The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Quote:Central Michigan was, in large part, the better team in the game. It gained more yards and more yards-per-play, it averaged over five yards-per-rush – something that has been a problem all year – and it converted all six of its red zone chances, five going for touchdowns while holding the Broncos to just three touchdowns in its seven trips to the area.

But in the end it lost and it was mental errors that did it in.

http://www.themorningsun.com/sports/2015...loss-to-wm

Splitting hairs on those stats, which were pretty even.

Homer is right.

This game was a potential blowout.

Chimps have played a plethora of games where they fall way behind, teams try to manage the click, and you get these faux close games.

Like Cuse, MSU, , and Osu the team with more talent, US, eventually imposed their will, i.e. The 8 minute closing drive.

CMU can't run block, and their much ballyhooed run stopping line, showed itself to be slow, and unable to defeat blocks. True freshmen John Kennoy owned their fat defensive tackles.

How many points were left on the field?

Davis drops a perfect pass at the 5, settle for a FG.
Missed FG in the red zone
Franklin catches pass inside the 5, called back on a penalty
Take a knee at the goal line

28 points

In the talent wins. Western has multiple play makers, Central has one.

The WINNING & Better team led the whole game

Quote:Central Michigan was, in large part, the better team in the game. It gained more yards and more yards-per-play

Barely more yards in a high-yardage game for both teams. It's negligable. Much like time of possession which was a bit in WMU's favor -- basically the same. Total grasping for optimistic straws on that one. More yards per play?

PASSING: WMU 11.9, CMU 9.7
RUSHING: WMU 5.2, CMU 5.2

Don't see it, Homer!

Quote:it averaged over five yards-per-rush – something that has been a problem all year

True. NIU's rush D is very strong and they played 3 P5 teams, but their FCS/D1AA game they still struggled on rushing. You figure it wouldn't last all season. Their main rusher with the most rushers (Walker) averaged 2.9 yards per rush. Looks like their other guy Hayes is a better choice now @ 6.5 yards per rush. OK... that doesn't make them better than WMU. Don't get it.

Quote:and it converted all six of its red zone chances, five going for touchdowns while holding the Broncos to just three touchdowns in its seven trips to the area.

All this means is WMU blew more chances. Missed FG, and at the end could have easily got a TD but purposely didn't out of mercy & respect. That'd be 10 extra points, buddy. Yes, WMU could have capitalized more in the red zone than CMU. They would have won bigger. So how is CMU the better team?

IF CMU was the better team, they would have stopped WMU at the end when WMU had an 8:24 time-swallowing drive to run out the clock for the game. Over half the 4th Q. And gave CMU the mercy rule. Sorry man. WMU wins, CMU loses -- close game, comparable, but pretty straight up.

I read in the Morning Sun recap where Bono (paraphrasing) claimed that going for two early in the fourth quarter was the right call. Had they made the two-point conversion, this could have been true, but you could make a strong argument that failed two-point conversion ultimately cost CMU a chance to win the game. If they kick the PAT there, we're up one with tons of time (11 minutes or so IIRC) left to play. Even if they don't stop us and we score - as Braverman did - we obviously kick the PAT, and it's still a one-score game. Instead, Braverman's TD (and the ensuing PAT) put us up nine and, even after they drove down the field and scored again, the failed two-point conversion forced them to get another stop which, in the end, they couldn't get.

I'm surprised that, up to this point, there's been little (if any) second guessing of Bono's decision.

(10-11-2015 09:44 PM)The Colonel Wrote:  I read in the Morning Sun recap where Bono (paraphrasing) claimed that going for two early in the fourth quarter was the right call. Had they made the two-point conversion, this could have been true, but you could make a strong argument that failed two-point conversion ultimately cost CMU a chance to win the game. If they kick the PAT there, we're up one with tons of time (11 minutes or so IIRC) left to play. Even if they don't stop us and we score - as Braverman did - we obviously kick the PAT, and it's still a one-score game. Instead, Braverman's TD (and the ensuing PAT) put us up nine and, even after they drove down the field and scored again, the failed two-point conversion forced them to get another stop which, in the end, they couldn't get.

I'm surprised that, up to this point, there's been little (if any) second guessing of Bono's decision.

I Cher your position on Bono, babe.

That was the right call. Why it's becomming a discussion point is beyond me.

It was fine. You either go for 2 there or have to later. Doesn't really make much difference.

Quote:If they kick the PAT there, we're up one with tons of time (11 minutes or so IIRC) left to play. Even if they don't stop us and we score - as Braverman did - we obviously kick the PAT, and it's still a one-score game. Instead, Braverman's TD (and the ensuing PAT) put us up nine and, even after they drove down the field and scored again, the failed two-point conversion forced them to get another stop which, in the end, they couldn't get.

All it would have done was fast-forward the same situation. Still with a good amount of time left. The only argument where that'd be in question would be if it's Always Best to go for the 2pt conversion Later due to tiring out a defense or something.

You still need two scores to win, same one way as another, and if you get the two you are also in a position to tie. You don't make it you still need two scores to win. That was the standard call, go for 2 there.

More interesting to me was the hold call causing a safety. Never saw that before.

Also wonder the impact of CMU losing the player to the targeting call. Reminded me of the Jordan White ejection, although that was more of a reaction and not a deliberate act. But had a real impact on the game. They say things even out long term.

Is there anything to the claim Bravermans runs were enabled by illegal blocks? I don't have a recording to look back at that.

(10-10-2015 07:55 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  

Quote:Central Michigan was, in large part, the better team in the game. It gained more yards and more yards-per-play, it averaged over five yards-per-rush – something that has been a problem all year – and it converted all six of its red zone chances, five going for touchdowns while holding the Broncos to just three touchdowns in its seven trips to the area.

But in the end it lost and it was mental errors that did it in.

http://www.themorningsun.com/sports/2015...loss-to-wm

Splitting hairs on those stats, which were pretty even.

So...when did CMU ever have a lead?

Oh, it never did.

The superior team, the superior PROGRAM, with the superior coach (yes, Fleck out-coached CMU big-time Saturday) won.

CMU was only in the game based on WMU errors.

And there will always be mistakes in a football game between two competitive teams. The one that can rise above them usually wins. That was Western Michigan University on Saturday.

Deal with it Chippewas.

Like you have four times the last five years.

(10-10-2015 07:55 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  

Quote:Central Michigan was, in large part, the better team in the game. It gained more yards and more yards-per-play, it averaged over five yards-per-rush – something that has been a problem all year – and it converted all six of its red zone chances, five going for touchdowns while holding the Broncos to just three touchdowns in its seven trips to the area.

But in the end it lost and it was mental errors that did it in.

http://www.themorningsun.com/sports/2015...loss-to-wm

Splitting hairs on those stats, which were pretty even.

Yep, it's not that uncommon that a baseball game's loser will end up with more hits than the winner. Or a hockey loser will have more SOGs.

I'll give them credit though. I originally thought their season was going to be a dumpster fire and maybe next season too. But despite their record, they've performed better than I thought.