Mountaineer Field, Home not Sweet Home
by The 25314 on Aug 14, 2009 2:45 PM EDT
Email
Print 
Everyone loves game day in Morgantown. And we all love game night in Morgantown a little bit more. But Mountaineer Field does not give WVU the home field advantage you might think it does.
It is without question, the best facility in the Big East, and maybe the best stadium in the northeast, save for Penn St. When it's full, it is loud and intimidating, but has also been home to WVU's most dissapointing losses.
Though WVU has a solid home winning percentage, it has only gone undefeated and untied at home 3 times in the 28 year history of Mountaineer Field, and never since 1993. It has also been the site of the 2004 loss to Boston College costing WVU a BCS berth, a 2006 loss to South Florida costing WVU another BCS berth, a 2007 loss to Pitt costing a berth in the National Championship, and a 2008 loss to Cincinnati, against costing WVU a BCS berth.
And what's worse, all those losses have come in November or later and were the only home losses of the season.
Why is it that WVU hasn't been able to complete an undefeated home record and chokes at home when the stakes are the highest? Most likely because the students leave early and the alumni doesn't stand up. But whatever the reason, all signs point towards WVU losing to Louisville or Pitt at home this year with a BCS game at stake because WVU hasn't been able to protect their house late in seasons.
27 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Few Points
1. Do you ever post anything positive?
2. You’re right, we haven’t held serve at home like some think we have. I’d be curious, however, to compare our home record to the home records of other teams who have “decided” homefield advantages.
3. While MFAMPS has seen its fair share of disappointing losses, it’s also been home to some mighty impressive wins, including: Auburn 2008, Rutgers 2006, Louisville 2005, VT and Pitt 2003, and a few further on back to boot. Do those even out? Maybe, maybe not.
NO!
With reference to No.1: I don’t think so!
by JP Fanshawe on Aug 17, 2009 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Just off the Top of My Head
2008:
Florida lost at home to Ole Miss.
OSU lost at home to Penn St.
LSU lost at home to Georgia, Alabama, and Ole Miss
2007:
USC lost at home to Stanford
Alabama lost at home to UL-Monroe
VT lost at home to Boston College
I’m not sure who else you would say has a decided “home field advantage”, but if these guys don’t, I don’t know who does.
I think we have the makings of a heated rivalry among TSM staffers. Next up, they will debate whether the glass is half empty or half full.
by Simple Jack on Aug 14, 2009 3:51 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Just because Country Roads asked for it.....
I went and looked up the home stats of each of these teams from 1993 (The last time WVU went undefeated at home) until now. I really can’t tell you which of these losses were more significant and/or damaging to said teams seasons, because frankly I’m lazy and don’t have the time or patience.
But I did do this. Shown is ONLY the home record and winning percentage of each of these “powerhouse” schools over the last 15 years:
West Virginia: 74-26 (.740%)
Alabama: 79-33 (.794%)
Auburn: 84-27 (.754%)
Florida: 88-13 (.871%)
Florida State: 88-14 (.859%)
Georgia: 74-25 (.747%)
LSU: 80-29 (.734%)
Miami: 81-22 (.786%)
Michigan: 84-22 (.792)
Nebraska: 95-14 (.872%)
Notre Dame: 68-31 (.687%)
Ohio State: 93-13 (.877%)
Oklahoma: 76-18 (.809%)
Penn State: 82-22 (.788%)
Tennessee: 87-19 (.821%)
Texas: 79-13 (.855%)
Virginia Tech 88-15 (.854%)
USC: 81-21 (.791%)
It should also be noted, that out of 120 Division 1 schools, WVU ranks 25th in home winning percentage since 1993. And of the 24 schools ahead of them, four of those schools play in non BCS conferences (Boise State, Marshall, Toldeo, and Fresno State). So I’d have to say WVU is doing just fine at home, despite the occasional slip up. (Although the Mountaineers do pick great time to slip up)
Source for info: http://football.stassen.com/records/h-win-pct.html
Good Info, Thanks
Since 2002, WVU is 9th, with a .753 winning percentage, behind: USC, Boise, Texas, OSU, Oklahoma, Georgia, LSU, and TCU, and just ahead of VT, Utah, Florida, Auburn, BC, Texas Tech, and Miami.
by Country Roads on Aug 14, 2009 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Great Work!
I love it when people do their homework. Good job, Blank…
by JP Fanshawe on Aug 17, 2009 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Too Many Spoiled Fans
First of all, I think we do pretty well at home as the statistics above show. I think in this day and age, if you schedule fairly tough (unlike, say, Rutgurs) then it is hard to go unbeaten at home.
Our home crowds are pretty good, however I do notice that too many of our fans don’t contribute to the effort. I think they are spoiled-they wont cheer and get loud unless everything is going our way. They also get negative way too fast- yelling at refs, coaches and players instead of cheering.
There is a HUGE difference between cheering and complaining
I somewhat agree
I do agree with students leaving way too early. I graduated in 2007 and I can remember the biggest game of the past nine years when we played Pitt and when things weren’t going our way it was so quiet. The group I was with was yelling and trying to get other fellow students involved (seeing how a trip to the NC was at stake) when one kid told me to shut up bc it was bothering his girfriend and didn’t see what the big deal was. I never have been more speechless and dumbfounded in my life. Even when we had blow out wins the students would leave early, if i were a recruit and cared about the fanbase I’d think twice about coming to a place like that.
I think teams that are good are good at home, and teams that aren’t, struggle at home. We’ve won some huge games this decade at Mountaineer Field. It is lamentable, however, that we’ve faltered in equally big home games late in the season when all the chips were on the table. As fans, we get excited, “All we have to do is win 1 last game and we go to a BCS game! And it’s at home against a team we probably should beat anyway!” So in that regard it’s been frustrating that we haven’t always closed the door when having the advantage of playing those big games at home and not in a hostile environment.
You want positivity?
One of the featured arguments for the pro-Bill Stewart sector deals w/ posts that “aren’t quite positive enough” or " can’t you be positive for once" or “do you ever post anything positive”. These academic observations are intended to dilute the problems WVU owns at leadership within the football program, by focusing on a tertiary consequence of said leadership flaws. In fact, it could be argued that such proponents are more than likely blindly supporting the new leader because of the dreaded “Jilted Lover Syndrome”. This is a syndrome generally reserved for weak-minded individuals, who place MUCH more of an emphasis on emotion and other sub-cortical brain levels as opposed to reason, critical thinking and other superior qualities. Yet, the “jilted lover” would choose to follow the successor to unprecedented depths to spite his predecessor.
I promise you one thing
If anyone calls me a jilted lover again, I will come to their house, rip their arm off, and beat them with it.
by Dr. Charley West on Aug 17, 2009 8:54 AM EDT up reply actions
He's not kidding.
It’s darned near impossible for your own hand to jilt you.
by Country Roads on Aug 17, 2009 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions
The Losses
The thing that sticks out to me about the losses is the magnitude of them. Here you have three straight years where WVU has played a late season game where a lot was on the line and they lost them. This has cost the Athletic Department a ton of money. Not to mention a possible shot at a national championship. Ugh.
I can’t speak to the crowds last year, but I have noticed ever since the 2003 VT game, Mountaineer Field is not the same. The place is not the only great home field that has lost its edge.
It just sucks that it has happened. And it has happened.
Are We Too Corporate?
I can’t whole-heartedly say that the atmosphere at the stadium has changed. It may just be that I have, but it seems that some games there is a vibe — like Auburn last year — where the intimidation and presence of the crowd are the same as they ever were. And then sometimes, it seems like we got our buzz on too early and the crowd is just spaced out, like Pitt, two years ago.
Think about this, though…what changed from 2003 to now? A whole lot more money became necessary to attend games. From 1981 until 2004 we made our donation and purchased 22 season tickets through our company. In 2005, we were informed that our donation level only allowed us to purchase 10 tickets, and that if we wanted to continue to get what we had always gotten, we would have to DOUBLE our donation to $10,000. This infuriated me because no merit was given to people who had purchased tickets, and made donations, for many years. It was like all that time supporting the program before The Product counted for nothing, or at least not as much as 50 grand from some new donor. Hence, we only have 10 tickets now. My point is, that maybe our crowds aren’t as good these days, because they are more corporate. Much the same thing, I think has happened, in NHL, NBA, and NFL arenas…
by JP Fanshawe on Aug 17, 2009 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I think
that it is fans like yourself (25314) that have let our home field advantage slip. You come to the game and expect absolute perfection and will not cheer for anything less. If we don’t score on every play you won’t get loud. If we don’t get a sack or tackle for loss it is not good enough for you.
Live in reality and stop playing that Sony “SpaceStation” stuff.
by 5th Year Senior on Aug 17, 2009 1:32 PM EDT reply actions
Stiles is the only one who seems to understand the message of my post.
There’s a bit of a discrepency here, though. People are saying we have some of the best home field advantage and point towards the win percentage (which is better frrom 02-08 than 94-01) while at the same time saying MF isn’t intimidating to opponents anymore because of the fans.
First, our team’s been better so therefore our winning % has increased as well. Second, because the team is better, they are expected to defeat more opponents by the common fan. Therefore, where you used to percieve the “big home game” against Syracuse, isn’t a big game anymore. When was the last time a team as good as ‘03 VT even came to Mountaineer Field? We point to the “big games” where it was so loud, but people forget they only happened in ’93, ’96, ’98. And they only remember the games we won. Why? Because it’s louder when you’re winning/ and or it’s close. It wasn’t a yearly occurance that these big games went down, let alone every game.
If WVU played the #1 team in the country, I’m betting it would get louder than it did against the “big home games” agaisnt Maryland and Auburn.
Also, the accoustics in the stadium changed when the suites were built in the North end zone.
But the most important reason is that, I don’t yell at games. I could have sworn that I did, but I guess not.
So...
How are you defining “home field advantage”?
You’re talking in circles here. You say we have won more home games because the team is better, but we don’t have a home field advantage because we also lost games against good teams. Well, duh. And we’ve won a few big games too—-Auburn, Rutgers 2006, UConn 2007. You’re right we haven’t had any top-10 teams coming in lately, but to me, that’s where any home field advantage (real or perceived) means the most. I guess I just don’t get what your argument is. Do we not have an advantage because we’ve lost games? Or do we not have it because we have lost big games? Or because the crowd is quiet? Or because we don’t play quality teams?
Because in any of those events, I can point to another program where the same problems exist, yet you would probably still say they have a “home field advantage.” Ohio State is a great example. They lost to PSU last year and Illinois the year before—-both late in the season, at home, at night, with national championship implications on the line. Also, the Big 10 isn’t all that great either. OSU plays one maybe two highly ranked teams a year, and unless it’s one of those teams or Michigan, Buckeye fans just sit on their hands and expect a blowout. I can attest to this from personal experience.
Now, if you can come up with a program that hasn’t lost big home games late in the year and has raucous sellout crowds when they play FCS teams, I’d love to hear it.
by Country Roads on Aug 17, 2009 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Dude, Auburn went 5-7 last year and UConn and Rutgers are UConn and Rutgers. I’m saying that WVU has lost very important games late in the year recently. That’s just a fact. But I don’t think it’s because the fans aren’t good. I think it’s cause the team just lost.
People have been arguing here that our home field advantage is fine (which I have no problem with) but that our fans suck and it’s not intimidating (which I do have a problem with). I was saying that it is an illusion that our fans “used to be better.”
They are two seperate arguments. But you can’t argue that we have both a great home field advantage and that the crowd sucks.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
