Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 16, 2014, 07:50:29 AM

Quote from: Raiderplaybyplay on December 16, 2014, 12:16:59 AM
In the interest of moving on to a more relevant subject. Thoughts on how mount is going to contain UWWs rushing attack? Mount looked especially vulnerable to the between the tackles runs Wesley through at them.

I'm assuming VK will load the box a bit and hope that the  secondary can contain Kumerow and company. For the most part they've been pretty good against the run this year and have game planned (fairly) well for the run against UWW in the past, just curious if anyone has any interesting ideas or things Im overlooking.

Looking back at the last six UWW/Mount Stagg Bowls, "fairly well for the run against UWW" is stretching it.

2007 - Beaver: 253 yards rushing (8.0 yards/carry); TD
2008 - Anderson: 124 yards rushing (6.4 ypc); 2 TD
2009 - Coppage: 111 yards (5.0 ypc); 3 TD
2010 - Coppage: 299 yards (7.7 ypc); 3 TD
2011 - Coppage (sprained ankle in 1st qrt): 91 yards; TD
2013 - Ratliffe: 146 yards (5.2 ypc); 2 TD

If anything, UWW has been very successful against Mount's run defense, and then some....

Aren't you forgetting the most important stat from the 2007 game for Beaver?  The illegal assist that sealed the game for UWW!  Just kidding, but I couldn't resist. 

Quote from: ohiofan1954 on December 15, 2014, 12:23:50 PM

Quote from: PRP96 on December 15, 2014, 11:14:08 AM

Quote from: ohiofan1954 on December 14, 2014, 08:54:18 PM

Quote from: raiderpa on December 14, 2014, 06:50:18 PM
Lots of talk and criticism on the WIAC board about Mount running up the score and being classless. 
Never have heard Mount being called classless by anyone that knows anything about the program.  Field goals on first and goal in the third and fourth quarters over the years and no passing in the fourth quarter of most blowouts.

Mount's offense this year is up tempo, not huddle and go go go..that leads to more plays, more scoring and short scoring drives, (check the stats)..
56-0 at half and starters played vanilla football in the third period.  Mount to my memory has never sat the starters at the half, they usually play a couple series in the third and this is what they did.

Second team DBs LBs were in most of second half, and Wesley took advantage of them for statistical gains which meant nothing except for some records which were set by the Wolverine individuals..notably QB and WR...

We took our beatdown by the Warchicks last year with humility, however, this is one Raider that would like to send Lance out with his worst loss ever... I think we can..

I saw Mt. kick a field goal in 06 against Otterbein with the score 68-17 and two minutes left in the game. That sure looked like running up the score to me.

As I recall, that field goal was kicked on 1st and goal from the 2.  So in order to not run the score up, Mount should have run the ball in for a TD??

It was not first down at the two. it was a fourth down play farther out on the field.

You are correct in that it was a 38 yard field goal (I just looked up the box score), but this does not help your case that Mount was running up the score.  As a matter of fact, it does the opposite.  If Mount was trying to run up the score, they would've converted on that fourth down and marched on to another touchdown.  Instead, they did the right thing and kicked a field goal.  I fail to see how kicking a field goal from 38 yards away on fourth down is running up the score.  Again, could they just take a knee??  Yes, but to completely stop playing football altogether is contrary to what you preach to players from the beginning of the very first work out and also a slap in the face to the other team. 

Quote from: MasterJedi on December 15, 2014, 11:41:15 AM

Quote from: PRP96 on December 15, 2014, 11:14:08 AM

Quote from: ohiofan1954 on December 14, 2014, 08:54:18 PM

Quote from: raiderpa on December 14, 2014, 06:50:18 PM
Lots of talk and criticism on the WIAC board about Mount running up the score and being classless. 
Never have heard Mount being called classless by anyone that knows anything about the program.  Field goals on first and goal in the third and fourth quarters over the years and no passing in the fourth quarter of most blowouts.

Mount's offense this year is up tempo, not huddle and go go go..that leads to more plays, more scoring and short scoring drives, (check the stats)..
56-0 at half and starters played vanilla football in the third period.  Mount to my memory has never sat the starters at the half, they usually play a couple series in the third and this is what they did.

Second team DBs LBs were in most of second half, and Wesley took advantage of them for statistical gains which meant nothing except for some records which were set by the Wolverine individuals..notably QB and WR...

We took our beatdown by the Warchicks last year with humility, however, this is one Raider that would like to send Lance out with his worst loss ever... I think we can..

I saw Mt. kick a field goal in 06 against Otterbein with the score 68-17 and two minutes left in the game. That sure looked like running up the score to me.

As I recall, that field goal was kicked on 1st and goal from the 2.  So in order to not run the score up, Mount should have run the ball in for a TD??

Could have taken 4 knees, used up the entire game clock each play and not score anything. I don't have a problem with scoring a ton of points or "running up the score" but I get a chuckle out of people who think that there's no option except to score or kick a field goal on first down. That's what taking a kneee is for! lol

I have always operated under the assumption that the reason Mount has kicked field goals on first down before is two-fold.  First, it would be incredibly demoralizing for the defense to just quit playing the game altogether and turn it over on downs intentionally.  Second, the reason the kick came on first down as opposed to fourth was because LK (and I say LK because I have not seen VK kick field goals on first down as of yet) knew his team would score if he ran any type of play on first, second, or third down.  Rather than have his players take a dive and act like the defense could stop them, he took the more sporting option (again, in my opinion) and kicked the field goal.  As a high school coach, I would not begrudge an opponent for taking either action if I was on the back end of a beating.  I would understand in both cases, whether it be taking a knee four times or kicking the FG, the opposing coach is doing what he believes is most sportsmanlike.  I am only saying that in my opinion, taking the FG is the more sportsmanlike option.

Let's all just agree to wait until Tuesday to see what the moral compass of all things sportsmanship Gregggggggg Easterbrook has to say about Saturday's game. 

Quote from: raiderpa on December 13, 2014, 11:11:34 PM
VK to YSU ?....If so, then does Eric Reaburn return to Mount Union?

What about Don Montgomery?

Quote from: WashJeff68 on December 13, 2014, 08:53:07 PM
My loyalty shows in my screen name.

After TG with my son's family we stopped in Alliance for the game. Left at half time because it was cold, the game was over, despite our request we were on the UMU side, and we had dinner plans in Cincinnati.

Based on today's results it will be another UWW-UMU Stagg Bowl.

UMU (and UWW) have proven they can dominate like no other two teams in college football. Have UMU and the Wisconsin schools ever considered moving up to DII where they might truly be tested? I recognize that the other sports might not be competitive, and that could be a reason for not moving up, but I'd be interested in others perspective.

Jeff in Tennessee

Why should either school consider moving up?  Let's say that UMU and UWW move up to DII.  Just for the sake of argument, let's say that both schools are successful at the DII level in the first year.  Neither makes it out of the early rounds of the playoffs.  What has either school gained by moving up?  You say in your post that they would be "truly tested."  I would argue that Mount was truly tested by JCU this year.  I know that Mount's run will eventually come to an end.  When that will happen, I don't know.  But until then, I am going to enjoy each and every year that they go to the Stagg (even if it is to play the same team over and over again).  You may not have meant anything like this by your comment, but this strikes me as an example of what is wrong in the world today.  We have two teams that are dominant in DIII football.  Rather than the onus being on the other schools in DIII to get better, we just need to move those schools up... they're too good.

On a completely different note, anyone else think that the timing of UB announcing the hiring of LL to be a little odd considering that he was still in the middle of a playoff run?  I may have missed the discussion of that on this board, but just wanted to see what everyone else thought.

Quote from: spurrier on December 05, 2014, 08:50:52 AM
I see the handle War Daddy has not been chosen yet...I therefore claim it for the polar bear nation

I don't know what your deal is, but this cracks me up.

Quote from: hazzben on October 29, 2014, 11:28:18 AM

Quote from: BoBo on October 29, 2014, 09:50:10 AM
I made a note of something following the first game of the year for Mount and UWW...I thought it was interesting and worth noting, but due to unforeseen circumstances never posted it. Considering the current topic, I decided to revisit the issue. Both Mount and UWW had basically cakewalks in their respective first games, 58-7 for Mount and 73-7 for UWW. Both games were essentially over by the end of 1 quarter - Mount led 21-0, while UWW was at 28-0. A major difference was in starting QB's numbers: Burke stat line 23-34, 411 yards, 3 TD, including a TD pass early in 3rd quarter; Behrendt stat line 4-5  35yds 1TD on first possession of game. Burke took 87% (73 of 84) of Mounts offensive snaps; Behrendt, 18% (12-67) of UWW's offensive snaps. It's only one game, but I was shocked comparing Behrendt's participation in UWW's blowout win compared to Burke's participation in Mounts blowout win. Couldn't help but wonder why Mount would leave their top dog in the game that long, risking injury or whatever, when it didn't matter in any way, shape, or form? I haven't examined the other games, but my gut tells me I would find similar results.  Not trying to insinuate anything, just putting it out there as food for thought.

I still go back to having every right to play with the pedal all the way down until halftime.

Obviously, you're making note that Burke played after the half as well. To which I say, meh.

It's the first game of the year. Regardless of how bad the opponent is, I completely understand Mount wanting to get stuff on film, work against live competition and see what they've got. It hurt Bethel against Wartburg this year, playing their first game against a very good team who had already played once. Talking with the coaches afterward, there were several things they found out about their team and would do (and are now doing) much differently with the game plan. They just didn't know this stuff until they'd gone live against another team. That's pretty common in a first game. SO I completely understand keeping starters in and doing as much as you can to get a feel for what this new team is like.

And I'd argue, it's a little different for Mount in the OAC than UWW in the WIAC. Whitewater knows they are going to get some stiff tests from the likes of  UWO, UWP, UWSP. And even the worst WIAC teams are light years ahead of the OAC cellar.

For Mount, they have to make sure their starters are getting sufficient, legit reps. Knowing JCU might be their only real test of the regular season definitely affects how they divvy up playing time against the other teams. Wally was right, job #1 is getting Mount up to speed and knocking the rust off.

The other thing I'd note, people on here are complaining about this (and Greg Eastertool), but are the other OAC teams? It's a man's game. I'm guessing the other coaches and players know this. From what I can tell, LK had a good rep in the league from other coaches (I know he did with Bethel's staff). They respected what he'd built and how he comported himself in games like this. VK hasn't shown me anything different.

And above all this, I'd argue for Burke, et al getting as many reps as they can. The end of their careers are rapidly approaching. There's no 'pick up football' at the local YMCA when they are done. The last time 99.9% of these guys take off their pads for Mount will be the last time they take off their pads period. Forget politically correct mercy, let these kids play and soak it up. I'd hate to think Burke or anyone else would ever have to look back with regret at a Sr. year in which they only got to throw 15 passes a game and didn't played after halftime in 85% of the games, simply because they were worried about hurting people feelings.

Don't know the guy personally, obviously... but Easterbrook comes off as the type that would be horribly offended that you left that pretentious second G off the end of his first name.

Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 12, 2013, 10:16:13 AM
All kidding aside, there's a semilegitimate argument that turf colored in that fashion, coupled with home uniforms of the same color, do make it harder for the away QB to see players on the opposing team.  It seems laughable but seriously watch a Boise State game sometime when they're wearing the home blue jerseys/blue pants.

There was discussion a couple years back of Boise being banned from wearing the all blue unis at home games for that very reason.  Did that ever end up going through?  I believe there was a conversation on this very board about it and I recall a question being raised about teams that wear green and play on a grass or normal turf field.

I generally don't have an opinion when it comes to what a team does with their field, as long as it's in good playable condition... but turf like that ought to be illegal... if for no other reason than saving the fans from having to look at it for 3 hours.

I'm not trying to speak for Coach Kehres here, but what I interpreted from that quote is that by simplifying the scheme, it allows the O-line to play with more confidence which reduces mistakes and allows for easier corrections.  I think that this is a compliment to the coaches.  I actually like the idea of simplifying the scheme... IMO, when a player is confident in what he is doing, he plays faster while everything else slows down for him mentally.  I think this may be what has happened with the O-line this year.  A scheme doesn't have to be overly complex in order for it to work, and as long as it works, it doesn't matter if it is more or less complex than the year before regardless of the experience of the players.

Quote from: davepi2 on November 14, 2012, 12:13:49 PM
does Mt. take recruits away from Akron? Look at how bad the akron program has been for so long. It may have suffered one of it's greatest disasters last week. Also will the hiring of a big name coach, defensive coordinator and assistant athletic director bring in better recruits that might effect Mt? Yes I know Akron is a d1 school, but those of us that are mac fans might say in name only.

I don't think any changes made at Akron will negatively affect Mount.  I may be wrong here, but if a kid is D1 caliber (or even fringe D1 caliber in talking about Akron) he will most likely be getting interest from other "bigger" programs.  I don't think Mount is recruiting head to head against Akron where you would see a drop off in the program because of success at Akron.

I can understand the AD wanting to show that he is in charge at BC, but I think he would've been better served to flex his muscles at a different time.  What purpose does this serve?  If he has the talks and takes the Jets job, then you're looking for a new coach.  Now, you're looking for a new coach who has no ambition to go up to the next level.

My personal advice for ADs across the country, show your dominance over the department when no one else will notice.  The next time a field hockey coach gives you guff, fire her.  Gymnastics coach turn you down for a date?  Gone.  But for goodness sakes, protect your revenue sports and don't get into a pissing contest that becomes nationwide news.

Quote from: Champs07 on December 23, 2008, 03:51:31 PM
Another great season for the Hawks and all who followed.  2008 Senior class...REMARKABLE 55-5 record with four conference titles and four straight trips to the Stagg Bowl!! Doesn't get much better than that.  Know for all you MUC fans trashing number three...be careful he just set the UWW all time catches for a season and believe me that isn't a fluke!  By the way he is back next year along with every WR for the Hawks, on a team I personally thought was better than MUC this year, just ran out of time. 10 more minutes in that game and we have a different outcome, but we didn't have 10 more minutes and I am not making excuses. Anyways #15 for MUC, who was suspect at best, ran his mouth more than anyone in the title game...and comparing UWW#3's skills to #15 for MUC is like comparing Jordan to Paxson (not comparable)! So if 3 wants to talk a little bit and add some spice to his already great ability let him, I wouldn't trash him...You will have to play him one more time!! As for #15 talking trash you might want to hit the weight room this year and try to work on your change of direction a little bit otherwise some Soph. from MUC will be playing in your spot next year!

The only thing I will say about #3 on this board is that he gave up on a play that allowed the game winning touchdown to be scored.  And I especially like the "not making excuses" comment right after you say UWW didn't lose. 

To the rest of the UWW posters, congrats on a great season.  I'm hoping for UWW-MUC #5 next year.  I like coming over to this board.  You guys have good discussions and a lot of good information.  Obviously, I understand Champs07 needing to defend his cousin (#3) so rigorously, but we'll just leave that be.

I hope the MIAC takes a look at that crew from the Stagg Bowl and does the smart thing by having them officiate nothing but JV games this year.  If they don't have JV teams up there in the MIAC, then those guys just need to go away.  I have never seen a more incompetent referee in my life when it came to simple clock rules.  Don't know if any of you remember having these jokers in any other games, but I find it hard to believe that they made it through an entire season and then forget when to wind and stop the clock in the Stagg.