FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[wally_wabash]

Don't take it personal, MacLeod...just seems a little shortsighted (to me) for Fincham to deliver a soundbite about not having the calls go their way just one week after receiving the mother of all breaks in this regard.  

[ScotLass]

Hahaha.....you guys should now have more respect for my crystal ball.....

MacLeod, I gave you fair warning to pre medicate yourself! 

[Schwami]

Thank you, thank you, thank you, ScotLass, for your crystal ball, and the link.

So there is a "Rose Bowl rule" after all, but it is not the #2 tiebreaker.  To me, the #2 tiebreaker seems to make sense (after reading it about ten times before comprehending it  - but hey, I didn't go to Kenyon ).  Everything after that is rather arbitrary - but now at least we know the rules.

There was much discussion last year about the "Rose Bowl rule" while Kenyon remained undefeated.  However, tiebreaker #4 would have broken the tie between an undefeated Wabash and an undefeated Kenyon.

Interesting that non-conference games have zero relevance in the tie breaker.

[wally_wabash]

Interesting that non-conference games have zero relevance in the tie breaker.

Nor should they, in my opinion.  Teams should not be discouraged whatsoever from playing the non-conference schedule that they want.  Quite the opposite...our teams should be encouraged to go out and schedule tough, competitive non-conference games.  If you made overall win pct. a tiebreak criteria, you would be actively discouraging teams from playing games against teams like John Carroll, Alma, Capital, W&J, etc. etc.

It's very hard to envision a scenario where this tiebreak could ever get any further than 4 or 5.   This year I don't think the tiebreak could possibly get past the second provision of rule 2. 

[Superfoot Wallace]

Don't take it personal, MacLeod...just seems a little shortsighted (to me) for Fincham to deliver a soundbite about not having the calls go their way just one week after receiving the mother of all breaks in this regard.  

Wasnt much discussion on the board after the game as all the undersized Noeflem went into hiding after the loss.  Was on the road  and didnt find the score until later that night.

Just because you bold type part of Coach Finchams quote doesnt mean that was the emphasis of his soundbyte.  Maybe you guys have that impression because your across the battle field from Witt on Saturdays, but I cant imagine Coach Fincham was saying they were bad calls.  More than likely those players who committed the penalties heard more about it than we all got from a soundbyte.  Finchams not one to offer excuses.  Explanations?  Maybe.  Think he personally dislikes OWU, but the players most detest the Gators.  Expect it was more a thats the way the ball bounces comment.

Since all I saw was the final score of the Bash-Witt game would you recount the call you are questioning?  No excuses, still feel bad calls were determinative against Woo in 97 and MUC in 98.

For some the loss sets up a nice matchup with the Gators "if" Witt takes care of business until the last week of the season.  Thats the way we prefer it.  At least those who remember the lean years, both home and away against the Gators for nearly a decade after entering the league.  The Gators did take the matchup last year halting a seventeen year streak of winning seasons.

Any takes on Obi would be appreciated as well.

best regards,
Evel Kowalkowski

[Schwami]

Interesting that non-conference games have zero relevance in the tie breaker.

Nor should they, in my opinion.  Teams should not be discouraged whatsoever from playing the non-conference schedule that they want.  Quite the opposite...our teams should be encouraged to go out and schedule tough, competitive non-conference games.  If you made overall win pct. a tiebreak criteria, you would be actively discouraging teams from playing games against teams like John Carroll, Alma, Capital, W&J, etc. etc.  

I agree with you Wally - teams should not be punished for scheduling quality opponents.  This can only enhance the reputation of the conference in the long run (despite the occasional blowouts administered by Capital).

[smedindy]

I need to do my power ratings again, but Massey doesn't have a link to a listing of the MOV ratings, you have to find the teams in the non-MOV order and hunt for them.

Massey has a good SOS metric, I believe.

The NCAA's system is CRAP-OLA because it's all about the region.

[wally_wabash]

MacLeod-

Responded to you privately about the Wabash/Witt thing...no need to rehash it here with huge games forthcoming.  

As far as Oberlin goes...who knows.  Conventional wisdom would say the Obies have no shot, but they are scrappy.  The Yeomen have some playmakers and if they can protect their QB at all, they can put up points.  I'm not sure they can handle the heavy dose of Murray/Vanover that is coming their way.  In short, I don't see this game falling into Huffman's hands and as such would be shocked if Witt didn't win...more shocked that I was last week against OWU.  

[nike]

  Quote from: wally_wabash on Today at 03:08:10 pm
Here's a fun quote from Fincham about last week's game at OWU:

"Their first touchdown was on a trick play. On their second touchdown, a pass-interference penalty kept their drive alive. On their third score, the field goal, defensive holding kept their drive alive. The calls didn't go our way."Wouldn't know what that's like, coach...sounds like a bummer though.


For those who questioned why I would favor Wabash  winning out instead of Witt if Wooster  could not win conference, please read above quote. Throw in comments about Oberlin and Kenyon.......pure arrogance. And quite honestly, my visits to Witt over the years have revealed a similar attitude from, oh well, I better shut up. Just my thoughts. Would love to see the last couple plays of the Wabash- Witt game. Watched the last play of the Allegheny-Wooster game over and over after the game on Wooster's website.
I think the worse the field conditions are, the greater the possibility of an upset. It can't really be prepared for. So I now think that Wooster has a decent chance of winning tomorrow. Sheppard behind Drushal is starting to look like one of the keys to the game.
It just dawned on me that ScotLass probably is a female. Imagine that!

[ScotLass]

It just dawned on me that ScotLass probably is a female. Imagine that!

Brilliant deduction......if I had the ability I would give you some karma......speaking of karma......

[ADL70]

I'm with you Wally on the inappropriateness of fewest, conf, road, losses when there's a seven game season. That glared out at me first time through.  In the bginning, the NCAC played 6 conf games.  Could it be they've never seen the crying need to change this?
[I just saw that the coaches reaffirmed in 2004]
I grew up in Springfield a Tiger fan, and I agree there is an irony in Fincham's comment.

[Li'l Giant]

it just dawned on me that ScotLass probably is a female. Imagine that!

You must have misinterpreted all the talk of "crystal balls"

If you made overall win pct. a tiebreak criteria, you would be actively discouraging teams from playing games against teams like John Carroll, Alma, Capital, W&J, etc. etc.

Instead, the NCAC just forces us to play UAA teams.

[ADL70]

Earlham isn't playing any UAA teams.  So I don't think anyone was "forced."

[Li'l Giant]

Earlham isn't playing any UAA teams.  So I don't think anyone was "forced."

(a) I'd love to find out how Earlham got exempted from this.

(b) fine, everyone but Earlham is forced to play UAA teams.

[ADL70]

Earlham isn't playing any UAA teams.  So I don't think anyone was "forced."

(a) I'd love to find out how Earlham got exempted from this.

(b) fine, everyone but Earlham is forced to play UAA teams.

If you have evidence of the force I'll accept "(b)", "a" suggests lack of such evidence.