FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[smedindy]

I think the football programs need to look how the NCAC basketball has been revitalized.

There are very few gimme games - only Allegheny has been disappointing. The battle is fierce at the top, and there may good teams that won't host an NCAC tourney game. You can't roll the ball out against Kenyon, Denison or Oberlin and expect a win this year. The NCAC won over 2/3 of its non-conference games and had winning records against the OAC and HCAC.

Now the question is how can Hiram and Keynon turn their football programs into programs as competitive as their basketball teams. And can OWU rebound from a tough patch. Allegheny made a coaching change in hoops and the results, thus far, are between disappointing and ghastly. OWU can't afford a hire like that in football.

The strides Denison and Oberlin have made in football are encouraging. While it may take a while to have NCAC football as fiercely egalitarian as NCAC hoops are this year, I think the league can make progress towards that quickly.

[ExTartanPlayer]

I think the football programs need to look how the NCAC basketball has been revitalized.

...

Now the question is how can Hiram and Keynon turn their football programs into programs as competitive as their basketball teams. And can OWU rebound from a tough patch. Allegheny made a coaching change in hoops and the results, thus far, are between disappointing and ghastly. OWU can't afford a hire like that in football.

The strides Denison and Oberlin have made in football are encouraging. While it may take a while to have NCAC football as fiercely egalitarian as NCAC hoops are this year, I think the league can make progress towards that quickly.

I know that you're aware of this, smed, but I think that turning a hoops program around is vastly different from turning a football program around for a couple reasons.

(Fun personal note: I was a "practice player" for the CMU women's hoops program for a couple years, and even now I occasionally play pickup ball with them over the summer if they need some bodies to play 5-on-5)

Fewer players on the court/field means that you don't need as much depth.  This is an oft-cited reason why academically elite Division I schools (Duke, Stanford, the Ivy League, the Patriot League) have been able to compete better in basketball than in football (although the 1990's Northwestern teams and the recent Stanford have had very nice runs on the gridiron).  Two or three really good players flanked by the right mix of "role players" can carry a hoops team to respectability.  Achieving that same level of competitiveness in a football program around requires a few straight years of landing a dozen starting-caliber players with least 5-6 that have potential to become all-conference performers.

I know there are a lot more basketball programs than football programs (so theoretically the competition for the available talent is harder in basketball), but I still believe that this has some effect.  IMHO, turning around Hiram/Kenyon football would require would require at least three straight years of "solid" recruiting classes (25+ guys per year with a high retention rate as they become juniors/seniors).

[smedindy]

I do realize that, but at least the path is there.

[wally_wabash]

I think the football programs need to look how the NCAC basketball has been revitalized.

I think this far easier said than done.  A couple of things...first, the league traded Earlham for DePauw which made the league better (by a lot) without any other team changing one bit.  Second, there's a returns of scale kind of concept going on that can't be ignored.  In football, speaking nothing of the contribution of players that are primarily practice players, it takes 3-4 dozen players on gameday to be successful.  Some players have more impact than others certainly, but overall the average impact on a game that one player has is going to be much much less than one player in a basketball game.  In basketball, one single player can make a team significantly better than if that player was absent...has a much greater impact.  Football is a bigger enterprise with a lot more moving parts and ostensibly much more difficult to get "well oiled" (it's not just getting 100 or so guys to sign up to play...it's gotta be the right 100 or so guys) than a basketball team where you're dealing with fewer coaches, and fewer players (usually by a factor of 7-10 times).  You can have a really good basketball team with just a few good players.  You need much, much more than that to have success in football. 

And let's not also forget that not everybody can win 7+ games.  We keep score and somebody has to lose.  And no matter what all of our teams in the league are doing to be successful, there's always going to be somebody that wins just 1-2 games.  Or maybe zero.  It's always going to be that way because we don't have enough elective games in a football season for everybody to get games against Elmira or Penn State-New Kensignton or Sacred Heart-Puerto Rico and pad the ol' win column. 

[smedindy]

But while teams must lose, I'd rather have the bottom feeders not be out of almost every game before it starts. This is more a concept anyway - that just because your name is Kenyon or Hiram you don't have to just stink at football.

[wally_wabash]

But while teams must lose, I'd rather have the bottom feeders not be out of almost every game before it starts. This is more a concept anyway - that just because your name is Kenyon or Hiram you don't have to just stink at football.

I understand what you're saying.  I think the reality is that NCAA football is not the NFL.  Haves and have nots exist here and while there may be some movement back and forth from one group to the other over time, in any given short term window there will be teams that are very good and teams that are very bad.  There isn't a ton of parity of college football...really at any level and particularly in Division III. 

[formerd3db]

wally:

I understand what you are saying also.  However, I disagree with you somewhat to a degree as I think there is some parity in college football, at least much more than say a decade ago.  While there are still the "super powers" like Alabama, Oregon and LSU of recent, look at how some other teams have gotten back into the "race" i.e. Stanford, Boise, TCU, etc.. Also, there certainly is some parity among the FCS teams (former DI-AA) as look how many different teams are in the mix for the playoffs and different champions as compared to just a few years ago, although there are certainly some of the perennial powers there as well. Same goes for DII - the GLIAC has appeared to be much more in parity the last 3-4 years. Grand Valley State is down, but Hillsdale coming back, of course, Wayne State this year and last and Saginaw Valley State starting to come back, of course, Michigan Tech, which almost dropped their program earlier this decade like Wayne State almost did back in the 1980's (both of which would have been huge mistakes) has enjoyed a revived program.  Heck, they played in front of 52,000 at U of Mich stadium that year they played Grand Valley State.

On the other hand, I agree with you that the parity in DIII is lacking.   Anyway, another interesting discussion, you guys.   

[wally_wabash]

d3db-

Lack of parity might not be the best way to describe FBS...I think more accurately FBS has a segregation problem.  The powers that be have, and continue, to go out of their way to keep certain teams out of their spotlight and championship and (most importantly) their giant sack of money.  What Boise State has done to get and stay relevant is amazing.  And despite being an awesome program, they were cut out of the spotlight in the postseason each of the last two years.  Houston got cut out this year.  It's pretty blatant discrimination and makes the FBS postseason particularly distasteful for me.  One more reason for #whyd3, I guess.   

[formerd3db]

d3db-

Lack of parity might not be the best way to describe FBS...I think more accurately FBS has a segregation problem.  The powers that be have, and continue, to go out of their way to keep certain teams out of their spotlight and championship and (most importantly) their giant sack of money.  What Boise State has done to get and stay relevant is amazing.  And despite being an awesome program, they were cut out of the spotlight in the postseason each of the last two years.  Houston got cut out this year.  It's pretty blatant discrimination and makes the FBS postseason particularly distasteful for me.  One more reason for #whyd3, I guess.   

Oh yes, regarding FBS, I agree with you.  Although I think there is some parity, I think you and I are "on the same page" with this i.e. with regard to the "fairness" or perhaps better said "unfairness" and "ridiculousness" of the current state of FBS with regards to the ratings and eventual bowl picks.  It is a travesty.  As I'm sure you have seen/heard, the current NCAA president is now saying he (i.e. the NCAA) would support a 4 team playoff.  While that is a start, IMO, it is still a joke.  They need to do it like the other levels and, as we've all discussed before, the deterrent to that is the politics and the $ factors and the bowl game administrators.   Can you imagine what controversy a 4 team playoff would still create as it would be just like what happened this year and the last few as you describe/pointed out.  On the other hand, remember when DIII and DII started out with the 8 playoff spots!   At least it was a start and perhaps the FBS would follow a similar path if once they started a 4 team playoff.  However, I doubt that and certainly won't hold my breath on it or bet on it, if I were a "betting man", of which I am not.

[sigma one]

I've been playing around with DIII numbers--got to do something in the winter.  In regard to DIII parity:  Don't hold me exactly to these numbers, what with schools adding and dropping football, etc., but they are really close.  And I include NESCAC.  Over the past three seasons ('09, '10, '11) 52 schools have had winning seasons all three years.  Another 25 have had a combination of winning and .500 seasons (that is, no record below .500; several have had two .500 seasons).  Reversing this: 31 schools have had at least one season of .500 and the other seasons below .500.  Lastly, 61 schools have had no winning seasons, and not even a .500 season.  That accounts for 169 schools.  All the others, up to the total number, give or take one or two, have had split records:  years both above and below .500  (remembering that a couple of schools have dropped football, so I am not including them; although I am including schools who have played only one or two seasons--complicated enough for everyone!).  Looked at a bit differently, at least regarding the top of the Division-------over the past FIVE years ('07--'11) 43 schools have advanced to the Quarterfinal Round of the Division III Championship.  This means those schools have won at in the first round (have won a playoff game), and they are playing at a high level.  Of that number, 19 have advanced to the Quarterfinals on two or more occasions; the other 24 have gotten there once each.  Just for kicks, those 19 schools are UW Whitewater (5), Mt. Union (5), Mary Hardin-Baylor (5), North Central (4), Wesley (4), Delaware Valley (3), St Thomas (3), Wabash (3), Bethel (2),  Curry (2), Franklin (2), Linfield (2), Monmouth (2), Montclair St. (2), St John Fisher (2), SUNY Cortland (2), Thomas More (2), Trine (2), Wheaton (2).  Those to the Quarterfinals  once over the period: Albright, Alfred, Case Western Reserve, Central, Centre, Coe, College of New Jersey, Hobart, Illinois Wesleyan, Johns Hopkins, Kean, McMurry, Millsaps, Muhlenberg, Mississippi College, North Carolina Wesleyan Wesleyan, Ohio Northern St. John's, Salisbury, UW Eau Claire, Wartburg, Washington & Jefferson, Willamette, Wittenberg.  Quite an assortment.  I'm aware that you can measure parity lots of ways.  If I have missed schools, please help.

[aueagle]

Impressive report sigma one

[formerd3db]

Impressive report sigma one

Ditto.  Excellent job and very informative. +k

[fantastic50]

Wooster's defensive coordinator Seth Duerr, a former All-American for the Scots, has left to become the defensive coordinator at D-2 Tiffin.  I think this loss is going to sting for quite a while.

More info near the bottom of this column...
http://www.the-daily-record.com/news/article/5149446

[smedindy]

This is a setback for the Scots.

[Lawrence Oliver]

Is there any word coming from Delaware as to when OWU will hire a new HC?  I haven't even heard of any names of coaches involved.  Can anyone enlighten us?