Steele | Penn football is smaller, slower ... and stronger

Leading up to Penn’s game against William & Mary this past weekend, rumors began circulating that the Quakers would end up benching their starters for most of the team’s final nonconference matchup of 2013.

After Penn captured its Ivy League opener in a quadruple overtime thriller last Saturday, the Red and Blue were left bruised and battered, and certainly couldn’t be blamed for taking a week off against one of the best teams the CAA has to offer.

After all, the end goal for the Quakers isn’t wins against nonconference opponents — but a flawless Ivy slate.

And if Penn’s schedule against opponents outside of the Ivy League has taught us anything before, it is that where the Quakers finish the season rarely corresponds to how they began it.

Last season, Penn went winless against Lafayette, Villanova and the same William & Mary squad it faced this past weekend. Despite the rough start to 2012, the Quakers rebounded by taking six of seven Ivy contests and captured the conference title for the third time in four seasons.

All seemed to be well around Franklin Field at the end of last
season. Gone were the critics who viewed Penn’s season as doomed following a 1-3 start and the bandwagon charged forward with joy and celebration.

Fast forward nine months to just after Penn’s 35-6 thrashing at the hands of Villanova and the doubters returned. Once again, it came time to question the Quakers’ motives behind playing a nonconference schedule laden with CAA teams.

While many feel that continually playing the Wildcats does nothing to help Penn’s chances of winning the Ivy League title with a completely healthy lineup, the atmosphere around the team seemed to indicate otherwise.

The Quakers enjoy the challenge of playing a bigger, better team, at least according to coaches and players. With that in mind, Penn’s matchup against Villanova, and subsequent defeat, seemed defensible.

However, as the game against the Tribe drew closer and it seemed increasingly likely that Bagnoli would pull his best players early in the game, even the staunchest defenders of Penn’s nonconference slate had to be scratching their heads.

What would be the point of scheduling a team just to take the week off?

In the end, however, Bagnoli and the rest of the Penn football team must be applauded for their work on Saturday. It’s reasonable to question why the Red and Blue play William & Mary, but it’s not fair to question Penn’s effort and toughness.

Saturday’s game was far from pretty, and on the outside, it certainly wasn’t anything to be proud of. Once again, Penn fell to a nonconference opponent, and Bagnoli dropped his 13th straight tussle with a CAA opponent.

But it was the way the Quakers responded late in the game that should give all Penn fans optimism as the Ivy play becomes the focal point of the season now.

After enduring the Tribe’s initial onslaught and falling down 21-0, no one could have blamed Penn for calling off the fight and turning its focus to its next opponent.

Instead, the Red and Blue demonstrated that they can play with the big boys, scoring two touchdowns in a three minute span. Suddenly, Penn had life, and trailed by just seven with half a quarter remaining.

While the Quakers ended up falling, 27-14, it’s hard not to find plenty of positives to take away from the William & Mary matchup.

Yes, the conditions were sloppy and Penn came out flat, but the defense showed poise against one of the top offenses in the FCS.
There was no waving of the white flag, no benching of starters and no running away when the Tribe began throwing haymakers.

The nonconference slate has toughened these Quakers up, and now with each week’s game becoming more important, it’s time for Penn to enter its games as the football bully of the Ancient Eight.

SEE ALSO

Tony| Penn football lost, but its defense won respect

William & Mary holds off Penn football, 27-14

Penn football back for an encore

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.