Mano-A-Mano: Ivy football kick-off

Last week's debate ended on a TKO for Team Philly, which hopped aboard the Ryan Becker Bandwagon. Well, after Billy Ragone's clutch performance against Dartmouth, that bandwagon is now sidelined with four broken axles. It appears Al Bagnoli will live and die with Ragone behind center, so let's forget that QB controversy ever happened and move on. The Quakers eked out a win over the Big Green in a hostile, prime-time environment. But does the fact that the game came down to the wire make you more or less confident in Penn's chances to three-peat? Or, put another way:

Question: Did Saturday's nail-biter reveal Penn's championship moxie or vulnerability?

Kevin Esteves: Despite the team's continued struggles, their performance against Dartmouth showed me that Penn football still has that championship moxie. The Quakers blew a 13-3 lead and for all intents and purposes, looked like toast in Hanover (see what I did there?). However, they got it done when they needed to get it done. Down by four with just under four minutes left, they had absolutely no momentum on their side (Big Green were on a 17-3 run), yet they still marched 89 yards down the field to score what would be the game-winning touchdown. Of course, you can't ignore all the mistakes that were made, but in order to be as successful as Penn has been recently, you need to be lucky. Were they fortunate to make it out of Hanover with a win? Absolutely. But they got by not on a fluke, hail-mary but instead a methodical march down the field. That shows confidence, moxie, whatever you want to call it — even when they had little reason to be confident at that point.

Brian Kotloff: The Quakers have inexplicably had major problems with the Big Green over the past few years -- including an overtime win in 2010 -- so I'm walking on shaky ground here. But I just feel like this game exposed the 2011 team's problems that will resurface throughout the league schedule. They shored up their pass defense issues, yet still allowed 171 rushing yards. Last year's team almost always held the opposing run game in check. Last year's team also led Dartmouth 28-14 at one point and ran into issues more related to being too good (overconfidence) than not being good enough. This year, to need a near length-of-the-field, last-minute drive to beat DARTMOUTH? A better team would have taken advantage of the opportunity the Quakers handed the Big Green. And if Penn's problems persist (bonus points for alliteration, right?), a better team will take advantage.

KE: Maybe I'm just taking the optimist route, but a championship team doesn't peak until its last game, right? The Quakers have an inexperienced O-line, and inexperienced kicker, and a quarterback in Billy Ragone who's just beginning to find his rhythm back. As a Penn fan, you'd obviously love to see the Quakers handing it to Dartmouth, but they're still an unfinished product at this point. The key is they have that championship leadership and moxie to keep them competitive until their play on the field catches up.

BK: Well their play better catch up to their "moxie" quick, because the stretch run is looming. Remember, this year Penn travels to Brown and Harvard, perhaps the two biggest challengers. The Quakers can't be sloppy, but they've been sloppy in each of their first three games. I don't see how their glaring issues will magically be cured by whatever intangible qualities they possess (plus, Ragone is no Ben Francisco when it comes to clutchness).

KE: Fair point, so let's toss it to our Buzz readers out there. What's your take? Let us know in the comments.