I'd like to cast my vote for .......

WRESTLING

Quote from: Boxer7806 on November 21, 2007, 01:41:32 AM
i think Curry and WNEC and Umass D are the only schools with full time coaches right now and im not sure about UMASS D but i know Bridgewaters coach teaches at the school so he is around... i know Kelly at Framingham is the AD so he is always around helping the program... im not sure if Fitchburg's coach is full time but i dont think westfields or MIT is ... but if there were more full time coaches in the leauge that would help greatly in recruiting and prove schools want to put money into their football programs...

MIT's coach, Dwight Smith, is in his also a PE teacher at the school, and I believe he focuses on squash. 
The 1999 New England Football Conference Coach of the Year, Dwight Smith has been on the sidelines for every game in the history of Engineer football. Taking over the reigns as head coach of the Tech club program in 1979 after a one-year stint as an assistant, Coach Smith led the Engineers into its varsity game on September 24, 1988. During Tech's 19-year run as a varsity program, Smith's gridiron unit has compiled a 59-104-1 mark.

I found a second, very similar but not identical list.....still no CGA:

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/departments/college/?article=10schoolsToughesttoGetInto07

Regarding the 'speculation' about the Coast Guard Academy and the alleged 'hardest' schools to get into, here's the list from the Princeton Review:

http://encarta.msn.com/college_article_tentoughestschools/the_most_competitive_admissions.html

To save time for anyone not interested in checking it out, the list, in order of difficulty, is: MIT, Yale, Princeton, Harvard, Olin, Caltech, Columbia, U Penn, Stanford, and Brown. 

Perhaps I missed some qualifying statement made by whoever first claimed CGA the hardest(not in top ten), but MIT is #1 and actually won a couple of football games this past season.

Waggs,
Thanks for the reassuring words.......except you should have added 'don't forget to take your Prozac'.  I know it's best to accept things as they are, hope for good luck and try to have fun.  Luckily enough I won't be witness to any more games, with the possible exception of the season finale, but since 'Sullymustgo' seems content to have gotten his message across, I don't hear anything along the lines of typical booster club complaining.  With a conference ranked last in all of D3, and a few programs that include some good players but can't compete against the lowest rung of college football, shouldn't there be an occasional stirring of the pot?  What else is there for a disappointed dad to do?

Quote from: d3fanoffootball on September 10, 2006, 01:57:42 PM
Someone must wake up the FSC coaching. Those boys could be in for a long season.  Close game, till the Deffense died.

Someone must wake up the (insert the name of your losing school here: "___'') coaching. Those boys could be in for a long season. 

I'll take a crack at it........WAKE UP!!!
I know nothing about FSC, but I know that in order to not embarrass my family name, I should just lower my expectations.  It's only D3, right? True, I'm just a fan, and I hate to complain, but I wish things like scoring points in a 0-0 game, play selection (maybe kick a field goal from the 8 instead of going for it on 4th and 7), and clock management (3:40 left in the half too much time to think about it, and then run out of time?) looked more important.  Is there a "D3football Coaching for Dummies" book? Such game mistakes/(different perspective?) are one thing, but to hear team morale was low the night before their opening game, and then learn the same guy has been there 28 years, I just couldn't help but get the feeling the guy doesn't know what else to do with his time. "For the love of the game" is being severely tested by a small group of young men who deserve better. 
OK, that's enough ranting.....good luck to all.

D3fan06,
I share the same hope with you, but football coaches are human and don't all or always display like behavior.  When we were invited to observe an Ivy league school's spring practice game in his junior year of high school, part of the experience was a tour of facilities by various members of the coaching staff.  I believe it was the DL coach, in front of 30 or so parents and their boys, who said something to the effect that; "when they're here in the weightroom or in pads they're mine, and I don't care what happens over there (referring to the academic side of the campus) as long as it doesn't interrupt what I'm trying to achieve here". It wasn't anything too far from what I believed was reality, but still a bit of a surprise to hear a coach admit it, and I think his head coach would have considered his statement a gaff. For that to be admitted at an Ivy, we have to believe it's the standard for most schools.  I only contributed to this post because of your earlier claim that it's the case at EVERY SCHOOL.  There's at least one school that I'm aware of that doesn't play the game that way.

Jonny,
I received strong enough indication from the head coach prior to my son's acceptance at the school that his football talent was a good thing, but that the coach did not have the ability or power to gain my son acceptance.  My son probably went on a 'wish list' the coach may have submitted to the administration, but even after being accepted, the coach wrote his congratulations with a reminder that MIT was an academic institution first, and that there were certain rules prohibiting players from allowing their football to interfere in any way with their academics.  At this point I'm not sure if we're in agreement or not, but I'll stand by my original reply, that not EVERY SCHOOL plays the same game.

D3fan wrote: EVERY SCHOOL in the NEFC (and beyand, NESCACs etc) have players that might not meet the highest academic standards of their respective schools.

This suggests that a high school or JC player with exceptional football skills will get a NEFC school administrator to overlook a questionable academic record. The table just isn't that evenly.  You either have an excellent academic record, or you go somewhere other than MIT. My son's at MIT and I did everything (all legitimate) I thought I should that would help to get him in, but in the end, his football skills had nothing to do with his admittance.  He was a high school team captain and all-league honoree, but all football did was add another item to his list of diverse interests, which is what most academic schools are looking for.  I don't know where you pulled your claim about EVERY SCHOOL from, but I think you're wrong.

Quote from: InTheMix on July 25, 2006, 03:37:48 PM

I'm not sure if MIT graduated their QB from last year but he was a great player and had terrific vision.  If he is still around and they get more numbers for players they could be a suprise.

You're talking about Rick Mancuso, who won the conference ROOKIE of the year award.  He's back for his sophomore season this fall.  Nice to hear someone speak of MIT and prospects for good football in the same topic.
From MIT's website:
"Mancuso's first season behind center was the best ever for an MIT quarterback. Despite playing in just seven games, he set Institute records for completions (135) and attempts (282), while tossing for an MIT season-record 1,587 yards." 

No mention of turnovers, but the MIT defense got a lot of action......and gave up a lot of points.  I'd like to see their numbers up this year too, but haven't heard anything.  Last year's roster of 44 was mostly sophomores and freshmen, and I know they started 10 freshmen in most games.  Maybe there's hope for their season.

Moose50,
JV or not, I appreciate your attempt at 'positive' banter.  As for great plays, obviously there were too many to know, but among my favorite efforts was that of a freshman DL who had a game that included 3 first half sacks.  As for underclassmen getting ready to take the place of graduates, MIT played with mostly underclassmen, including starting 10 freshman.

I agree it's good news for Salve Regina to recognize it's time for a full time coach, but I'm responding to the shortage of freshman players.  Although the roster number was 10, not 7, I can only guess that the football team is well served by transfers from local junior colleges.  MIT, on the other hand, had 17 frosh listed on their roster of 44 (Salve's roster was 52), and the one box score that I used to compare starters to roster, MIT had 10 frosh among their 22 offensive and defensive starters.  There are obvious academic hurdles experienced only by the MIT players, but maybe the recruiting coordinator at Salve is already doing a decent job by attracting the juco players, and hopefully the experience gained by MIT's youngsters will serve them well on the field in years to come.
Having a strong academic standing is a good thing, but I also like the idea that MIT might have a very experienced team in a couple of years. 

Thanks, Pat. Many a game have been played in terrible conditions.  This one seems particularly odd because it's now scheduled for one day later, and presumably on the same field.  Have you ever heard of a game being postponed because of field conditions?  Was there any more information on what was wrong? 

Anyone have the story on why MIT @ Salve Regina wasn't played yesterday, and is now scheduled for today?

Regarding talk about Nichols, no one has made a prediction yet for their upcoming game against MIT.  I know it ranks as a "who cares?" for most hardcore fans, but it isn't the typical slamdunk that most MIT games are.  I noticed that Nichols starts a few freshmen, but MIT started 10 in last week's game.    Is it possible those guys that were playing high school ball last year are starting to get a feel for the college game and improving at a faster rate than their older class teammates?