Eastern Illinois
- Thread starter Deeringfish
- Start date
ISU is pretty decent. Fortunately I have Felis and xyzbobxzy on the new and improved "Ignore" functionality.
Well, they scored 31 points so they have some offense even if only against their peers. We also out scored their peer so that is something too.
Not only that. They lost in OVERTIME to the no. #5 team in the nation (FCS). ISU ended last season ranked #2, and entered the game ranked #5 (likely to improve). They just lost at IOA respectably, by a 2 TD margin. After that they obliterated Morgan St. (an FCS playoff team last season).
If anything this results is further proof that EIU is a solid FCS team, capable of beating the very best of their subdivision. They do have many FBS transfers and newcomers and it may still be a while before they start to "fire on all cylinders". But it seems they are already getting close. They may still end the season ranked and/or in the FCS playoffs, once they go through the softer part of their schedule.
Last edited:
Feli,
I thought you were absolutely right when you said the same thing last week, prompting the repeated outbursts from gcg. I suspect you will be hearing from him soon.
Amusing, All's Quiet On the Western Front from those who would put Feli on ignore. His points about EIU were right on the button. I suspect we won't hear more from gocatsgo on this subject, nor will be subjected to him telling us about how bad the ACC is as a conference!
Oh, and by the way, it turns out that not only was Stanford overrated, but so was USC!
I'm elderly and forget things, but they relate to a common theme and should be read together.
Dude, they are 0-3. 0-2 against the FCS. They are not a solid team, and any Power 5 team worth their salt would have crushed them.
Talk about Duke and Stanford. Those are solid to very good teams. Our wins against them mean something. Our win against Eastern means nothing but a W in the win column, which I will take.
Make a little effort to follow the LOGIC of the discussion before firing away the first thing that goes through your mind. I have had to correct you numerous times because of that.
Most days most P5 teams will beat most FCS teams (even the better ones). That is NOT under discussion.
The reason why this discussion arose was because some started arguing after the EIU game that EIU was such an extremely weak team that there was no point in allowing our QB's (backups or starter) to run the normal offense on them as a practice (in the 2H). Presumably even our scout team was a better practice than EIU would be. That is why some of us pointed out that they have 11 FBS transfers (most from the SEC) and many players who list respectably sounding HS accomplishments (all-state, etc). Hence, practicing our normal O against them would have been a worthwhile experience for our QB's. Get it now?
Don't talk down to me. I know exactly what we are talking about and I was one of the people who thought it was worth getting reps against even this putrid team.
I'm just commenting that the team is not any good. Your last post didn't talk about them being serviceable, it was making them out to be a quality opponent. They aren't. My view is that even playing against the Northshore School for the Blind is worth some reps. But, let's not make the team out to be better than they are.
I'm just commenting that the team is not any good. Your last post didn't talk about them being serviceable, it was making them out to be a quality opponent. They aren't. My view is that even playing against the Northshore School for the Blind is worth some reps. But, let's not make the team out to be better than they are.
Well, if your point is that ANY FCS school isn't any good you are entitled to it (although many reasonable people would disagree with you).
If your claim is that they are specially bad AS an FCS school, the facts (already amply discussed) contradicts you. Their having just taken the national #5 FCS team into OT confirms what their roster (and recent national success) says: they have a solid FCS program.
And let us also remember that after beating (then and now) TOP-25 Stanford we remained OUTSIDE the top 25 (with 72 AP points, and 35 from the coaches). It was AFTER WE SOUNDLY BEAT EIU that the AP voters AND the COACHES became convinced we were top 25 material (with 170 AP points, and 95 coaches' points).
Hence, our victory over 'lowly' EIU earned us almost 100 additional AP pts, and 60 additional coaches' pts!!!
Coincidence???
How on earth would beating an extremely weak opponent give us any points whatsoever to propel us into the top 25?
It must be that AP voters and COACHES do hold EIU in relatively high regard, as an FCS program.
That is COMPLETELY CLEAR, right??
You still haven't answered MRCat's question: did you actually watch the EIU/NU game?
Not on ignore. More a question/exercise in/of self control.
I think he must have attended EIU. Otherwise, why the passion over something about which 15 people on the planet have an opinion?
So the answer is "no, I didn't watch the game. I just like to try my best at pissing people off."
Got it.
ISU was considered to be a descent win for IA and EIU just took them to OT. So that would indicate that the IA win over ISU also has to be dropped to just a win against a not worth playing foe or EIU win is worthy of raising in stature. That said, EIU did not look like world beaters (at least not against our D) and while going against their first string might have had merit for our second and third string QBs, they would have gone up against EIU backups and that likely would not be a real test. Other than I would imagine that in practice, it is difficult to get game speed experience.
Last edited:
While I was ok with saying EIU was not as bad as they appeared, now you are really, really reaching.
I do not agree. Feli's observations about EIU were factual in all respects. GCG's were not. He said only that EIU was one of the worst teams he'd ever seen, which, of course, is a matter of opinion. I watched the game in it's entirety from section 131 and do not agree with him. (Note, also that Feli's observations were a factual effort to cast NU in a more favorable light. GCG's were not.) Note also that prior to the Duke game GCG was quick to denounce the ACC as a poor conference. Well, that was certainly not true this past Saturday when 3 Big Ten teams, including Nebraska, lost to ACC opponents. (It might well have been 4 if Iowa had not kicked a 57 yd. field goal near the end to defeat Pitt by 3. Of course, Pitt played the entire game without ACC player of the year James Conner, the superb running back, who is out for the season.) The point is, everybody is entitled to an opinion. Sometimes I'm inclined to agree with GCG and sometimes I'm with Feli. In this case I'm with Feli. Further, to call Feli a troll in this instance is simply ridiculous.
As you well know, you are quite free to do whatever you like, regardless of whether it makes sense. In this instance Felis made various factual observations about the quality of our opponent EIU. He certainly did't need to watch the game to do that. I did watch the game and I agree with him. By suggesting that the quality of an opponent was better than some thought, he certainly did nothing to denigrate or diminish the quality of NU's team.
On the contrary, he was specifically using the "fact" that EIU is a strong opponent (based on the "metric" of FBS transfers, as if there aren't poor FBS schools much less poor recruits from those schools much less recruits who decided to transfer from those schools) to criticize the coaches for not getting the backup QBs reps. Everything he states is based on what one can learn solely from the box score or statistics instead of actual insights that can be gleaned from watching the games, and every point he makes is either overtly or covertly used to criticize the program or coaches.
I just find that disingenuous. He's posing as an NU fan but he's not, which makes him a liar to boot. I've got no respect for that and I'm surprised you're defending it.
1) EIU is now 0-3 with a blowout loss to WIU, a blowout loss to NU, and a close loss to ISU. It is nowhere close to the Garoppolo-led team that made the FCS quarterfinals.
2) Quite frankly, I don't care how many FBS transfers are on a FCS team. By definition, a player transferring from the FBS level to the FCS level means that player couldn't hack it at the FBS level for one reason or another (on-field performance, grades, behavior, whatever).
3) Feli tries to use numbers in a complete vacuum to "prove" his points without considering any kind of context. Such as, I don't know, actually watching the football game. I feel pretty safe in saying that EIU is the worst opponent I've seen in come into Ryan Field in a long LONG time, felt that way immediately after the game, and felt even better about it when it was echoed by MRCat95.
You nailed it. He is a troll who only posts to criticize the program. Which is why I have him on ignore and you guys should too. If no one rises to his trolling it will spoil his "fun". Try it, you''l like it!!
Tell me what it was about the Feli's EIU post that was meant to criticize the NU program? In this instance I believe he is being unfairly treated, and you guys are acting like jerks. Simply my opinion
Here is what he said:
"In other threads it has been alleged that EIU was so bad/weak that it wasn't even worth for NU reserve QB's to try to run a normal offense as some sort of scrimmage....presumably EIU isn't even practice material for NU...and presumably the NU QB's are actually better off practicing against their teammates under controlled conditions.
Yet, the evidence says otherwise. First of course is the game itself. In the first half, when presumably both teams were trying hard and playing their starters, NU was forced into two 3-and-out (one was actually a 4-and-out!), and had to settled for FG's in two other occasions. In the 2H, with many reserves on both sides, NU's O scored only once. Not exactly what one expects when a team is vastly superior."
He is implicitly attacking the coaches for their approach to the use of QBs in the game, and then using some stats from the game to imply that NU wasn't vastly superior. His intent was to take away from NU's dominance of an FCS team.
Once again, it was really enlightening when it was pointed out that he doesn't even watch the games. Surely you're not defending someone who claims to be an NU fan but won't even watch the games or admit to not doing so.
No where did I say Feli was a troll. Just said that while I was OK with saying that EIU was not as bad as GCG suggested, then he took it too far saying that while beating Stanford got us about 75 votes, that beating EIU got us 100 and was actually worth more than beating Stanford. That the reason for the sudden recognition was the beating of EIU. That is what I had a problem with
villox,
I am acquainted with you and you are most assuredly smarter than this. Feli's commentary on EIU was well researched, well documented and did not require attendance at the game. He was simply saying that EIU was not nearly as bad as many people thought, which, in my view, was supportive of NU. The quote you listed above was supportive of his position in that regard. Someone as bright as you certainly should be able to figure that out.
Where in this set of statements did he denigrate the program or coaches? Has he done it in the past? Yes but not in this set of statements. OMG look at what you made me do. Have to defend Feli
I didn't say it required watching the game. I said that ever point he makes is exclusively through "research", not observation. Why is it too much to expect that someone who claims to be an NU fan say whether they've ever watched a game?
Right. Despite repeatedly being asked, he ignores the question. It's very typical troll behavior (actually most trolls would just lie).
No, you misunderstood.
Here is what I wrote:
"after beating (then and now) TOP-25 Stanford we remained OUTSIDE the top 25 (with 72 AP points, and 35 from the coaches). It was AFTER WE SOUNDLY BEAT EIU that the AP voters AND the COACHES became convinced we were top 25 material (with 170 AP points, and 95 coaches' points)....Hence, our victory over 'lowly' EIU earned us almost 100 additional AP pts, and 60 additional coaches' pts!!!"
Beating Stanford got us from the "not mentioned" in the rankings to the "other receiving votes" categories. Beating EIU got us from the other receiving votes to the top 25.
The trick is that when you are not mentioned at all it's like if you didn't exist. You can think that in the preseason poll we got MINUS INFINITY (as everybody that wasn't mentioned). After beating Stanford we jumped from -infinity to 72/35. That is a heck of a jump. After beating EIU we jumped from 72/35 to 170/95. The Stanford jump was MUCH higher. But the point was that if beating EIU was so insignificant, we would have gotten about the same number of points as we did after beating Stanford.
The fact the AP voters and, especially, COACHES, gave us additional points (significantly) proves that THEY view EIU as a relatively respectable opponent, and that beating them (together with Stanford!) made us deserving of a top 25 spot (which beating Stanford alone didn't).
