FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[scotty]

oldguy, please...we were just getting along...my original thought was that D3 is growing in stature and maybe recruiting is a little different than before...

[wally_wabash]

I'll go on record as saying that I think our conference champion will be undefeated.  Each of the last three or four years we've all said that "this is the year the conference is wide open and it's just not going to be possible for any team to run the table."  And then we posit theories about how any number of three-way ties would break down, etc., etc.  And every year, even in 2003 when the conference was relatively weak, our champion has gone undefeated in conference play.  One of these teams is going to emerge as being simply better than the rest of them.  That's just the way it happens.  Only two times in the history of the NCAC (1997 and 1989) has our football champion not been undefeated in conference play.  

[lancer98]

In regards to the 1997 year, that has to be by far the best year the conference had football wise.  I was talking to a few players from Wooster's team that year a few weekends ago and they were disucssuing the Witt, 'Gheny and Woo teams that year that all finshed 9-1 and beat each other to create a three way tie.

'Gheny got the playoff bid and lost to of course Mount  21-19, I think, and Mount went on the trample everyone in their path on the way to a National title.  It probably would be safe to say the conference had 3 of the top 5 teams in the country that year.

Just a little blast from the past in regards to Wally's post.

[smedindy]

Lancer -

I always felt that a conference is only as good as its midpack and weakest members. Top-heavy conferences aren't that impressive. Every conference is going to have a dog (well, except the WIAC).

How good was Kenyon, Case and Earlham that year?? Better than they are now? I'm curious. I know the OAC is better in the middle than the NCAC but Heidelberg is bad, and how well could Marietta and Wilmington compete in the NCAC?

I do feel that one of the 'bottom' five will have a better NCAC record than one of the 'top' five, just due to schedule. I posted that on the older board - it sets up that Denison, Earlham, Kenyon or Oberlin COULD go 4-3, and it's plausible that one of the 'top' five could go 3-4 due to their schedule.

Earlham misses Wooster and OWU
Denison misses Wooster and 'Gheny
Kenyon misses Witt and Wabash
Oberlin misses Witt and 'Gheny.

By missing two of the big five, it's easy to see where a team could wind up with just three losses.

[lancer98]

Semds,

I don't know enough about Kenyon, Earlham, Case , etc. to comment of them during those years but I would venture to say they weren't much different than their current success.

I see your point about a conference being top heavy but having 3 out of the top 5 teams in the country has to say something no matter how you slice it.  The NCAC has come no where close to that since then.

I obviously can't prove the 3 of the top five and never will, but there are definetly enough indictators to provide a pretty strong argument. 

[tiger_alum]

Just as a side note about the '97 NCAC, wasn't Case out of the NCAC in '97?  At leaset in football?

[wally_wabash]

In 1997, Allegheny, Wooster, and Witt all had the aforementioned 9-1 regular seasons.  The rest of the conference had below .500 records both in conference and overall and went 4-12 against non-NCAC opponents.  So really it doesn't look like much was different. 

[BashDad]

Wally, Lancer98, Smed:

It was really disappointing to see the NCAC only rated 17th out of 25 d3 football conferences by Pat and his "Kickoff" cohorts--not that the conference as a whole has deserved much in the past few years.  And, if you look at the non-conference matchups on Sept. 3 and 10, the NCAC is not likely to improve its image, even if Witt is able to knock off Capitol and Dayton (I expect them to lose both games).  The bottom half really skews the numbers every year.  Interesting to see the info on the '97 season--must have been something!

What do others think of the idea of a pre-season NCAC poll on Offensive/Defensive players of the year?  "Kickoff"  predicts Holmes from Witt will be NCAC Player of the Year.  I think others may have a good shot.  I would be happy to pull together initial nominees which others could add to, if you think we should.

Red/White tomorrow! 
WABASH ALWAYS FIGHTS!!   

[oldguy]

Scotty,  What, i can't make a joke.

Yeah, 1997 was a strong year for the league.  When there are 3 teams at 9-1, most the other teams will naturally not have very good records.  I actually went that Allegheny-Mount playoff game.  I was mad Witt wasn't there, but it was quite a game.  Mount went up 21-0 I believe, the Allegheny came back and almost won.  They grabbed an onside kick to start the second half.  Their TE had a huge day.  Had the ball at the end of the game with a chance to win.  It was a great game.

[smedindy]

Case was listed in the final NCAC standings that year - so they were in.

We're never going to get the ultimate respect for our champions without improvement by the 'bottom' five in respect to non-conference.

Witt and Wabash were probably amongst the top 10 in the country in 2002 as well, and Wooster was definitely on the rise that year.

This year, with five fairly even teams, the league could be stronger overall than many years but not show much for it, especially if we WIAC each other during the conference season.

Oldguy -  the fact with teams being 9-1 doesn't mean anything about the other team's non conference records, which still stunk.

[seinfeld]

If anyone from Wooster was holding out some possible hope of Tyrell Sutton coming to Wooster, you can kiss that goodbye. Based on the comments of Northwestern's coach from Media Day, Sutton is at least the No. 2 tailback going into the season, and almost sounds like he is 1a.

http://nusports.collegesports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/082505aac.html

[wally_wabash]

Unitl the middle and bottom of our conference get demonstrably better against non-conference teams, the NCAC will never get a rep as a strong conference.  We've fielded some strong teams that have had some playoff success, but as a whole our conference largely stinks.  Look at the non-conference records of schools not named Wabash, Witt, and Wooster.  Over the last five or so years (and probably longer), the NCAC's record against other conferences is horrendous.  And not only are we losing the vast majority of those games, we're getting trampled.  Really, I think that 17th out of 25 is more than fair.  

[ScotsFan]

I agree about the ranking of the NCAC.  With all of this talk about 'Gheny and OWU improving, they need to step up and start showing it in the non-conference games to start improving the respect given to this conference.  Still, the bottom 5 are no where close IMHO to competing with anyone outside of our conference and that will always hurt the overall appearance of the NCAC.

Wally, that is true about how we seem to never think a team will run the table every season and judging by how many times the champ actually does run the table in conference play, my money would have to go on Witt to do it.  Their game at Wabash will be the teller IMO.  If Witt gets by in that one, they should be in the driver's seat.  Wabash just has too many tough road games to get by unscathed and the same goes for OWU.  As for the COW, I definately don't see them winning in Springfield and other possible losses could easily come from the visiting 'Lil Giants (although I think this game will be a good one no matter who wins) and on the road @ Allegheny.  Wooster has had OWU's number the past few years and I don't think it will change this year either.  Allegheny is the wild card again.  When they won the conference 2 years ago, the schedule favored them then like it does again this year. 

This year's  conference race has all the makings of being a dandy.  With 5 teams who could legitimately make a run at the title, I have a feeling that this thing won't be decided until late in the season.  Let's hope so anyways for the sake of keeping this board even livelier!

GO SCOTS!!!

[lancer98]

Just checked this site for some facts and came accrossed this link

http://www.d3football.com/playoffs/1997.htm

Turns out that Game was MU 34 'Gheny 30.  I knew it was a hard fought battle.  The following year Mount beat Witt 21-19.  That's where those numbers came from.  Check out Mount's other scores that year.  Its's pretty laughable.  It validates my point that if 'Gheny could remain competitive, its pretty certain that Woo and Witt could have as well.

Oldguy,

Are you sure you attended that game?  Maybe Pat has made a mistake?  

[gobash]

Somebody please educate me on something.  What is with the Karma indicator and stars?  How does one gain or lose karma and stars?   

Well the stars are based on how many posts you've made I believe, and as for karma, I have no idea, and have been wondering about that myself.  Maybe the older posters can vote for posts, and that gives you karma?