Author Topic: Ohio Athletic Conference  (Read 3209819 times)

Offline TailGate

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • Karma: +8/-7
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43710 on: February 11, 2014, 01:29:02 pm »
Another for MTU

Matt Zolcak  OL  6-1, 255  Mentor, OH

Offline Raider 68

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 3251
  • Karma: +1415/-156
  • Go Raiders!!
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43711 on: February 11, 2014, 02:33:19 pm »
Charlie Dear, a LB from U-Toledo has transferred to Mount for the upcoming season.  LB is a strength.  But if you put him or Spencer on the line, the pass rush might improve.  Also recruit Boatright from Ontario was a superstar at the Massillon Sparq events in the past.  I would not be shocked to see him make a difference in year 1.

Dear is 6' 0" 218 and Spencer is 6' 0" 200.

Not really the size MTU needs on the DL.

Agree, keep him LB. Against the huge playoff O Lines, the Raiders need that 6'2"  260+ to fight off pass protection.
Lally was the only one who could really do it last year.
11 time Division III National Champions

Offline Dr. Acula

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 2249
  • Karma: +267/-12
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43712 on: February 11, 2014, 06:11:29 pm »
St. Thomas' line was huge and the defense shut them down with Fechko being the biggest D linemen.  Orteca played DT at 250.  As long as there's talent I think the size thing is overblown a little.  I'm more concerned about the DE's being able to get pressure than I am how big the guys are.  Trust me, I'd love to see a big 300 lb Jesse Wells type in there at DT, but I'm fine with a smaller DT like Matt Williamson or Pat McCullough IF they can play like those guys did.  Couple of studs and both played at probably 250-260. 

Charlie Dear was a beast in HS.  Hope he can help them somewhere.  Playing for Balderson in HS and Campbell in college made the move to Alliance a no brainer!   

Offline joelmama

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 645
  • Karma: +212/-80
  • luv seeing UM QB nailed
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43713 on: February 12, 2014, 05:31:48 pm »
He QB from Michigan looks pretty good.  Might end up being a DB.  But 61% completions and about 18 yard per completion are pretty nice numbers for his first year as a qb.

http://highschoolsports.mlive.com/news/article/-6972710897285445782/player-of-the-year-top-10-kyler-shurlow-went-from-under-the-radar-to-off-the-charts/#/0

Offline Dr. Acula

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 2249
  • Karma: +267/-12
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43714 on: February 12, 2014, 07:20:06 pm »
^^^ Finalist for MI POY, a good baseball player and 4.09 GPA to boot??  Sounds like quite a kid.  Glad to have him heading to Alliance. 

Offline Dr. Acula

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 2249
  • Karma: +267/-12
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43715 on: February 12, 2014, 07:25:58 pm »
That also got me thinking....when is the last time a kid did double duty at Mount with football and baseball?  I know a few guys ran track too, but the last football/baseball guys I recall are Chuck Moore and Mike Miller.  There may be others I forgot, but those two were key players in both sports. 

Offline TailGate

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • Karma: +8/-7
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43716 on: February 12, 2014, 08:06:38 pm »
Still cold outside.  Did some surfing.  The OL kid Leichliter plays both.  Apparently was pinch hitter in 2012 and homered to win back to back games in first or second time at bat w/Varsity.  Looks like he was DH last year and ran across one newspaper article showing him leading RBI's in southwest ohio.  Quite a few articles under www.walkthewarpath. Checking others.

Offline Kira & Jaxon's Dad

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 4096
  • Karma: +1232/-284
    • View Profile
    • MTU Football
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43717 on: February 13, 2014, 08:32:31 am »
St. Thomas' line was huge and the defense shut them down with Fechko being the biggest D linemen.  Orteca played DT at 250.  As long as there's talent I think the size thing is overblown a little.  I'm more concerned about the DE's being able to get pressure than I am how big the guys are.  Trust me, I'd love to see a big 300 lb Jesse Wells type in there at DT, but I'm fine with a smaller DT like Matt Williamson or Pat McCullough IF they can play like those guys did.  Couple of studs and both played at probably 250-260. 

Charlie Dear was a beast in HS.  Hope he can help them somewhere.  Playing for Balderson in HS and Campbell in college made the move to Alliance a no brainer!   

UWW OL was Young (1 Jr, 2 Soph, and 2 Fr) and big (averaged 6' 4" 281 Pounds) and they pretty much controlled the LOS in the Stagg Bowl.  I'm more worried about beating them in December than any other foe along the way.  They are only going to get bigger, stronger and better.

LT   72   Wiederholt Johnny   So   6' 6"   266
LG   61   Sloneker Eli           So   6' 3"   265
C   58   Shier    Spencer           Fr   6' 4"   293
RG   75   Skibba Lucas           Jr   6' 3"   280
RT   79   Koepnick Tony           Fr   6' 3"   301
National Champions - 11 :  1993, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2012
#23.12.14

Offline PurpleSuit

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 777
  • Karma: +263/-305
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43718 on: February 13, 2014, 10:00:46 am »
St. Thomas' line was huge and the defense shut them down with Fechko being the biggest D linemen.  Orteca played DT at 250.  As long as there's talent I think the size thing is overblown a little.  I'm more concerned about the DE's being able to get pressure than I am how big the guys are.  Trust me, I'd love to see a big 300 lb Jesse Wells type in there at DT, but I'm fine with a smaller DT like Matt Williamson or Pat McCullough IF they can play like those guys did.  Couple of studs and both played at probably 250-260. 

Charlie Dear was a beast in HS.  Hope he can help them somewhere.  Playing for Balderson in HS and Campbell in college made the move to Alliance a no brainer!   

UWW OL was Young (1 Jr, 2 Soph, and 2 Fr) and big (averaged 6' 4" 281 Pounds) and they pretty much controlled the LOS in the Stagg Bowl.  I'm more worried about beating them in December than any other foe along the way.  They are only going to get bigger, stronger and better.

LT   72   Wiederholt Johnny   So   6' 6"   266
LG   61   Sloneker Eli           So   6' 3"   265
C   58   Shier    Spencer           Fr   6' 4"   293
RG   75   Skibba Lucas           Jr   6' 3"   280
RT   79   Koepnick Tony           Fr   6' 3"   301


I don't disagree that the size advantage is a problem, but maybe the 3-2-6, 3-3-5 defense just isnt a good matchup for a monster line.  UWW goes with a more traditional offense, but Mount uses a new school thought with the spread defense, a more 4-3 or 3-4 might matchup with UWW.  With 2012's secondary, no defense would have been successful, but I'll leave that to VK to figure out.  He has plenty to work out with this defense over the offseason
« Last Edit: February 13, 2014, 10:03:14 am by PurpleSuit »

Offline emma17

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 2120
  • Karma: +465/-219
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43719 on: February 13, 2014, 11:31:59 am »
St. Thomas' line was huge and the defense shut them down with Fechko being the biggest D linemen.  Orteca played DT at 250.  As long as there's talent I think the size thing is overblown a little.  I'm more concerned about the DE's being able to get pressure than I am how big the guys are.  Trust me, I'd love to see a big 300 lb Jesse Wells type in there at DT, but I'm fine with a smaller DT like Matt Williamson or Pat McCullough IF they can play like those guys did.  Couple of studs and both played at probably 250-260. 

Charlie Dear was a beast in HS.  Hope he can help them somewhere.  Playing for Balderson in HS and Campbell in college made the move to Alliance a no brainer!   

UWW OL was Young (1 Jr, 2 Soph, and 2 Fr) and big (averaged 6' 4" 281 Pounds) and they pretty much controlled the LOS in the Stagg Bowl.  I'm more worried about beating them in December than any other foe along the way.  They are only going to get bigger, stronger and better.

LT   72   Wiederholt Johnny   So   6' 6"   266
LG   61   Sloneker Eli           So   6' 3"   265
C   58   Shier    Spencer           Fr   6' 4"   293
RG   75   Skibba Lucas           Jr   6' 3"   280
RT   79   Koepnick Tony           Fr   6' 3"   301


I don't disagree that the size advantage is a problem, but maybe the 3-2-6, 3-3-5 defense just isnt a good matchup for a monster line.  UWW goes with a more traditional offense, but Mount uses a new school thought with the spread defense, a more 4-3 or 3-4 might matchup with UWW.  With 2012's secondary, no defense would have been successful, but I'll leave that to VK to figure out.  He has plenty to work out with this defense over the offseason

I'll have to focus on the Mt D line more the next time I watch the replay, but many if not all of the plays I can recall now featured 4 downlinemen for Mt.
UWW's O line completely handled the Mt 4 man front.
I'm not saying the scheme can't be adjusted for better results, but I don't think the Stagg result had anything to do w Mt running a 3 man line.
In addition, UWW's O Line was successful at getting to the LB's as well, which may indicate a quickness issue at LB or an assignment or scheme issue w D line.

Offline HScoach

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 3851
  • Karma: +1189/-490
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43720 on: February 13, 2014, 01:06:30 pm »
Mount is typically in a 4-2-5, regardless of what Pat Ward says.

With the proper line, they will stay in a 4-2-5.   Unless the running game requires more size and they'll shift to a 4-3-4.

The 3-3-5 we all saw this season was a function of it not mattering if the extra D-lineman was on the field or not.   They had better success rushing an extra DB than the 4th lineman.   Hence removing a DL and replacing with a LB or DB.
I find easily offended people rather offensive!

As I have grown older, I've learned that pleasing everyone is impossible- but pissing everyone off, is a piece of cake.

Statistics are like bikinis; what they reveal is interesting, what they hide is essential.

Offline emma17

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 2120
  • Karma: +465/-219
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43721 on: February 13, 2014, 01:31:30 pm »
Mount is typically in a 4-2-5, regardless of what Pat Ward says.

With the proper line, they will stay in a 4-2-5.   Unless the running game requires more size and they'll shift to a 4-3-4.

The 3-3-5 we all saw this season was a function of it not mattering if the extra D-lineman was on the field or not.   They had better success rushing an extra DB than the 4th lineman.   Hence removing a DL and replacing with a LB or DB.

Isn't it Pam Ward  :)
I think you're saying Mt varied it's front based upon the opponent. Against a stronger team I assume they played the 4-2-5 (or whatever # they could hide back there) as they did vs UWW.
Was the 4 man front successful vs the other stronger teams?

Offline HScoach

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 3851
  • Karma: +1189/-490
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43722 on: February 13, 2014, 02:25:23 pm »
Oops.   meant Pam, not Pat.

Hmmm, successful against the stronger teams?     I'm not usually a numbers guy, but in this case it proves my point:
27 - Franklin
34 - Heidelberg
34 - John Carroll
20 - W&J (and that's a stretch putting them in this category)
21 - Wittenberg
59 - Wesley
40 - NCC
52 - UWW

No, they weren't successful defensively against any of the good teams they played.   Closest thing to a typical Mount defensive performance was against Witt, but I think we over estimated Witt based on the numbers of starters they returned.   That was a solid team, but they lacked speed and play making ability.   

I'll again reiterate my opinion that the defensive secondary was only slightly worse than previous Mount teams, but was torched because of ZERO pass rush from the D-line.    Mount has rarely had true shut down corners.   What they've been blessed with typically is a very athletic secondary that can cover a lot of ground playing behind a dominant D-line that gets after the QB.   Where their D-line has struggled typically is against the power running games, not rushing the passer.   They've almost always excelled at rushing the passer, sometimes to the detriment of the overall defensive performance.   Much like the Indy defenses where built around the Peyton Manning offense.     

I'm not going to say everyone pushed Mount around like UWW, but Mount never dominated the line of scrimmage defensively all season.   Even against the dregs like Mucky and Etta.   They were better along the D-line than most of the teams they saw this season, but not better than everyone except the truly elite like UWW/UST/MHB/etc like they've been over the last decade.     They weren't close to being the best D-line in the conference, that would go to JCU.   I'd put H'Berg's D-line above Mount's too.     And the lesser OAC and early round playoff teams were a lot closer to Mount than we're used to seeing.
I find easily offended people rather offensive!

As I have grown older, I've learned that pleasing everyone is impossible- but pissing everyone off, is a piece of cake.

Statistics are like bikinis; what they reveal is interesting, what they hide is essential.

Offline Raider 68

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 3251
  • Karma: +1415/-156
  • Go Raiders!!
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43723 on: February 13, 2014, 05:17:12 pm »
Oops.   meant Pam, not Pat.

Hmmm, successful against the stronger teams?     I'm not usually a numbers guy, but in this case it proves my point:
27 - Franklin
34 - Heidelberg
34 - John Carroll
20 - W&J (and that's a stretch putting them in this category)
21 - Wittenberg
59 - Wesley
40 - NCC
52 - UWW

No, they weren't successful defensively against any of the good teams they played.   Closest thing to a typical Mount defensive performance was against Witt, but I think we over estimated Witt based on the numbers of starters they returned.   That was a solid team, but they lacked speed and play making ability.   

I'll again reiterate my opinion that the defensive secondary was only slightly worse than previous Mount teams, but was torched because of ZERO pass rush from the D-line.    Mount has rarely had true shut down corners.   What they've been blessed with typically is a very athletic secondary that can cover a lot of ground playing behind a dominant D-line that gets after the QB.   Where their D-line has struggled typically is against the power running games, not rushing the passer.   They've almost always excelled at rushing the passer, sometimes to the detriment of the overall defensive performance.   Much like the Indy defenses where built around the Peyton Manning offense.     

I'm not going to say everyone pushed Mount around like UWW, but Mount never dominated the line of scrimmage defensively all season.   Even against the dregs like Mucky and Etta.   They were better along the D-line than most of the teams they saw this season, but not better than everyone except the truly elite like UWW/UST/MHB/etc like they've been over the last decade.     They weren't close to being the best D-line in the conference, that would go to JCU.   I'd put H'Berg's D-line above Mount's too.     And the lesser OAC and early round playoff teams were a lot closer to Mount than we're used to seeing.


HScoach,

Agree with your D line analysis, so the main focus by the coaches should be to D line. It just has to be
bigger, stronger and better. As far as the secondary, hopefully the Raiders can recruit a few DB's that
are a bit taller. Several times the 5' 9 or 5' 10 guy was going against the 6'3"+ WR. They just cannot
 lose every jump ball and expect to win each week. Having a pass rush really helps, but the
defense did not blitz very much in 2013. Maybe it would not have mattered. The offense was
great, but the defense was well below average fora Raider team. What is Don Montgomery
 doing these days? :-\
11 time Division III National Champions

Offline emma17

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 2120
  • Karma: +465/-219
    • View Profile
Re: Ohio Athletic Conference
« Reply #43724 on: February 13, 2014, 07:18:47 pm »
Oops.   meant Pam, not Pat.

Hmmm, successful against the stronger teams?     I'm not usually a numbers guy, but in this case it proves my point:
27 - Franklin
34 - Heidelberg
34 - John Carroll
20 - W&J (and that's a stretch putting them in this category)
21 - Wittenberg
59 - Wesley
40 - NCC
52 - UWW

No, they weren't successful defensively against any of the good teams they played.   Closest thing to a typical Mount defensive performance was against Witt, but I think we over estimated Witt based on the numbers of starters they returned.   That was a solid team, but they lacked speed and play making ability.   

I'll again reiterate my opinion that the defensive secondary was only slightly worse than previous Mount teams, but was torched because of ZERO pass rush from the D-line.    Mount has rarely had true shut down corners.   What they've been blessed with typically is a very athletic secondary that can cover a lot of ground playing behind a dominant D-line that gets after the QB.   Where their D-line has struggled typically is against the power running games, not rushing the passer.   They've almost always excelled at rushing the passer, sometimes to the detriment of the overall defensive performance.   Much like the Indy defenses where built around the Peyton Manning offense.     

I'm not going to say everyone pushed Mount around like UWW, but Mount never dominated the line of scrimmage defensively all season.   Even against the dregs like Mucky and Etta.   They were better along the D-line than most of the teams they saw this season, but not better than everyone except the truly elite like UWW/UST/MHB/etc like they've been over the last decade.     They weren't close to being the best D-line in the conference, that would go to JCU.   I'd put H'Berg's D-line above Mount's too.     And the lesser OAC and early round playoff teams were a lot closer to Mount than we're used to seeing.

Interesting stuff.
I love when it works out where numbers prove my point- a rare case indeed.
That is a Lot of points to give up all season and a lot of pressure to put on the offense.
I really liked Mt's corner from last year or two years ago- #10 I think, Isaiah something? 
I saw a big difference without a Driskill- That guy made plays everywhere on field and probably would have excelled as a D lineman w his attitude.
In comparison, UWW really had some D Ends that could get after the QB.  Not just that though, they had the athleticism to play Burke on the option. Mt was so different looking this year.