Beatpaths

If you weren't already aware, last night the Sacramento Mountain Lions faced off against the Florida Tuskers in Orlando. What's that? Yes this is the second post in a blog about the Hartford Colonials, so why, then, am I spending time on a game between two other teams?

I said it earlier and should reiterate: to be a fan of a UFL team is to be a fan of the league. Not only that, but with a mere five teams, the competition has been even more interesting. Every last team in the league either has faced Hartford or will in the future, and so every game can tell you a little but about the team you beat, or the team that beat you. Every game is important.

Prior to last night, the Mountain Lions shared the bottom of the UFL standings with the Colonials, with both teams sporting unflattering 1-3 records. The Mountain Lions were beaten decisively in the Colonials home opener by the score of 27-10, and were dominated in every phase of the game. They went on to lose two other games, and only narrowly pulled out a single victory against Florida (whom they've subsequently swept. Daunte Culpepper threw for four interceptions in Sactown's loss against the locomotives and looked washed up. But what does that all mean?

Apparently nothing. The Mountain Lions have twice rebounded for wins against a team that soundly defeated the Colonials in their first game. Apparently we still have no way of knowing just what every team is capable of. I'm not certain that any of them know yet either. Hartford beat a team that beat a team that beat Hartford. There's no way of knowing the outcome of any of these games.

Of course, I would argue that Hartford has beaten themselves as much as they've been beaten. I recall watching the Colonials first road game. I was absolutely elated in the third quarter. We not only had a football team in town, we had a damn good one. Then the fourth quarter happened, and all bets were off.

Penalties ruined the team's chances in Omaha, and penalties and turnovers have continued to dig huge holes that the team can't quite pick themselves out of. The comment I've heard, from more than one source, is "It looked like an entirely different team." I agree. The Hartford Colonials first seven quarters of football this year were impressive, and so I wonder, what happened? Was this a team without talent? Did they get lucky?

I sincerely doubt luck had anything to do with it. Take a look at Hartford's last game a home against Omaha. Both team's stats are nearly identical. Time of possession is within one minute. Total yardage is exactly the same. Penalties and penalty yardage are nearly the same. Third down conversions and percentage are nearly the same. What sticks out like a sore thumb is Hartford's four turnovers to Omaha's one. I think that bear's repeating. The Colonials turned the ball over four times as often as the Nighthawks, and still managed to stay within one score. It may sound ridiculous to say, but that doesn't suggest a lack of talent. If anything, it's amazing that the score wasn't higher. We can stay in the game despite mistakes, and might even still snatch a game or two away, but for the love of god, we can't win a championship playing like that.

The Colonials can join the Mountain Lions and Tuskers both in 2-3 Land. They did not beat a bad team on September 18th, but a competitive one. They lost to a competitive team. The talent levels in the UFL are apparently solid across the board. Winning games is going to be about taking those precious few opportunities the other guys will give you, and not giving them anything in return.