FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[DarkSide-D]

WCLegacy,

Another point of pride for the conference would be Witts winningest program in d3 and bashes 7th (I believe, I could be wrong though)

Heres hopin for a GREAT rebound for next week's contests.

Lets go scots (and all the NCAC)!

[Ryan Tipps]

True enough, DSD. 

It's also worth mentioning that OWU clocks in on the same list as having the 10th most wins in Div-III. Denison is just a little ways down the list at No. 21.

Some things to smile about, for sure.

[b4uknewit]

Smeds-- It's too early in the season for you to be bitching about spelling. Besides,  I went to Ferris State in Michigan and hockey players have no pride in pucking spelling! so leave the OAC out of it!           DarkSide--We both have our opinions and that is how it should be. Games are played in quarters. Scores will be back and forth.  The final results are what count.  Good luck to NCAC teams down the road and hope there are no more criticle injuries. 

[Bashbacker765]

Was anyone else at the Wheaton scrimmage?  I don't want to hear the QB's Dad brag on him.  I have watched him for 3 years.  He is OK at best.  I'm a die hard Wally, but can't stand someone blowing smoke up everyones a$$'s, to try to promote their own son.  It might be time to let someone else make the comments about the QB's at Wabash.

WABASH ALWAYS FIGHTS!

[gobash]

Wow...saucer of milk, table two.  Rowr.

Maybe you could just take what he has to say with a grain of salt, and not call him out in public for supporting his kid? 

Sure he has a vested interest in the QB position, but there's more that happened at the scrimmage than what went on at QB, and I'm glad he reported what he saw.  We'll see for ourselves next week who Creighton goes with, and how they perform. 

I'm far more interested in falling in love with Don Juan's running skills, anyway...what an awesome name.

[scotty]

quit bickering...you sound like Depauw people...you Wallys are a complicated lot...every time i get mad at you, you strike a cord...lets get the NCAC a little respect...ps, Wooster found a rb...now we need to get the oline healthy...

[smedindy]

jdean -

As long as the conference gets its collective hat handed to it in non-conference games, the NCAC won't get the respect of others, and this year probably won't get the seeding if everyone futzes around non-conference.

It's never to early to complain about spelling. Especially when it's egregious! And needles an OAC defender.

[Pat Coleman]

"Most wins in Division III" is really more like "most all-time wins for programs currently in Division III."

I'd be far more interested in seeing what teams have actually won in the time they actually were Division III. Not sure games in 1896 have much bearing on today.

[gobash]

Are you kidding?  DePauw beat us in our 1896 game...we've still got retribution in store for that one

[Ryan Tipps]

You're right, Pat. The fact that these are all-time wins for teams currently in Division III is what I was attempting to convey when I typed out my message.

But, I think it's acceptable to look at the whole of the program, because otherwise you're forced to make the purely subjective decision as to when history becomes irrelevant.

Even decades ago in the early days Div-III, the league was a much different beast than it is today. The way teams played and performed in, say, 1973 is just as meaningless as 1896. But, no matter the year, it is all a part of the history of that program, and there's a lot for these NCAC schools to be proud of, Division III or before.

[Pat Coleman]

I know you're just repeating what people commonly call that list. The fact is the title of the list is misleading, though, and it's something I often correct when it comes to me in copy from schools.

Still, there's a point to being accurate to the term given to the list (post-1972). And if 1896 is irrelevant, then should we have 20 years of irrevalance (1973 to say 1993) or 97 years?

[Ryan Tipps]

Still, there's a point to being accurate to the term given to the list (post-1972).

I will reveal my shortcomings here and say that I don't exactly understand your point about the term given to the list. It's past 2 a.m., so that may having something to do with it for me. Can you clarify? Your post makes it sound like the list includes only results from after '72, which is certainly not the case since the total games pushes 1000 for some of the aforementioned teams. I'm sure I'm missing something.

If you want to correlate history with the current progress of a team, then you probably shouldn't go back more than 10 years. But, that's a subjective decision on my part. Others could easily argue differently. I think 10 years back still has an impact on recruiting and coaching.

With regards to (ir)relevance, I suppose that I'm leaning toward being all-inclusive.  Anything beyond 10 or so years is pretty much irrelevant, so if you're going to include two decades starting in '73, why not go back all the way to the begining. It might not have been Div-III, but the playing field among teams was still level in regards to how a program operated -- and succeeded or failed.

[Pat Coleman]

Yeah -- what I'm saying is that a list by that name should only include wins by that school in Division III (post-1972, for those who have been in D-III as long as it has existed).

This list rewards longevity, rather than solely quality.

And I would definitely dispute a level playing field. Some current D-III schools played in more than one major bowl game, while others played non-major schedules exclusively.

[Ryan Tipps]

Thanks for restating. Now I certainly see what you're saying. I suppose that if I had it my way, the list would best serve us by stating the all-time wins with perhaps the post-1972 wins in parenthesis. Or evening flipping the two numbers around and putting the all-time historical numbers in parenthesis. That way, the list is all inslusive, everyone is happy and there would be no accusations of the record book being misleading.

Some current D-III schools played in more than one major bowl game, while others played non-major schedules exclusively.

Interesting. Learn something new every day. My longtime understanding was that, prior to the divisions split, all teams competed in the same pool vying for the same prize. I always thought that each team was afforded the same opportunities and restirctions, whether that be in regards scheduling, recruiting or anything else. It sounds like that wasn't the case. My mistake then. Thanks for the new insight.

[aueagle]

This board spoke this summer about out of conference play and how it is so important. For the next two weeks we will have a complete story on our strengths/weakness. I still give kudos to Witt for stepping up to play Dayton and the others this season. Nice job by Albion in their play vs Butler.  I know it's the Bulldogs, but Albion still went up a level to play 'em. GO BISHOPS