FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

Started by admin, August 16, 2005, 05:19:27 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

bleedpurple

UW-W is doing everything you are describing. So not sure what is missing in your mind. Wait, that didn't come out right...

emma17

Quote from: bleedpurple on August 11, 2017, 06:17:21 PM
UW-W is doing everything you are describing. So not sure what is missing in your mind. Wait, that didn't come out right...

Lots and lots of marbles-that's what's missing.

This may come as a surprise, I don't agree with your bolded statement. There is no way in the world the offense run (and executed) in the last two years was designed with the idea of competing with the best of the best deep in the playoffs as a goal. That's just another example of the subtle difference between conference championship goals and national championship goals. 

Just Bill

But how foolish would it be for UWW to design an offense to defeat Mount Union and Mary Hardin-Baylor, only to lose to Oshkosh and Platteville, because that offense couldn't win the conference? After they missed they playoffs, would they be shaking hands and high-fiving saying, "We totally would have beaten Mount Union! Great job guys!"

The horse still goes before the cart.

(Also, I don't really think you design your offense to win one championship or the other. You design your offense to give you the best possible chance to win each of your games. If you do that well, the championships follow.)
"That seems silly and pointless..." - Hoops Fan

The first and still most accurate description of the D3 Championship BeltTM thread.

bleedpurple

Quote from: emma17 on August 12, 2017, 01:26:01 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on August 11, 2017, 06:17:21 PM
UW-W is doing everything you are describing. So not sure what is missing in your mind. Wait, that didn't come out right...

Lots and lots of marbles-that's what's missing.


This may come as a surprise, I don't agree with your bolded statement. There is no way in the world the offense run (and executed) in the last two years was designed with the idea of competing with the best of the best deep in the playoffs as a goal. That's just another example of the subtle difference between conference championship goals and national championship goals.
So you think the design of the offense was a function of over-focusing on winning the conference championship and not enough on competing nationally?  This whole conversation just keeps getting weirder.  Especially following a year UW-W was the only team in the country to beat either of the teams playing in the Stagg Bowl.  UW-W's offense had issues the last couple of years, but they didn't have anything to do with goal setting or shooting too low. What Just Bill said...

emma17

I think you and JB tend to go to extremes, which makes it a bit difficult to have a discussion, especially one about the subtleties of coaching.
JB says you "design an offense to give you the best chance to win each of your games and the championships will come". Certainly there is a whole lot of merit to this JB. However, Salisbury did a great job designing an offense to win games, as did Willamette. Those offenses did great in the regular season, however, they are limited in their effectiveness against the best of the best, which in turn limits the team's chance of accomplishing a national title goal.

Bleed, there are lots of things I think about the offense of the last two years. Not all of the bad has to do with over-focusing on beating conference opponents.
There are some decisions/strategies that I do think were short sighted from a national championship goal perspective:
1. It can be argued that UWW's greatest offensive strength over the successful years has been the ability to control the game with a pound the rock approach, made effective by a move-the-chains approach to play calling. UWW was in way too many 3rd and longs based on 1st and 2nd down play calls and design. UWW got through the conference just fine with that approach, but it didn't work vs. either of the OAC teams.
2. UWW's offense has featured strong O line, FB and tight ends, and with motion and shifting the offense has looked to gain even greater advantage at the point of attack. This style was scrapped in the last two years. Although the O worked just fine in beating conference foes, it failed miserably vs. the two OAC teams. When the opponent can match your ability at the LOS, you need to look to create advantage.   

Imo, if UWW did a better job of balancing the goal of winning the national championship and the objective of winning conference, they would have employed a very similar, yet slightly nuanced offense that would have given them a better chance of accomplishing both.

KitchenSink

I remain of the opinion that the inability of the UWW passing game to be a more dynamic threat has allowed talented defenses to load up against the run.  Take away the run, that mostly left passes to the tight end and that is not going win high level games.  The focus on the run game is a strong foundation, but the passing game needs to more consistent to achieve to the highest level.  Here's hoping for a more consistent defense, too.  You can't have the worst pass defense in the conference.  You just can't.
What the hell was that?  That was a Drop-kick.  Drop-kick? How much is that worth?  Three points.  THREE POINTS?!

emma17

#42456
Great point about the lack of a potent passing game. In 2016, Hudson was the leading receiver with 52 catches and the 2nd leading pass catcher was TE Gumina w 35. Hudson was the leading receiver in 2015 as well with 54, Worth at 49 and Gumina at 35. For comparison, in 2014 Howard had 84, Kumerow had 66 and Worth had 47. In 2013 Kumerow had 77, Howard had 72 and Huber had 41.

Obviously a Kumerow/Howard combo doesn't come around every season, so you have to use what you've got on the roster- and of course you have to coach up what you've got. UWW had Campbell (6'5", 264 pounds) and Gumina (6'3", 250 pounds) and combined they only caught 51 passes. Quite a few passes to Gumina were of the bubble screen variety.

Pat Coleman

In addition to the raw number of receptions, I think you need a yards per reception component to really tell that kind of story.
Publisher. Questions? Check our FAQ for D3f, D3h.
Quote from: old 40 on September 25, 2007, 08:23:57 PMLet's discuss (sports) in a positive way, sometimes kidding each other with no disrespect.

02 Warhawk

I'm looking to get the West Fan poll up and running again this year, and I have a few open spots available. Please send me a PM if you're interested in participating the season.

Thanks!

retagent

I'm not going to say that coaching is over rated, but, in the end, if you don't have the horses, you can't pull the wagon. Maybe, just maybe, Willamette and Salisbury didn't quite have enough talent to win against the really talented teams. Give me two teams with equal coaching, and I'll pick the team with better talent.

emma17

Quote from: retagent on August 15, 2017, 01:05:50 PM
I'm not going to say that coaching is over rated, but, in the end, if you don't have the horses, you can't pull the wagon. Maybe, just maybe, Willamette and Salisbury didn't quite have enough talent to win against the really talented teams. Give me two teams with equal coaching, and I'll pick the team with better talent.

You won't find me arguing against the importance of talent. The question for Willamette and Salisbury (and any team w national title hopes) is- did the staff build the team with winning conferernce or winning a national championship in mind?
Also, as you know, there have been plenty of talented teams losing to lesser talented teams, and sometimes it has to do with scheme. Heck, you can say one play for Seattle in the Super Bowl is a microcosm of the idea.
Some feel UWW was the less talented team in more than one of its Stagg Bowl victories.

bleedpurple

Link to this afternoon's press conference featuring several UW-W players and Coach Bullis can now be found on uwwsports.com. Just an FYI for those interested.

fredfalcon

Speaking of talent, RF just welcomed 9 players from the Las Vegas area and 3 from Arizona. Whether they make a difference remains to be seen, but the coaches are excited about what they've seen so far!
WORLD'S OLDEST FALCON FAN.

MESSAGE TO RECRUITS:  IN DOUBT? ENROLL AT STOUT. DON'T CARE? GO TO EAU CLAIRE. AT A LOSS? TRY LACROSSE. FEELIN' OUTTA JOINT? YOUR PLACE IS POINT. DON'T LIKE THE REST? DO WHAT'S BEST!


GOT BALLS? PLAY FOR THE FALLS!

emma17

Quote from: bleedpurple on August 15, 2017, 08:40:31 PM
Link to this afternoon's press conference featuring several UW-W players and Coach Bullis can now be found on uwwsports.com. Just an FYI for those interested.

Coach Bullis seems fired up about the D line speed, comparing it to a few years back when he was coaching it. That's exciting for sure.
Speed at WR too. He mentioned the need to stretch the field. I don't recall UWW throwing the deep ball often when the passing game was clicking- I assume he just wants at least the threat.
Really looking forward to an exciting season.

02 Warhawk

#42464
Quote from: emma17 on August 16, 2017, 10:16:49 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on August 15, 2017, 08:40:31 PM
Link to this afternoon's press conference featuring several UW-W players and Coach Bullis can now be found on uwwsports.com. Just an FYI for those interested.

Coach Bullis seems fired up about the D line speed, comparing it to a few years back when he was coaching it. That's exciting for sure.
Speed at WR too. He mentioned the need to stretch the field. I don't recall UWW throwing the deep ball often when the passing game was clicking- I assume he just wants at least the threat.
Really looking forward to an exciting season.

"When the passing game was clicking" is the key part in this statement. It seemed like they threw it deep way too much last year, on the off chance that something good will happen. Hopefully the offense can be more strategic about it this season, and develop more of an underneath game to move the chains.