CCIW

[PaulNewman]

Yes, Greg you are correct about one thing...we have been here before.  Interesting that you without pause presume that's data that supports your takes.  And you're also correct that I most likely would have ignored my usual reaction to your CCIW/NP lovefests if you hadn't been the one who questioned my question on the other thread.  And no ad hominen intended.  There's mounds of data here on this site re: your argument style and presumption that you couldn't be wrong.  "You're better than that" feels like an ad hominen, but no, apparently I am not better than that, so I'd really prefer you just leave me alone, which I think is what I asked previously.

Your style with NP is to be what I would call pre-emptively defensive in an offensive fashion.  Who raised "not running up the score?"  I won't go through them one by one but your versions change in a pretty self-serving way on most of your points... like with the first version of the "sneaky" but "not tricky" play and how the NP duo pulled that off moment by moment (with no mention of the GK other than "fishing the ball out of the net" or a  need to teach EU a lesson) that upon challenge you changed to a second  version about the GK and his poor hands and the "well, if you're snoozing," then "whatever misfortune" befalls you is on you.   Also wonder how EU (or for that matter Carthage) fans feel about your characterizations...."massacre...sleepwalking...pants down...prisoners on chain gangs...if anything EU insulting the game."  Again, I don't care, but enough with the deflection and diversion routine.

You attributed a lot of thinking to the NP  player who initiated the "sneaky" but "not tricky" play..."figured the Bluejays were in a mental fog and decided to test his suspicion."  No leap there lol.

Changing the cadence up 7 touchdowns midway thru 4th quarter...to..draw an offsides call?  Really?  Again, whether deserving of "misfortune" or not that's a different issue than "testing a suspicion" to take advantage of a team being in "misfortune mode" (whatever that means).

Your apologist take on the GK getting some extra work in is just laughable.  Extra work on positioning when the ball doesn't get out of the other team's half?  More game experience about where to put the water bottle and the towel?  And it's not about whether he stayed in or didn't so I don't need another long justification.  It's about the absurdity of your argument.  And btw, EU had eight subs in so it wasn't in fact 1st team going against 2nd team so maybe, maybe the NP GK will get a save chance.

The anyone can be on the team but that's not a "everyone can participate" model, regardless of the motivation/rationale...yeah, if you can't see your contradiction with that, I got nothing for ya, except that plenty of folks DO pay even larger sums of money for the privilege to play.

Well played though in turning my beat Tufts 5-0 imaginary prop into an actual record thing.  Wow.

With picayune obtuseness,

PN

[Falconer]

Not gonna get into this fray about that NPU game. I will go in another direction, with reference to the Falcons, since they are like NPU a Christian college that plays high level soccer (both men and women) and sometimes (much less often than 10 or 15 years ago) wins games with lopsided scores.

First, Messiah's roster is quite small, by comparison with NPU (and several other D3 schools, including Lycoming not very long ago). That still doesn't mean that every healthy player gets into a blowout. Almost always, at least 2 of the 4 GK on the roster don't play at all, though the main backup keeper usually does get to play in a one-sided contest. One or two other players sometimes will sit out, too, but often the entire roster except keepers will get PT.

But, even in close games, most of the roster get PT. High level tournament games are the only exceptions. In those games, it's not unusual for McCarty to go only 6 or 7 deep, or in rare instances just 4 or 5 deep. He wants to win, and I sense he plays the full roster partly to develop next year's starters and next year's key bench players. I don't think it's simply to give guys PT for the sake of it.

As for running up the score, I cannot recall ever seeing a game in which it was obvious that the Falcons had stopped going to goal. Period. When the bench players go in, McCarty expects them to play as hard as the starters, all the way. For example, in Saturday's game vs York, the backup winger scored on a nearly impossible angle with about 4 minutes left in a 3-0 game prior to that goal. York responded by getting a yellow card shortly afterwards, so they didn't think the Falcons had let up either. Why should those guys be expected to play softer, just because their goals won't change the outcome? Indeed, anyone familiar with the Final Four in 2017 knows that backup players scored hugely important goals; in one case, the only goal a man scored in his whole career was the GW. That doesn't happen, unless the bench is expected to keep the pedal on the metal.

If anything makes Falcon soccer specifically Christian, it's the underlying philosophy, best captured (IMO) in the famous saying of the late Layton Shoemaker, David Brandt's predecessor as head coach. "Do the right thing, in the right way, for the right reason." That applied just as much to taking corner kicks as to showing sportsmanship to your opponent. There actually was a season under Layton when the Falcons had zero cards of any color the entire year. Obviously one need not be religious to buy into that philosophy, but the institutional ethos absolutely encourages one to do so: it's easier that way. The Falcons also have a motto, "playing for an audience of One," that does require a religious buy-in. Nothing in either expression of philosophy states or implies anything about using the bench in a blowout.

[Falconer]

I suggest that the Falcon bench be seen as akin to Dean Smith (as in UNC basketball) and his "Blue Team." Many won't get that reference, but those who do will see my point. Likewise, the Falcons play the soccer equivalent of Bob Knight's "motion offense." I think that analogy does fit, and Brandt would have owned it. McCarty's teams aren't really much different. Prior to Brandt, there was more of a dump-and-run game, if only b/c the Falcons didn't have the kind of depth they later had under Brandt and McCarty, esp in the MF. I remember seeing a stark difference in play, when Brandt's first class of recruits got onto the field: instead of attacking from the wings and forwards, the scoring came from MFers going to goal. Only later were premier strikers added to that model.

[PaulNewman]

I suggest that the Falcon bench be seen as akin to Dean Smith (as in UNC basketball) and his "Blue Team." Many won't get that reference, but those who do will see my point. Likewise, the Falcons play the soccer equivalent of Bob Knight's "motion offense." I think that analogy does fit, and Brandt would have owned it. McCarty's teams aren't really much different. Prior to Brandt, there was more of a dump-and-run game, if only b/c the Falcons didn't have the kind of depth they later had under Brandt and McCarty, esp in the MF. I remember seeing a stark difference in play, when Brandt's first class of recruits got onto the field: instead of attacking from the wings and forwards, the scoring came from MFers going to goal. Only later were premier strikers added to that model.

As a NC native who grew up despising UNC and then later also Duke (because my ancestral roots are Kentucky), I know the reference...roughly parallel with Smith's other favorite innovative tactic the "Four Corners" where UNC would have a lead, sometimes narrow, and Smith would have his team go into four corners to play keep-away to drain the clock and make the other team chase.  This was all before the shot clock era and probably the best maestro of the Four Corners scheme was Phil Ford.  Eventually the other team would leave an opening for easy lay-up, often on a backdoor play.  Anyway, I recall the "Blue Team" being five subs who literally would come in for like 2 minutes each half to give the starters a break but also because the concept seemed to create a great vibe with team chemistry and the Tarheel fan base.  They were almost like a walk-on group that came in for a few possessions to energize the team and crowd.

[Gregory Sager]

Yes, Greg you are correct about one thing...we have been here before.  Interesting that you without pause presume that's data that supports your takes.  And you're also correct that I most likely would have ignored my usual reaction to your CCIW/NP lovefests if you hadn't been the one who questioned my question on the other thread.  And no ad hominen intended.  There's mounds of data here on this site re: your argument style and presumption that you couldn't be wrong.  "You're better than that" feels like an ad hominen, but no, apparently I am not better than that, so I'd really prefer you just leave me alone, which I think is what I asked previously.

Your style with NP is to be what I would call pre-emptively defensive in an offensive fashion.  Who raised "not running up the score?"  I won't go through them one by one but your versions change in a pretty self-serving way on most of your points... like with the first version of the "sneaky" but "not tricky" play and how the NP duo pulled that off moment by moment (with no mention of the GK other than "fishing the ball out of the net" or a  need to teach EU a lesson) that upon challenge you changed to a second  version about the GK and his poor hands and the "well, if you're snoozing," then "whatever misfortune" befalls you is on you.   Also wonder how EU (or for that matter Carthage) fans feel about your characterizations...."massacre...sleepwalking...pants down...prisoners on chain gangs...if anything EU insulting the game."  Again, I don't care, but enough with the deflection and diversion routine.

This is all a really ridiculous case of the pot calling the kettle black. You have a very nasty way of taking personal shots in your arguments and then ducking behind a "Who, me?" facade that is the very definition of "deflection and diversion."

As for the so-called inconsistent and "pretty self-serving" manner in which I described the goal in question, all I can say is that anybody who cares to do so can watch it for themselves on YouTube. The time index is 1:43:42 and the play clock reads 20:43 at the point where Elmhurst commits the foul that led to the quick-start free kick.

I'm not even going to bother with the rest of the ongoing nonsense in your post. This is beginning to make me angry, and I'm not going to let that happen. I'm done with dealing with you, for my own sake.

[Gregory Sager]

As for running up the score, I cannot recall ever seeing a game in which it was obvious that the Falcons had stopped going to goal. Period. When the bench players go in, McCarty expects them to play as hard as the starters, all the way. For example, in Saturday's game vs York, the backup winger scored on a nearly impossible angle with about 4 minutes left in a 3-0 game prior to that goal. York responded by getting a yellow card shortly afterwards, so they didn't think the Falcons had let up either. Why should those guys be expected to play softer, just because their goals won't change the outcome? Indeed, anyone familiar with the Final Four in 2017 knows that backup players scored hugely important goals; in one case, the only goal a man scored in his whole career was the GW. That doesn't happen, unless the bench is expected to keep the pedal on the metal.

I think that the ability to demonstrate sportsmanship by easing up on an already-trounced opponent when there's still plenty of game left to play, without disrespecting the trounced team in the process, varies from sport to sport. As discussed, the SOP in a football game is to run the ball up the middle after using up all but a second or two or three of the play clock. In recent years, if the two head coaches are amenable to it, a college football game can be played out with a running clock, at least on the D3 level; I know that St. John's has finished out one or two blowout wins that way in recent seasons. Baseball etiquette actually sort of demands that a team stop bunting or stealing bases once it gets up by seven or so runs in the late innings. This is less observed in NCAA baseball and softball, I think, because of the mercy rule: a ten-run lead in baseball or an eight-run lead in softball ends the game once the losing side has completed either seven innings at bat (baseball) or five (softball). Basketball used to be easy before the shot clock was instituted, because you could just go into a four-corners offense. But a shot clock demands that you try to keep scoring, even on an opponent that you've already whipped.

Soccer's probably in the middle ground somewhere. You can stop going to goal by simply playing keepaway with your backs, holding mid, and cycling mids. Obviously, if you can't do that with inpunity against an outclassed opponent, then the game is still very much a contested matter. But, as you said, a coach who tells his players to stop going to goal denies his backups the chance to hone their skills in a game situation -- and any coach worth his salt values those chances for his backups. I completely agree with you: Why should those guys be expected to play softer, just because their goals won't change the outcome?

[PaulNewman]

Yes, Greg you are correct about one thing...we have been here before.  Interesting that you without pause presume that's data that supports your takes.  And you're also correct that I most likely would have ignored my usual reaction to your CCIW/NP lovefests if you hadn't been the one who questioned my question on the other thread.  And no ad hominen intended.  There's mounds of data here on this site re: your argument style and presumption that you couldn't be wrong.  "You're better than that" feels like an ad hominen, but no, apparently I am not better than that, so I'd really prefer you just leave me alone, which I think is what I asked previously.

Your style with NP is to be what I would call pre-emptively defensive in an offensive fashion.  Who raised "not running up the score?"  I won't go through them one by one but your versions change in a pretty self-serving way on most of your points... like with the first version of the "sneaky" but "not tricky" play and how the NP duo pulled that off moment by moment (with no mention of the GK other than "fishing the ball out of the net" or a  need to teach EU a lesson) that upon challenge you changed to a second  version about the GK and his poor hands and the "well, if you're snoozing," then "whatever misfortune" befalls you is on you.   Also wonder how EU (or for that matter Carthage) fans feel about your characterizations...."massacre...sleepwalking...pants down...prisoners on chain gangs...if anything EU insulting the game."  Again, I don't care, but enough with the deflection and diversion routine.

This is all a really ridiculous case of the pot calling the kettle black. You have a very nasty way of taking personal shots in your arguments and then ducking behind a "Who, me?" facade that is the very definition of "deflection and diversion."

As for the so-called inconsistent and "pretty self-serving" manner in which I described the goal in question, all I can say is that anybody who cares to do so can watch it for themselves on YouTube. The time index is 1:43:42 and the play clock reads 20:43 at the point where Elmhurst commits the foul that led to the quick-start free kick.

I'm not even going to bother with the rest of the ongoing nonsense in your post. This is beginning to make me angry, and I'm not going to let that happen. I'm done with dealing with you, for my own sake.

Welcome news.  Very relieved.  Thank you... and best to you and yours as well as the Vikings.

[Gregory Sager]

Congrats to Peder Olsen on winning POW for the second time this season, and for the seventh time in his career!

Obviously, the annual rivalry showdown tomorrow is the main event in CCIW men's soccer -- and it's killing me that I have to call what will be an uncompetitive contest between the NPU and Wheaton women here in the city at the same time that the NPU/WC men's game is being played at Wheaton. This bids fair to be one of the better iterations of the rivalry in recent memory, as Wheaton is clearly better than it has been over the past few seasons and the Vikings definitely have a mixed record thus far when being asked to step up in competition. The interesting thing, and I think the encouraging thing in the big picture, is that this won't be the game that decides the league's title. For several years now Carthage has blocked the CCIW from coming down to Wheaton vs. North Park every season, and even though the Firebirds are struggling at the moment there's still upstart North Central and dark-horse Carroll to consider, as far as teams undefeated in CCIW play are concerned.

Speaking of the Firebirds, the very intriguing alternative to the main event takes place at the same time tomorrow at Stagg Field down on the South Side, where Carthage will get a prime chance to redeem itself and halt its descent into irrelevance by taking on a formidable Chicago team that likewise has struggled as of late. Two versions of the same mascot, both wounded but both dangerous ... that should be very interesting as well.

And the other non-conference matchup, UW-Whitewater (8-2-1) @ Carroll (7-1-1), also a 7 pm start, looks intriguing as well.

It should be a great night of soccer.

[Gregory Sager]

Illinois Wesleyan and Illinois College fought to a scoreless draw in Jacksonville tonight. The Titans were denied victory despite outshooting the Blue Boys by a 17 (4) to 4 (1) margin and outcornering them, 6-3.

[mr_b]

Final from Wheaton: North Park 3, Wheaton 1.  The Vikings were down 1-0 on a penalty kick and tallied three goals in the second half.

[Gregory Sager]

Looking forward to watching that one once I get home.  (I'm in Charcoal Delights enjoying my postgame meal after calling the WC @ NPU women's soccer game.) We followed it on live stats in the press box, and I noticed that the stats are very lopsided in favor of the Vikings. In fact, Silas Galvao's PK goal was the only shot on goal Wheaton had, so I'm assuming that the Vikings had the run of play all night.

[Gregory Sager]

Carthage was blanked by Chicago, 1-0, at Stagg Field this evening. That's three straight shutout losses for Carthage.

Carroll finally stepped up in class in terms of non-conference play -- and paid the price for it, falling 3-2 to UW-Whitewater at the Schneid.

Elmhurst bounced back with a 1-0 win at Millikin.

North Central powered past Augie, 5-2, in the QC ... so all three road teams won in the CCIW vs. CCIW matchups.

[Gotberg]

Anyone know why the NPU / St. Norbert game scheduled for this Sunday was cancelled?

[Gregory Sager]

St. Norbert's game at Dominican that was scheduled for last Saturday was rained out. Since that's a conference game for both teams, it takes priority -- and the only possible open date that the Green Knights and Stars have in common is next Monday (since they're both playing next Saturday and Wednesday, and there's no date available that both teams have in common further down the road). So the SNC @ DU rainout game was postponed to next Monday, and, since St. Norbert isn't going to play on three straight days, the Green Knights had to cancel with NPU.

I'm not sure yet whether Kris Grahn is looking to pick up an extra game or not for NPU on short notice, but I'm pretty sure that he won't find an opponent in time to get a game on the docket for this weekend. That's a shame, because it means that the traveling Homecoming alumni will miss a chance to see the men's soccer team in person.

[Gotberg]

St. Norbert's game at Dominican that was scheduled for last Saturday was rained out. Since that's a conference game for both teams, it takes priority -- and the only possible open date that the Green Knights and Stars have in common is next Monday (since they're both playing next Saturday and Wednesday, and there's no date available that both teams have in common further down the road). So the SNC @ DU rainout game was postponed to next Monday, and, since St. Norbert isn't going to play on three straight days, the Green Knights had to cancel with NPU.

I'm not sure yet whether Kris Grahn is looking to pick up an extra game or not for NPU on short notice, but I'm pretty sure that he won't find an opponent in time to get a game on the docket for this weekend. That's a shame, because it means that the traveling Homecoming alumni will miss a chance to see the men's soccer team in person.

Thanks, that's too bad but understandable.