FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[ExTartanPlayer]

The bigger thing that nine league games does is that it takes away opportunities for comparisons to be made amongst teams in the region's different conferences based on results versus common opponents.  With so many teams playing just one non-league game now, there's just less intersecting data available.  The importance of the subjective leeway the RACs have when ranking teams in the North region going forward takes on added significance here.

Totally agreed.  It would be nice, of course, for all teams to play 2+ OOC games so there's more data to compare the respective conferences, especially when those numbers factor so prominently into Pool C berths to the dance.  Admittedly, while the playoff selection process can grate on my nerves sometimes, I am of the mindset that if you wanna get into the playoffs, you'd better win your conference, so this is a pretty minor squabble IMO.

From my perspective, it's not so much the issue of SOS.  As a fan of the game, I like crossover play between powerful teams from different conferences, with some room for geographic and/or longstanding rivalries (for example, I think it'd be great if CMU and Allegheny played every year, conference affiliations be damned).  That's a bigger cost of full round-robin than the SOS issue to me.  I know some of you Wabash guys likely feel the same: it'd be more fun to play a nice game vs. the CCIW or OAC than all of the mandatory games with Hiram and the other dregs (although Kenyon had a great run last year, OWU just rose from the ashes, and Oberlin pulled the Wabash upset...suggesting that the conference might not be as soft underneath as it used to be).

[sigma one]

I hope I am tracking this discussion correctly.  If not, I am sure you will let me know.  The old NCAC power-rated schedule was deficient in a number of ways, but most importantly it did not allow all the teams to meet on a yearly basis.  And the way the power-rating was done was screwy, going back several years because the schedules had to be constructed.  In that system, for example, Wittenberg, one of the conference powers, played Hiram in most years (because Witt had one average year a few years back that produced the matchup.)   Wabash did not play Hiram, probably good that the terriers did not have to face both powers, but, you know.    Last year OWU and Witt did not play.  Would not everyone with any interest in the conference have wanted to know the outcome of that game when OWU was having such a good year?  Seems to me that the players (not to say the fans) were cheated a bit. The possibility of a freakish constellation of who beat who was always possible
    This apparently drove the coaches to distraction, and they are very much in favor of the round robin I've heard.  Recall that last year Kenyon could have won the conference, and several years back the Lords almost did the same thing.   Of course, Kenyon did not play the perennial top of the group last year.  Imagine, except for one late loss, they could have represented the NCAC in the playoffs--an outcome that might not have displeased the conference administration (and some of the conference schools), spreading the wealth.  Kenyon had a nice season and a nice team, but to be the conference champion without playing the usual powers ? . . .can you imagine what a  big defeat to, say, Heidelberg would have done to a conference reputation that is already weak.  (This despite some good playoff showings in recent years:  Witt over Berg, Wabash over No. Central.  Even these wins some regard as lucky; maybe they were; but they went toe to toe with teams from conferences that have better reputations--teams that were favored to win those games.)  Yes, playing the UAA was interesting, and early games vs. non-UAA opponents produced comparison outcomes occasionally.  That is lost.  Careful first-game scheduling can still produce good match-ups.   On the whole the conference is probably better off, though there is certainly something to be said for more non-conference games. 

[Mr. Ypsi]

Yeah, not having a round-robin (or double in basketball, or triple in baseball) is inherently problematic.  But having virtually no non-conference games is also inherently problematic.

Exactly why have long advocated that 8 is the perfect conference number.  Any odd number is a nightmare for football scheduling.  6 is not enough for an AQ.  10 means only one non-con game.  With 8 you have such a nice balance IMO - football: 7 conference, 3 OOC; basketball: 14 conference, 11 OOC; baseball: 21 conference, 19 OOC.

[fantastic50]

Eight is great, except when one of your members isn't coed.  If you have only seven schools fielding women's teams, then you're one defection (as with Earlham) or one school dropping some sports for financial reasons, away from losing your AQs to the national tournaments.  Also, in some sports where your nearby non-conference opponents are limited (field hockey and lacrosse) come to mind, you don't want to be looking for non-league games at a point in the season when nearby larger leagues are already into conference play.

Because of Wabash, I think that ten makes more sense than eight for the NCAC, but I agree that there are lot of good things about an eight-member conference.

[Li'l Giant]

Preseason Top 25 out. Wittenberg #10, Wabash #25, OWU receiving votes. Thoughts? Comments?

Can't wait for the season to start. I watched a replay of a 2012 game last night just because I needed a football fix.

[wally_wabash]

Preseason Top 25 out. Wittenberg #10, Wabash #25, OWU receiving votes. Thoughts? Comments?

I think Wittenberg has top ten potential.  I certainly think OWU is top 25 caliber and perhaps much higher if they can solve the red zone against good teams.  Wabash might be better than both of them (they were last year, lest we forget).  I think you'll probably see two NCAC schools in the top 25 when the legit polling happens in August and then throughout the season.  I don't know if we'll ever see three NCAC schools in the top 25 at the same time this year because it's hard for me to see enough voters convince themselves to vote for three schools from our conference.  

Sounds about right to me, except I didn't expect this top 25 for another couple of weeks. 

[ADL70]

Pat:

Did OWU get 32 votes or are they out of order at #31?

[wally_wabash]

Pat:

Did OWU get 32 votes or are they out of order at #31?

Probably 32 votes....but you're going to draw some ire for suggesting that the Top 25 ranks more than 25 teams.   

[Pat Coleman]

Good catch. I swear I looked it over for that specific thing but I clearly missed it.

[ADL70]

Pat:

Did OWU get 32 votes or are they out of order at #31?

Probably 32 votes....but you're going to draw some ire for suggesting that the Top 25 ranks more than 25 teams.   

Looks like it was 22 pts.

[Bishopleftiesdad]

OWU has their roster up. No Freshman listed as yet though. I count 56, with a breakdown that follows.

17 SR.
20 JR.
19 So.

http://www.battlingbishops.com/roster.aspx?roster=57&path=football

[Bishopleftiesdad]

D3 pre-season All-American team is out.

http://www.d3football.com/awards/all-americans/2013-preseason

Only NCAC player is 2nd team Tight end Calvin Cagney, Jr., Ohio Wesleyan.

Go Bishops.

[BashDad]

D3Football.com All American Scoreboard:

Franklin - 4
Mt. Union - 3

I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'.

[D3MAFAN]

D3Football.com All American Scoreboard:

Franklin - 4
Mt. Union - 3

I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'.

Can probably be translated as 4 turnovers to 3 incompletions. JK! But good observation.

[smedindy]

D3Football.com All American Scoreboard:

Franklin - 4
Mt. Union - 3

I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'.

Of course, there's the other 18 for Franklin vs. the other 19 for Mt. Union...