FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[ExTartanPlayer]

In addition to its kicking woes, OWU was terrible on third down, something like 1 conversion for the game.   

I missed the entire game and am bummed that I did - can you elaborate on the kicking problems?  That's been a strong point for the past 4 years and I'm shocked to hear it may have cost the game.

Mackenzie is 3-9 on field goals for the year.  I can't say if he just has the shanks or if OWU isn't executing properly pre-kick.  I do know one of those FGs on Saturday night was blocked.  But still, 3-9 is not good.  It's not good to the point where you probably have to start thinking twice about putting that field goal unit on the field in 4th and short situations.

Wasn't Mackenzie -  Adam Vinatieri last year?

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/19276/why-are-nfl-teams-afraid-of-the-dark

"The reality is that kickers just aren't consistent from year to year. If kicking were a consistent skill, guys who are scary accurate in one season would also be at the top of the leaderboards the following season. Research has shown that not to be the case. Here's a simple chart we put together, consisting of every kicker since 1999 who attempted 20 field goals or more in each of two consecutive seasons. You're about to realize just how maddeningly inconsistent placekickers are.

(there's a chart in the article - click the link)

Look at that chart again. That's crazy. If you take the league's most accurate kickers in a given season and compare them to the NFL's least accurate ones, the least accurate kickers are better on field goals in the subsequent season. Of those 41 kickers who had seasons where they converted 89 percent of their kicks or more, just four of them repeated the feat in the following year. The reality is that kickers don't have a big enough sample size in a given season to exhibit a true level of ability; think about how accurate or inaccurate a quarterback can be in 30 pass attempts, or how a .300 hitter can go 2-for-33 and nobody blinks an eye. That's a full season for a kicker. You're better off using a kicker's performance over three or four seasons to judge his true level of ability."

Obviously there's more to it than that - and in Division III there is a gulf between good kickers and bad ones, it's not like ability doesn't matter AT ALL - but the point stands that kickers, even good ones, are not necessarily consistent from year-to-year.  This is one of the reasons I'd been pounding the "OWU's record last year exaggerated the team's true ability" table, by the way.  It was hard to believe all those FG's that went their way last year would go their way again.  Now, they aren't, and suddenly everyone's asking "What's wrong with OWU?"

Also: Mackenzie was 18/29 last year and 29/33 on PAT's.  Those are good numbers for a D3 kicker but hardly exceptional.  60% accuracy on FG's and 90% on PAT's.  And it's not like they tried a bunch of 50-yarders that brought his average down; they did try eight from 40+ and he was 3/8.  Remove those and he's 15/21 from 39 yards and in, which is still pretty average.  Mackenzie is a decent-but-not-great kicker that had a lot of opportunities last year.  He does deserve some credit for coming through with key kicks that happened at the end of games/halves (the kick to beat Case, a 46-yarder at the end) but in some Cases (pardon the pun) if he had made kicks earlier in the game (he missed a 26-yarder and a 36-yarder earlier in the game) that would have been irrelevant. 

[ADL70]

Any one in Central Ohio looking for Prez Cup tix PM me.  I probably have one avail for each day.

[wally_wabash]

Whatever is going on at Allegheny, and what the president's view of football is, or the Trustees', the AD is married to a football coach.  He coached at Wabash and is now coaching at Gannon.  I can tell you that she is pro-sports and loves football.  I talked to her on Saturday, and she expressed embarrassment.  I can't imagine really that Allegheny would think of dropping football.  I can understand the post from a frustrated supporter after the Gators' start this season'

Having said this, I repeat what I posted earlier.  The current Allegheny team is a surprise, I 'd guess to all of us, and certainly to themselves.  No QB with experience:  they started smallish freshman QB in their first game, and when he went down Saturday the reason was obvious why he was elevated to #1 so quickly.  I'm not saying he will always be what he is now, but he is what he is now.  I'm just going with two observations here--watching them on their internet feed v. Kenyon and in person v. Wabash.  They are undersized at some positions, showed no ability to move the ball or stop the run (yes, against a very good defense out for retribution), showed no flair, (and I think expressed no positive emotion from near the beginning of the game--I hope I am wrong about this, and did not read them correctly), and did not evidence better than average abuility at any of the skill positions.  Obviously, they have problems on the lines as well.  My question is not about the Administration so much as about how they cannot find at least some of the horses they used to recruit from the rich territories of wester Pa. and northeast Ohio.  They brought in more than 40 freshmen, so it's not like the Administration has cut their numbers. If I recall, Emigh, one player who might be called a difference maker, has not played this year.  Is he injured?  On the team?  Walking into the stadium on Saturday, I saw a woman wearing an Emigh #4 jersey.  So I'm supposing he is injures.  But even Emigh is small, and he would not make up for the deficiences they show.

Thanks for sharing this information.  Makes the comment on the column sound kinda silly.

Re: the second bolded comment, I also saw them in person against Carnegie Mellon and thought essentially the same.  I'm really not trying to bash the kids' spirit or effort, but I just think they looked, well, small and slow...at virtually every position, lines included, and their RB's just look like regular guys, not difference makers.  I did think WR Andrew Niklas looked like a pretty decent player but their QB's just struggled to get him the ball.  Watching CMU against Geneva two weeks later, the difference was really striking (and Geneva really is just an OK-but-not-great team).  Geneva was more competent at every single position.

It is hard to figure how they fell off the cliff so quickly from last year's still-reasonably-average team to this train wreck.   What's really amazing is that they were ranked a respectable #107 in Kickoff and supposedly returned eight offensive and five defensive starters.  I understand struggling with a new QB but as you guys have noted, they don't look competent in ANY aspect of the game - no rushing attack, no ability to stop the run, nothing.

I kind of think we should have seen it coming maybe.  Maybe not to this extent, but I think signs were there to indicate that maybe Allegheny wasn't just going to be good ol' 5-5 Allegheny again.  Last year's offense was really bad out there.  And that was with a senior QB and a senior RB and maybe some senior help on the line as well (I'd have to check back on that).  But even with seniors at those two key skill spots, Allegheny averaged about 11 points per game.  Their high water mark for the year was 22 points scored against DePauw.  The 2012 Allegheny offense scored 13 touchdowns all year.  This year's offense is rebuilding from THAT one.  I think we probably should have seen some offensive futility coming. 

The thing that's happening this year (that we also maybe should have seen) is that they aren't defending anybody.  They had a senior-heavy defense last year that kept teams to 19 points per game...which on average gives you a decent chance to win.  But they lost those guys and they clearly don't have guys behind that group of seniors to step in...and as such the scores are getting away from Allegheny more than we would have thought. 

That's all a long-winded way of saying that this has been building (or un-building) at Allegheny for awhile.  Last year's senior laden team couldn't score with any regularity.  It's been masked somewhat by a pretty decent defense there, but now that's gone too.  I know we've kind of piled on Allegheny here a litlte bit this week, but I hope this doesn't last too long there.  They've got a recognizable football name with some history behind it and the league is better when Allegheny is good.  Here's hoping they get it turned around there in the next couple of seasons. 

[sigma one]

An earlier comment was that part of the blame for Allegheny's decline has to be placed on Matlak.  How many time have we have we heard it's not the X's and the O's, it's the Jimmies and the Joes.  As I noted when this discussion started, Allegheny sets in rich territory.  Sure, there is plenty of recruiting competition, but over time Allegheny has captured more than its share of top-tier DIII players.  The school has an excellent reputation in Western Pennsylvania, so what's changed.  I do know this:  recently Allegheny has been a .500 football team with an occasional surprise (Wabash, 2012).  Today's recruits know little or nothing of the Gators' past football excellence.  Assuming that Admissions requirements have not risen or changed (can we assume that?--and even if they have athletics has to adjust), the burden of finding competitive athletes rests on the shoulders of the coaches.  And also if financial aid policies have changed--as they have at many schools in the wake of the economic downturn--athletics has to adjust.  I am not saying that a school should violate NCAA regulations, only that many football players and other athletes are eligible for need-based aid, and some places have changed the way they award this aid, leaving a gap for the student and parents to fill.
And some schools have cut back on academic scholarship money, also challenging the recruiting of qualified student-athletes.  All this said, coaches still have to pass the test of finding those players who will make a difference--or risk consequences that will likely show up in won-lost records.
      I do not know if any of this applies to Allegheny.  I think, though, that there is a back story here.
         
     

[Bishopleftiesdad]

Over the last couple of years their has been an influx of D2 teams in Ohio, Schools that used to be NAIA, (Malone, Walsh), or did not have a football team, ODU and Lake Erie.
That adds some competition for those eastern Ohio and maybe western PA kids. Not sure if their has been anything similar in PA.

Could this combined with Sigma's propositions effected Ghenny?

[ExTartanPlayer]

Over the last couple of years their has been an influx of D2 teams in Ohio, Schools that used to be NAIA, (Malone, Walsh), or did not have a football team, ODU and Lake Erie.
That adds some competition for those eastern Ohio and maybe western PA kids. Not sure if their has been anything similar in PA.

Could this combined with Sigma's propositions effected Ghenny?

Sort of, but not really. Seton Hill (now division 2) added football within the past decade and maybe 1-2 others have transitioned to d2 but there has always been a strong d2 presence in western PA (Cal U, IUP, Slippery Rock, Edinboro, Gannon, Mercyhurst) plus FCS schools Duquesne and Robert Morris.  The reason I don't buy this as a reason for Allegheny's downfall is that plenty of other western PA d3 schools are sailing along and doing at least okay. It's actually quite amazing to me to see the number of football-playing colleges in PA, OH, and Michigan.  Shows how many "solid" HS football players come from this region even if we don't produce the volume of D-1 studs from Texas, Florida, and California.

[Bishopleftiesdad]

Thanks ETP.

[smedindy]

I wonder how Allegheny's overall student recruitment and retention figures are doing? I know they've always been regarded as a good school in the US News Rankings. Not elite, but holding their own.

Athletics is somewhat a special animal but if their enrollment is down and / or they're needing more full-pay students then there could be something underlying their issues. Also, as alluded to, their previous AD seemed to let the entire program slide a bit, which was first shown in a dismal men's hoop showing the past two seasons.

I'm finally going to get registered in the VSE Fundraising database so I can gander at their fundraising figures soon.

[sigma one]

ExTartanPlayer:  Excepting CMU, which I place in a separate class, I cannot think of a DIII school in Western Pa. with a better academic reputation than Allegheny.  I know that supporters of various institutions will champion their own schools.  That's understandable.  Objective analysis shows Allegheny among a strong group of National Liberal Arts Colleges.  Some might lean toward W& J, also a fine place, and with a consistently strong DIII football tradition.  But I would place W & J a notch below Allegheny on the academic scale--one reason they might get athletes that Allegheny cannot. 
     Allegheny is not so elite that some good student-athletes would avoid applying or better said, from being recruited by Allegheny coaches to apply.
       Sometimes--and I am not saying this is 'Gheny--schools trying to raise the academic profile of the student body place subtle and not so subtle pressures on Admissions and coaches to recuit a "better caliber" of student.  I've seen those schools get into trouble by not remaining what they are.  It's natural to want to get better, but I don't see most schools moving much on the academic scale.
      The full-pay argument is an intriguing one.  Many places are trying to recruit more full-pay or mostly-pay students to improve their budgets and lower their discount rate.  Hum.  Allegheny?   Who knows the reasons for the Gators's current situation.  Probably a combination of factors, which we all hope is temporary.  But it's hard to rise from the ashes given current competition for student-athletes.  The school has to want it to happen. 
     

[ExTartanPlayer]

ExTartanPlayer:  Excepting CMU, which I place in a separate class, I cannot think of a DIII school in Wester Pa. with a better academic reputation than Allegheny.  I know that supporters of various institutions will champion their own schools.  That's understandable.  Objective analysis shows Allegheny among a strong group of National Liberal Arts Colleges.  Some might lean toward W& J, also a fine place, and with a consistently strong DIII football tradition.  But I would place W & J a notch below Allegheny on the academic scale--one reason they might get athletes that Allegheny cannot. 

No firsthand knowledge about the latter part of your post and whether that is happening at Allegheny.  You are correct that CMU is generally in a different "class" (research-driven university vs. smaller liberal arts schools) and thus they are not competing against one another for student-athletes; most high school students considering CMU are not also considering the other schools listed here, so I don't think what goes on at CMU really has any bearing on what goes on at Allegheny (other than their head-to-head games, of course).

These are the Division III schools in Western PA: Allegheny, Carnegie Mellon, Geneva, Grove City, St. Vincent, Thiel, W & J, Waynesburg, Westminster.  There are obviously some in central PA and plenty in eastern OH that also are recruiting from the same pool, but that's too many to list.  Grove City also probably should be placed in its own class, being a very conservative Christian school, and probably draws students for reasons other than academic reputation.  Beyond that, I think Allegheny and W & J are the two that would stand out to me, but I don't think - keyword: think - that Allegheny is so far "above" the others academically that they cannot recruit athletes who are reasonable targets for others on this list.  Admittedly, I don't know that for sure.

[sigma one]

ExTartanPlayer:  Thanks for thinking through the DIII schools in western Pa.  I certainly agree with what you say on recruitng and academic quality.  Years ago, and I mean Years Ago, I can recall most of the better students and football players in that part of the world looking to Allegheny as The Place.  That does not mean they all applied there and eventually went there. 
     I do think a big factor is that today's football players don't recall Allegheny's glory days.  Whatever else is happening, well, time will tell us more about Allegheny's commitment to excellence or competitiveness in football.  The Gators were 8-2 several years ago, but generally they have been "average" in terms of wins and losses.  Maybe I am just too much recalling fondly the time when Allegheny was really good--and denying the reality of current circumstances.  I try to dilute this attitude by thinking that they have had several injuries, but I don't know how much different the Gators would be with a couple of players back on the field. This year is extreme so far, but they have been average, or maybe slightly above, for some years (and, yes, how many times have we pointed out that they beat Wabash last year, a great win in an otherwise pedestrian season).  The result of last weekend as well as the scores earlier this year are fresh to us and so magnifies their difficulties.  We (I) have never thought of Allegheny in the same category as Oberlin, Kenyon, Hiram, even Denison (cyclical--they appear to be on the rise).  Should I start doing that?  Or should I believe, as several have pointed out, that it is  cyclical at Allegheny?  A strong Allegheny is a big plus for the conference.     

     

[ExTartanPlayer]

ExTartanPlayer:  Thanks for thinking through the DIII schools in western Pa.  I certainly agree with what you say on recruitng and academic quality.  Years ago, and I mean Years Ago, I can recall most of the better students and football players in that part of the world looking to Allegheny as The Place.  That does not mean they all applied there and eventually went there. 
     I do think a big factor is that today's football players don't recall Allegheny's glory days.  Whatever else is happening, well, time will tell us more about Allegheny's commitment to excellence or competitiveness in football.  The Gators were 8-2 several years ago, but generally they have been "average" in terms of wins and losses.  Maybe I am just too much recalling fondly the time when Allegheny was really good--and denying the reality of current circumstances.  I try to dilute this attitude by thinking that they have had several injuries, but I don't know how much different the Gators would be with a couple of players back on the field. This year is extreme so far, but they have been average, or maybe slightly above, for some years (and, yes, how many times have we pointed out that they beat Wabash last year, a great win in an otherwise pedestrian season).  The result of last weekend as well as the scores earlier this year are fresh to us and so magnifies their difficulties.  We (I) have never thought of Allegheny in the same category as Oberlin, Kenyon, Hiram, even Denison (cyclical--they appear to be on the rise).  Should I start doing that?  Or should I believe, as several have pointed out, that it is  cyclical at Allegheny?  A strong Allegheny is a big plus for the conference.     

Agreed.  I'm a LITTLE young to remember when Allegheny was REALLY good but it wasn't too far out of my consciousness (i.e. I was aware that they used to be REALLY good, even though they were on the downslope by the time I was getting recruited for college ball).  When they were added to our 2007 schedule, I still thought "Cool! We're playing Allegheny, they're pretty good, that should be a good game!"

It's funny what time can do to our memories without checking the facts; for some reason I'd always thought of Allegheny as a step ahead of the middle-pack schools in my second bolded passage there, I always thought of them as one step behind Wabash/Witt and one step ahead of everyone else, recalling seasons like that 8-2 year in 2009 (and the 7-3 team that followed, which may have been better but played a tougher schedule that included a Case team coming off three straight playoff appearances in addition to the big W's; the three losses were all closer than the two losses the 2009 team sustained)...but then, looking back through the mid-2000's, they probably haven't fit that classification for a long time.  I think, yeah, they're really more in that category with the "blah" teams in the conference right now.

[wally_wabash]

I'm leafing through the NCAA stats and I just keep shaking my head.  Some things that stand out...

- as mentioned, Wabash has the #1 scoring offense and #1 scoring defense.  Always a good combo of winning football. 

- Wabash leads the nation in 3rd down defense...opponents are just 3-38 on 3rd down.  Yikes. 

- Wabash leads the nation in red zone defense....because nobody has been in the red zone against Wabash this year.  In fact, you have to go back to the second quarter of the Oberlin game last year to find the last time a Wabash opponent's offense took a snap in the red zone. 

- Wabash has the #9 rushing offense (the NCAA is missing one game's worth of Wesleyan's stats so their placement is not accurate).  That is the top rushing offense amongst teams that do NOT run some kind of triple option. 

- 100% scoring in the red zone.  Great execution on the short field. 

I know, I know.  Who have they played?  Let's just take a wait and see approach...Denison just knocked off OWU on the road and could very well wind up being the team that goes 7-2 or 6-3 in league play.  Hanover is still winless, but they were picked to finish 2nd in the HCAC.  Look at their schedule.  They could very well not lose again until week 11 and once again be playing Franklin for a shot at the HCAC title (they'll lose by a thousand, but they could be playing for the title nonetheless).   

I'm not trying to make a case here that Denison and Hanover are great or even good teams.  They aren't.  But I don't think those two teams are as bad as maybe people want to think they are.  Especially Hanover...I think they're quite a bit better than they're getting credit for currently.

[firstdown]

Wally

Wabash is also number 3 in net punting.  Defense, offense, and the kicking game - a nice trifecta.

[ExTartanPlayer]

- as mentioned, Wabash has the #1 scoring offense and #1 scoring defense.  Always a good combo of winning football. 

Yeah, this is pretty good, I guess.

I'll agree with you that their competition is as bad as it may look on the surface.  I don't think either Hanover or Denison is going to be confused for a Top 25 opponent but Hanover is likely to win a fistful of HCAC games (although given their loss to MSJ, I think the "they could be playing Franklin for the HCAC title" angle, while technically correct, is misleading) and Denison may win 6 or even 7 games now that they're 3-1 and already have Wabash and OWU in the rearview mirror.  They're probably middle-class opponents rather than the doormats Wabash made them look like.