ways to account for these two factors and make the statistics much more informative.  In regards to point (1), we can simply look at yards allowed per rushing attempt to see Mount Union's defense against the run on a per play basis rather than per game (or season).  Here's how that chart looks:

2000-- 1340 yds. allowed-- 2.9 yards per carry
2001-- 1610 yds. allowed-- 3.1 yards per carry
2002-- 1667 yds. allowed-- 3.2 yards per carry
2003-- 1509 yds. allowed-- 3.0 yards per carry
2004-- 1051 yds. allowed-- 2.2 yards per carry
2005-- 1255 yds. allowed-- 2.2 yards per carry
2006-- 450   yds. allowed-- 1.1 yards per carry
2007-- 206   yds. allowed-- 0.5 yards per carry

Based on these numbers, it looks like MUC's run defense reached a new level in 2004 and again in 2006.  Then there's 2007, which is at another different--better!--level.

In response to point (2), you are absolutely correct in that passing nearly 100% of the time when trying to play catch-up will have a negative impact on a team's rushing numbers.  While sacks are definitely helpful for a defense, they do mask a team's true ability against the run.  Here is the table above, again with a new column.  The third set of numbers is Mount Union's rush defense on a per-play basis with sacks and yards lost omitted:

2000-- 1340 yds. allowed-- 2.9 yards per rush-- 3.5 yards per true rush attempt (.6 difference)
2001-- 1610 yds. allowed-- 3.1 yards per rush-- 3.7 yards per true rush attempt (.6 difference)
2002-- 1667 yds. allowed-- 3.2 yards per rush-- 3.9 yards per true rush attempt (.7 difference)
2003-- 1509 yds. allowed-- 3.0 yards per rush-- 3.7 yards per true rush attempt (.7 difference)
2004-- 1051 yds. allowed-- 2.2 yards per rush-- 3.2 yards per true rush attempt (1.0 difference)
2005-- 1255 yds. allowed-- 2.2 yards per rush-- 3.0 yards per true rush attempt (.8 difference)
2006-- 450   yds. allowed-- 1.1 yards per rush-- 2.4 yards per true rush attempt (1.3 difference)
2007-- 206   yds. allowed-- 0.5 yards per rush-- 1.7 yards per true rush attempt (1.2 difference)

It looks like the ridiculous amount of sacks the Mount Union defense has created over the last couple of years has exaggerated how good the run defense is (shown by the difference between columns 2 and 3), but the run defense is also decidedly better than it was right after the turn of the century.  These numbers make it pretty clear that Bethel's run offense has its work cut for it on Saturday--they appear to be going against the best MUC run defense in at least 8 years.  The run defense that Blake Elliott effectively shredded in 2003 allowed more than twice the true rushing yardage, on a per-play basis, than this year's team.

Something's gotta give- here are Bethel's rushing stats for 2007

  RUSHING YARDAGE...............         3104         
  Yards gained rushing........         3434         
  Yards lost rushing..........          330         
  Rushing Attempts............          704         
  Average Per Rush............          4.4         
  Average Per Game............        238.8         
  TDs Rushing.................           35               

[tmerton]

By the way, AO, my Eagle Head is coooooler!   

I think AO borrowed his from Boston College - yours is definitely cooler, LAB.

[AO]

I believe it's the philadelphia eagle with a little smoother edges.

[bulk19]

Re: UWEC quarterbacks -

Our starter played two games, and was hurt. Second string QB played in games 3 and 4. The third stringer played in games 4 and 5. Our punter played in game 5, too, and then started the rest of the season, including a first-round playoff win. He had a concussion when he threw a game-winning TD, and was held out against Bethel.

So Tony Hull, the Blugold's top WR, played QB, making him the fifth one to do so on the year. During that game, a RB took a few snaps, too. So, for those who are keeping score at home, that was six on the year... 

[Klopenhiemer]

Re: UWEC quarterbacks -

Our starter played two games, and was hurt. Second string QB played in games 3 and 4. The third stringer played in games 4 and 5. Our punter played in game 5, too, and then started the rest of the season, including a first-round playoff win. He had a concussion when he threw a game-winning TD, and was held out against Bethel.

So Tony Hull, the Blugold's top WR, played QB, making him the fifth one to do so on the year. During that game, a RB took a few snaps, too. So, for those who are keeping score at home, that was six on the year... 

6 quarterbacks in one year.  You make the playoffs and win your opening game.  I will first tell you that it quite impressive.  What does that say for your program or the WIAC.  Is your program that deep with talent and kids who can play multiple positions, or is the MIAC a conference where a second tier quarterback can be successful.  I was not meaning to start a IIAC v. WIAC battle.  Some conferences might be a 80% run the ball conference and the quarterbacks do not do a whole lot but throw a waggle here and there.  Let me know what you think. 

[AO]

UWEC is short for Wisconsin-Eau Claire of the WIAC conference, and I would say that it means that there are more than 2 players on a team capable of playing the qb position effectively and that Eau Claire is very talented at all other positions on the field to win so many games in a very tough conference.

[Klopenhiemer]

UWEC is short for Wisconsin-Eau Claire of the WIAC conference, and I would say that it means that there are more than 2 players on a team capable of playing the qb position effectively and that Eau Claire is very talented at all other positions on the field to win so many games in a very tough conference.

I knew that its just been a long day.  Asking this question on the MIAC board with a combination of little sleep = typing errors.  I appologize for my ignorance. 

[bulk19]

UWEC's starter was a junior, and the 2 and 3 were a freshman and sophomore... The P and WR were both seniors - and played QB in high school - and were considered leaders on a team that had a magical season, considering they were picked to be 7th in the conference... They won a lot of games ugly, and the stats weren't impressive - no first-team fantasy football selections, most likely  , but they found ways to win and made a lot of plays on special teams...

That's the way the Bethel game turned out... They were in it until the end, but ultimately Bethel sort of beat the Blugolds at their own game, by winning ugly!  They did what it took in that game and found a way to win that one, and have continued on, in my opinion, quite impressively...

But a tall task is coming up this weekend for those gentlemen...

[repete]

were you at the game repete?  I was.  I was also there to watch Kofoed look much worse except for the single weber td.

Wasn't there but saw some footage. Not that many drops. I felt sorry for Hull -- a great athlete/competitor playing out of position in a huge game.

Your point? Who brought Kofoed into this? Just a gratuitous shot at SJU from our boy AO -- your act is getting so tired ...

[HScoach]

Something's gotta give- here are Bethel's rushing stats for 2007

  RUSHING YARDAGE...............         3104         
  Yards gained rushing........         3434         
  Yards lost rushing..........          330         
  Rushing Attempts............          704         
  Average Per Rush............          4.4          
  Average Per Game............        238.8         
  TDs Rushing.................           35               

Only 4.4 per rush?  That's not overly impressive.

If Bethel finishes the game averaging half of their average (2.2 per rush) I'll be very surprised.  The Mount DT's are beasts.  Running between the tackles is not going to work consistently.  Option and mis-direction/counters could be the ticket because the MUC defense is very aggressive and flows to the ball like mad.   Therefore, use their own speed and aggression against them.