Playoffs 2013

[skunks_sidekick]

JCU proved once again that you must be able to run the ball in the playoffs to combat Mother Nature.    Congrats to SJF on the win.

Amen.......BALANCE is the key.  When UWW started mixing the play-action pass (successfully) with their strong running game, they took their game to the next (and best) level. 

The only thing that saves you if you are one dimensional on offense is if you have a lights out defense, and/or superior special teams.

[Pat Coleman]

I think I'll start defending this point soon since I'm noticing a contingent start to imply that the snow is the main reason for John Carroll's loss.

Know I'm a day late to this but my take on the podcast was as such:

The snow itself is not the main reason for JCU losing, but the fact that they weren't balanced enough offensively to succeed in imperfect weather. Think there is a difference although I am parsing a little bit.

[Ralph Turner]

I think I'll start defending this point soon since I'm noticing a contingent start to imply that the snow is the main reason for John Carroll's loss.

Know I'm a day late to this but my take on the podcast was as such:

The snow itself is not the main reason for JCU losing, but the fact that they weren't balanced enough offensively to succeed in imperfect weather. Think there is a difference although I am parsing a little bit.

Not being able to conduct a passing game in snow is something that I would expect from a Texas team, not a team from Cleveland.

[Frank Rossi]

Checking out the bracket update and it lists the Wesley/Ithaca game in Dover.  that would be great, but would also be interested in the reason for the change.  Is ithaca's field in bad shape, I think they have grass?

I wrote this in the East Region Playoff Discussion PP related to someone else guessing the relative seeding in this quadrant.  It seems relevant to your post here:

"I would've said:

1. Mount Union

2. Johns Hopkins (We know the first two automatically.)

3. Wittenberg (9-0 in "Region" and respectable SOS.)

4. Framingham State (One loss, but to an RRO -- Rowan -- and very good SOS.)

5. Wesley (Two losses, but extreme SOS.  Not placed above Framingham St. based on Framingham's very good SOS and 9-1 record.  Both lost to Rowan by nearly identical amounts.)

6. Ithaca (Win vs. RRO -- SJF -- placed team above remaining two.  SOS well below Wesley.)

7. Lebanon Valley (Was behind Ithaca in last seen Regional Rankings and the losses were equal, meaning no reason to swap, although Lycoming may have become an RRO in final unseen rankings.)

8. Washington & Jefferson (If Lycoming was an RRO, it would explain the 7/8 ordering better since W&J had a better SOS than LebVal.)

Note that because of the location of Wittenberg, Mount Union, Wittenberg, Lebanon Valley and W&J had to be podded together to avoid any Second Round flight -- as per the new NCAA's budgeting requirements.  The question concerning the ordering of JHU/ITH/FS/WES is an interesting one.  My inclination is this: the Committee viewed Wesley and Ithaca as virtually identical seeds -- you could balance them in either direction and have valid arguments either way.  As such, and in order to not force Framingham State, as a higher seed that couldn't host, to travel a huge distance, they lined up the teams in a way that left Wesley for nearby JHU and left Framingham for nearby Ithaca.  They are not required to strictly follow seedings, but my guesstimate is it ended up as the above if they were forced to seed."

[footballfan413]

JCU proved once again that you must be able to run the ball in the playoffs to combat Mother Nature.    Congrats to SJF on the win.

Amen.......BALANCE is the key.  When UWW started mixing the play-action pass (successfully) with their strong running game, they took their game to the next (and best) level. 

The only thing that saves you if you are one dimensional on offense is if you have a lights out defense, and/or superior special teams.

Amen to your Amen, Skunks.  I have been saying this for years.  My connection with UWW started in 03 when we were just a very good WIAC team with a, "run first, run often," philosophy but UWL owned the conference.  The stark difference that happen in 05, with a record breaking QB and a WR that ended his career in the NFL, was crazy.  By the start of the conference season, we were saying, "holy crap," this team can pass as well, if not better, than run, (and we could run pretty damn well,) and is a totally different animal.  UWW did not become a national powerhouse until we embraced and nurtured a balanced offense and had the horses to pull it off. And I have, also, always contended since then that no team will go deep into the play-offs without one, not even with a, "lights out defense, and/or superior special teams."  Not by the 3/4th round, anyway.   And UWW's defensive coordinator, Borland's #1 goal and philosophy, each and every game, is to, "make the opponent one dimensional! I'm sure he just loves it when a team starts out that way.   

I also changed my thought process about just how much weather affects a talented team after watching our California QB throw for 4 touchdowns in an, absolute, blizzard in 07.  Weather be damned, you still have to be able to mix it up against the best in the country to move on in December, IMHO

[D3MAFAN]

JCU proved once again that you must be able to run the ball in the playoffs to combat Mother Nature.    Congrats to SJF on the win.

Amen.......BALANCE is the key.  When UWW started mixing the play-action pass (successfully) with their strong running game, they took their game to the next (and best) level. 

The only thing that saves you if you are one dimensional on offense is if you have a lights out defense, and/or superior special teams.

Amen to your Amen, Skunks.  I have been saying this for years.  My connection with UWW started in 03 when we were just a very good WIAC team with a, "run first, run often," philosophy but UWL owned the conference.  The stark difference that happen in 05, with a record breaking QB and a WR that ended his career in the NFL, was crazy.  By the start of the conference season, we were saying, "holy crap," this team can pass as well, if not better, than run, (and we could run pretty damn well,) and is a totally different animal.  UWW did not become a national powerhouse until we embraced and nurtured a balanced offense and had the horses to pull it off. And I have, also, always contended since then that no team will go deep into the play-offs without one, not even with a, "lights out defense, and/or superior special teams."  Not by the 3/4th round, anyway.   And UWW's defensive coordinator, Borland's #1 goal and philosophy, each and every game, is to, "make the opponent one dimensional! I'm sure he just loves it when a team starts out that way.   

I also changed my thought process about just how much weather affects a talented team after watching our California QB throw for 4 touchdowns in an, absolute, blizzard in 07.  Weather be damned, you still have to be able to mix it up against the best in the country to move on in December, IMHO

Couldn't have said it better.

[Jonny Utah]

JCU rushed for 1521 yards this year, a 138 yd per game average with 22 rushing touchdowns.  Although they passed for a lot more (3446 yards/313 per game), it wasn't like they were a run and shoot offense with no rushing game were they?

I mean, I assume teams tried different things throughout the year against them (rushing 3, rushing 6-7, delayed blitzes), and they must have had an answer for them all.

[Pat Coleman]

How much of that was "running out the clock" running, though?

[Jonny Utah]

How much of that was "running out the clock" running, though?

Yea don't know.  I have to admit, I only watched the fourth quarter of the SJF game, where JCU needed to move the ball. 

Are they a run and shoot team?  Or just a standard spread team?

[emma17]

Just a reminder -- the OAC was NOT the No. 2 conference in our most recent rankings, either, 02:

http://www.d3football.com/columns/around-the-nation/2013/2013-conference-rankings

Ha! I didn't see the latest rankings. I was going off the Kickoff rankings.

Soooo......this is awkward   

Not nearly as awkward as next week's tailgate after you dissed this year's team

LOL. I've talked to at least 10 people today at the game that share my sentiments.

No matter what happens, this team has exceeded everyone's expectations. I'm happy with how this season has turned out.

02- I'm sorry to be late to this discussion as I feel you were a little ganged up on.  Some comments were made that I feel were more about protecting a conference or previous opinion than they were about respectfully discussing your point. 

I stand with you in that one of the best ways to determine the strength of a conference is playoff performance- AND performance against another conference's best teams.  The OAC dominates with one team and falls flat since 2005 or so with the rest.  Posters can give every rationalization under the sun, or snow, but it is what it is. 

Some seem to feel that the measuring stick of "how well they played vs. Mt" is the best way to determine the strength of the OAC.  There are holes in this approach.  "Decent/good teams" will often play the top team in their conference relatively tough because of the massive familiarity that exists within conference play.  Not just familiarity with players, but coaches in a variety of ways. Suggesting that the OAC must be a good conference (initially #2) simply because JCU and Hedi play Mt tough and blow everybody else in the OAC out is a weak argument.  The OAC will prove itself to be a top conference when more than Mt does something good in the playoffs and/or when more than Mt takes on and defeats tougher non conference opponents. 
 
Along those lines, my intention isn't to promote the WIAC as the best conference this year,  In fact I think it may be the MIAC.  But that said, Ret, your argument in favor of the MIAC partly based upon its record with the WIAC is silly.  In fact, it only proves how strong the WIAC is.  The WIAC's weakest teams played the MIAC's and the CCIW's best team(s).  The fact that the MIAC won those games says little about the strength of the MIAC. 

If the OAC is to be deserving of top conference recognition, the teams not named Mt should start beating better non-conf competition, either in the regular season or in the playoffs. 

Lastly 02- not everybody believes that a true fan is only one that never questions their team or has doubts about their ability to win a national championship. I think one sign of a true fan is one that attends a game with wind chill below 0.   

[Pat Coleman]

If the OAC is to be deserving of top conference recognition, the teams not named Mt should start beating better non-conf competition, either in the regular season or in the playoffs. 

Which is why it doesn't have top conference recognition.

[emma17]

If the OAC is to be deserving of top conference recognition, the teams not named Mt should start beating better non-conf competition, either in the regular season or in the playoffs. 

Which is why it doesn't have top conference recognition.

First, I'm not referring to only the most recent rankings (which even #4 is too high IMO).   
Second, the majority of your replies to 02 seemed as though you lacked a willingness to engage the actual point.  Replies such as "When you compare the OAC to the UMAC, sorry -- I stop reading"- are not only a complete twisting of the point 02 was making, but disrespectful IMO. 

[hazzben]

JCU proved once again that you must be able to run the ball in the playoffs to combat Mother Nature.    Congrats to SJF on the win.

Amen.......BALANCE is the key.  When UWW started mixing the play-action pass (successfully) with their strong running game, they took their game to the next (and best) level. 

The only thing that saves you if you are one dimensional on offense is if you have a lights out defense, and/or superior special teams.

Amen to your Amen, Skunks.  I have been saying this for years.  My connection with UWW started in 03 when we were just a very good WIAC team with a, "run first, run often," philosophy but UWL owned the conference.  The stark difference that happen in 05, with a record breaking QB and a WR that ended his career in the NFL, was crazy.  By the start of the conference season, we were saying, "holy crap," this team can pass as well, if not better, than run, (and we could run pretty damn well,) and is a totally different animal.  UWW did not become a national powerhouse until we embraced and nurtured a balanced offense and had the horses to pull it off. And I have, also, always contended since then that no team will go deep into the play-offs without one, not even with a, "lights out defense, and/or superior special teams."  Not by the 3/4th round, anyway.   And UWW's defensive coordinator, Borland's #1 goal and philosophy, each and every game, is to, "make the opponent one dimensional! I'm sure he just loves it when a team starts out that way.   

I also changed my thought process about just how much weather affects a talented team after watching our California QB throw for 4 touchdowns in an, absolute, blizzard in 07.  Weather be damned, you still have to be able to mix it up against the best in the country to move on in December, IMHO

Let me start by saying, I think balance is a great thing. It's tough to scheme against teams that are strong in both the run and the pass.

But we overstate the matter when we pretend a team can't win with just a great run game, defense and special teams. Evidence, you say...

Nebraska & Georgia Southern (to name just a few).

The former dominated more balanced teams for decades until they abandoned the triple option with the ouster of Frank Solich. Those option teams beat Florida, FSU, Miami & Tennessee teams that were much more balanced on paper.

The latter proves that you can win a playoff championship in this way. They just beat Florida (a team with loads more 'talent' and scholarships) without throwing a single pass. They've also won multiple FCS/IAA national titles with a run oriented, option approach. For a DIII version, how about Augustana back in the 80's? 

There are more teams that could be sighted, but the fact is, you can win with a dominant, one dimensional offense. And you can win against defenses that are faster, more athletic and more physical than anything that has ever set foot on the field of a Stagg Bowl.

The better question might be, can you win with a run dominant approach from a more tradition/pro-style offensive set? Suffice to say though, there are teams who win national titles against the 'more balanced team' by relying (at times almost exclusively) on the run.

[Jonny Utah]

JCU proved once again that you must be able to run the ball in the playoffs to combat Mother Nature.    Congrats to SJF on the win.

Amen.......BALANCE is the key.  When UWW started mixing the play-action pass (successfully) with their strong running game, they took their game to the next (and best) level. 

The only thing that saves you if you are one dimensional on offense is if you have a lights out defense, and/or superior special teams.

Amen to your Amen, Skunks.  I have been saying this for years.  My connection with UWW started in 03 when we were just a very good WIAC team with a, "run first, run often," philosophy but UWL owned the conference.  The stark difference that happen in 05, with a record breaking QB and a WR that ended his career in the NFL, was crazy.  By the start of the conference season, we were saying, "holy crap," this team can pass as well, if not better, than run, (and we could run pretty damn well,) and is a totally different animal.  UWW did not become a national powerhouse until we embraced and nurtured a balanced offense and had the horses to pull it off. And I have, also, always contended since then that no team will go deep into the play-offs without one, not even with a, "lights out defense, and/or superior special teams."  Not by the 3/4th round, anyway.   And UWW's defensive coordinator, Borland's #1 goal and philosophy, each and every game, is to, "make the opponent one dimensional! I'm sure he just loves it when a team starts out that way.   

I also changed my thought process about just how much weather affects a talented team after watching our California QB throw for 4 touchdowns in an, absolute, blizzard in 07.  Weather be damned, you still have to be able to mix it up against the best in the country to move on in December, IMHO

Let me start by saying, I think balance is a great thing. It's tough to scheme against teams that are strong in both the run and the pass.

But we overstate the matter when we pretend a team can't win with just a great run game, defense and special teams. Evidence, you say...

Nebraska & Georgia Southern (to name just a few).

The former dominated more balanced teams for decades until they abandoned the triple option with the ouster of Frank Solich. Those option teams beat Florida, FSU, Miami & Tennessee teams that were much more balanced on paper.

The latter proves that you can win a playoff championship in this way. They just beat Florida (a team with loads more 'talent' and scholarships) without throwing a single pass. They've also won multiple FCS/IAA national titles with a run oriented, option approach. For a DIII version, how about Augustana back in the 80's? 

There are more teams that could be sighted, but the fact is, you can win with a dominant, one dimensional offense. And you can win against defenses that are faster, more athletic and more physical than anything that has ever set foot on the field of a Stagg Bowl.

The better question might be, can you win with a run dominant approach from a more tradition/pro-style offensive set? Suffice to say though, there are teams who win national titles against the 'more balanced team' by relying (at times almost exclusively) on the run.

Good point Hazzben.  I think there is a difference between "system offenses" and "unbalanced" offenses.  The Triple Option and Wing-T offenses are system offenses which are run based but still always have that threat to pass at any time.  (Ithaca also ran triple option during their national championships in 1988 and 1991)

[smedindy]

Emma17 -

I respectfully disagree. The strength of a conference lies not with the top, but how the second and lower tiers fare against the other conferences.

You throw Wesley into the UMAC and that doesn't change the UMAC's overall strength one whit. But you can gauge a league where a league is by the masses. Case in point, the HCAC - one great team and then a disaster in non-conference for the most part.

The issue, of course, is that limited non-conference opportunities, anomalous results can skew things a bit. Case in point - somehow Earlham beat Kenyon. That is what I would call an outlier result and if the data set were bigger, I'd throw that out of the conversation (because upsets happen and bad teams beat good teams - over time with enough results it would normalize but that's not the case here.) But you gotta connect all the dots in the ENTIRE league, not just the top heavy piece.

The OAC wasn't as strong this year - their non-conference results bear that out. But JCU poleaxing St. Norbert is a real result - that matters.