FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[smedindy]

You play to win the league...

Thanks Herm....

Hello!

But you do play to win your league...unless, apparently, you're DePauw in which case you play to finish third and then whine about how tough the conference is. 

Even the teams in the NESCAC play to win their league, which is all they can do.

I guess Huntingdon, LaGrange, Macalester and Chapman just play, too.

[Mr. Ypsi]

You play to win the league...

Thanks Herm....

Hello!

But you do play to win your league...unless, apparently, you're DePauw in which case you play to finish third and then whine about how tough the conference is. 

Even the teams in the NESCAC play to win their league, which is all they can do.

I guess Huntingdon, LaGrange, Macalester and Chapman just play, too.

Actually, Huntington and LaGrange play to win the SLIAC.

Oh, wait ... nevermind!

[BashDad]

I wish DePauw were in that position. You're right. At the same time, if you want to make it an apples to apples comparison, put DePauw in the NCAC those four years. Don't know how that would have ended up...but I promise you, Wabash would not have won four straight in the SCAC.  

Apples to apples, in the last seven years bash has had one, maybe two, "great" teams while dpu has had none. We've won four bell games to your three, six playoff games to your zero, produced 6 d3football.com all-Americans to your 1. We average almost 3,000 more people than you at home games. We've had one coach leave-- to a D1 non-scholarship program-- while you've had three-- one to retirement, one to a high school program, and one to god-knows where. NCAC or SCAC, Wabash has built a significantly better program in recent years than Depauw. They just have. Stick to jokes about last year's game. You've earned that. We've earned the rest.

[DPU3619]

First, it's actually five to our three, but either way you make it sound like that statistic means you've kicked DePauw's ass all over West Central Indiana for the last decade. 

Playing that game is with this rivlary is all about sample size.  Yeah, you've won five to our three, but, it's also your five to our eight.  It's also your nine to our twelve.  It's also your fifty-three to our fifty-three.  That doesn't really mean anything, does it?

I don't believe any of the three of us whined about the SCAC once tonight.  We go through this every year.  We said this last year.  You guys were puffing your chest out.  The NCAC was better.  You guys gave a big fat wedgie to every team you played sans Witt.  DePauw's OWP was in the pooper and yet, somehow, someway, DePauw didn't need anywhere near the full 60 minutes to settle it very, very definitively.  Here we are again.  The only difference is that DePauw beat those teams that they haven't beaten in the past.  I don't mean this as a potshot at Wabash or the North Coast, but why is it different in 2009?  For what reason?

[bashbrother]

never a bad time to dust this one off again........but now seems somewhat appropriate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qwq7BYOnDrM

[smedindy]

First, it's actually five to our three, but either way you make it sound like that statistic means you've kicked DePauw's ass all over West Central Indiana for the last decade. 

Playing that game is with this rivlary is all about sample size.  Yeah, you've won five to our three, but, it's also your five to our eight.  It's also your nine to our twelve.  It's also your fifty-three to our fifty-three.  That doesn't really mean anything, does it?

I don't believe any of the three of us whined about the SCAC once tonight.  We go through this every year.  We said this last year.  You guys were puffing your chest out.  The NCAC was better.  You guys gave a big fat wedgie to every team you played sans Witt.  DePauw's OWP was in the pooper and yet, somehow, someway, DePauw didn't need anywhere near the full 60 minutes to settle it very, very definitively.  Here we are again.  The only difference is that DePauw beat those teams that they haven't beaten in the past.  I don't mean this as a potshot at Wabash or the North Coast, but why is it different in 2009?  For what reason?

Well, considering some of the rhetoric in past posts...

The NCAC is more competitive, year over year, based on the teams that have made the playoffs in this decade.

The NCAC is dragged down by the bottom four to five teams year over year. If Oberlin is up, Denison is down. If Kenyon is up, Hiram is way down. It just happens that way. And Ohio Wesleyan has totally derailed for some reason, but as recently as 2005 they were a good club.

As for this year...

NCAC Top 5 Massey:

Witt - 25
Wabash - 39
Allegheny - 98
Wooster - 115
Kenyon - 168

SCAC Top 5 Massey:

Centre - 61
DePauw - 67
Trinity - 83
Birmingham Southern - 96
Austin College - 103

The NCAC may be the "Big 2, Little 8" this year, but this year's SCAC reminds me of Conference USA.

[DPU3619]

You're exlcuding Millsaps, who has the highest rating of everybody at 55.  Massey is also a flawed ranking system.  Those NCAC schools are ranked as high as they are beacuse they pile up wins against the four(!) bottom feeders in that conference.  The bottom of your conference is worse than the bottom of our conference.  Cool, dude.  Those sort of results can happen in any conference in the country.  It doesn't mean that the NCAC is the bee's knees.

Also, this isn't an excuse - it's a counterpoint (plus DePauw doesn't have a lot to say about it), but what is the NCAC playoff record if they get paired up in a sub-bracket with the two OAC or two WIAC teams every single year?  A little food for thought on why Trinity doesn't ever get out of there.  They have UMHB and/or HSU every season.  Wabash and Witt have had playoff success because of the UAA, the Heartland, and the MIAA BEFORE Whitewater shows up.  That's completely ignoring what happened last year against the last team to get in.

The SCAC teams haven't been so fortunate to match-up with the SLIAC, the ODAC, or the USAC except for Millsaps getting LaGrange in the first round in 2008 & the 2006 disaster. 

2007: L @ UMHB
2006: Maybe the worst SCAC champ ever - 3 loss Millsaps - loses @ CMU
2005: L vs. UMHB
2004: L vs. UMHB
2003: L vs ETBU team
2002: Stagg
2001: BEAT UMHB. lost to Bridgewater who went to the Stagg
2000: Beat Wesley, Bridgewater, lost to HSU

It's been the ASC every year.  You can't point to the NCAC playoff record and stick your tongue out.

EDIT:  Maybe DePauw gets a shot at a favorable match-up or two if Centre wants to help us out.  8-1 maybe.  7-2 no chance. 

[smedindy]

Sorry, I did miss Millsaps.

Massey uses SOS and diminishing returns in those power rankings (not in the BCS rankings), so it's not that flawed. It's comparable to the 'real' Sagarin ratings. Beating Oberlin 30 isn't worth that much. Beating Oberlin by 7 hurts a lot more. Look back, I never said the NCAC is God's football conference. Heck, I've always stated that it's not strong at all because of Oberlin, et. al. But I also would not get rid of Oberlin because they bring a lot more to the pool than just football.

I also have been on record as to the traveshamockery that is the NCAA D-3 playoff bracketing. (I'm not as vocal as Ralph - but then who could be?) Trinity has always gotten the short end of it thanks to the proximity of MH-B. But then, unless Mt. Union moves east, and the WIAC stays in the west, there's really no chance a North team gets to the Stagg bowl unless a miracle (not Josh, sad to say) happens.

[wally_wabash]

So the bottom of our league is worse than the bottom of your league?  You're comparing varying degrees of bad...so what?.  Good teams shouldn't lose to Kenyon in the same way that good shouldn't lose to Rhodes.  And didn't the SCAC have a winless team last year?  So stop with the comparing the bottom of the conferences.  The bottom teams in a conference aren't the ones that determine who wins...it's the games between the top 3-4 teams that determine a champion.  Wabash has been able to consistently be at the top of that heap.  DePauw has not.  Again, stop with the "yeah, buts" and just do better.  You know you have to beat Trinity to win your league (well, you used to...looks like that might not be the case anymore).  Go and do it.  If the SCAC champion is Trinity, they know that they are going to have to play an ASC team in the playoffs.  It isn't a surprise...stop making excuses.  Wabash playing in a league that you consider to be inferior is not an excuse for nor does it justify DePauw failing to win their own league.  You know who you have to beat to win that league...go do it.  Wabash did it.  In three years.  DePauw is a dozen years into the SCAC now and this is as close as they've been to the AQ...and yet they still can't control their own destiny.  It's in somebody else's hands. 

[Schwami]

Alas, the NCAC does not get matched up against the ASC in the playoffs too often to make comparisons.  Last time was 2001 when Witt beat Hardin-Simmons at Hardin-Simmons.  

OK, Trinity made the Stagg Bowl in 2002.  Lost to Mount Union 48-7.  Wabash lost to Mount Union 45-16.  Some difference.

Last year Millsaps lost at home to Washington & Jefferson 35-20.  The same W & J team that beat Oberlin 49-35 (ok, maybe W&J was a different team at the end of the season than it was at the beginning of the season, but still  ).

[DPU3619]

So the bottom of our league is worse than the bottom of your league?  You're comparing varying degrees of bad...so what?.  Good teams shouldn't lose to Kenyon in the same way that good shouldn't lose to Rhodes.  And didn't the SCAC have a winless team last year?  So stop with the comparing the bottom of the conferences.  The bottom teams in a conference aren't the ones that determine who wins...it's the games between the top 3-4 teams that determine a champion.  Wabash has been able to consistently be at the top of that heap.  DePauw has not.  Again, stop with the "yeah, buts" and just do better.  You know you have to beat Trinity to win your league (well, you used to...looks like that might not be the case anymore).  Go and do it.  If the SCAC champion is Trinity, they know that they are going to have to play an ASC team in the playoffs.  It isn't a surprise...stop making excuses.  Wabash playing in a league that you consider to be inferior is not an excuse for nor does it justify DePauw failing to win their own league.  You know who you have to beat to win that league...go do it.  Wabash did it.  In three years.  DePauw is a dozen years into the SCAC now and this is as close as they've been to the AQ...and yet they still can't control their own destiny.  It's in somebody else's hands. 

Just for that, I'm uninviting myself to your tailgate.  So THERE. 

EDIT:  My point wasn't meant as a comparison.  It's pointing to what I believe is a a flaw in how Massey calucates those rankings.  I don't care about Hiram or Earlham.  You don't care about Sewanee.  What I'm saying is that when there are more bad teams at the bottom of your conference, your good conference team's Massey number is going to be naturally higher.  I think the NCAC has 2 good teams, 2 OK teams, and the rest are bad.  I think the SCAC has 2 good teams, 4 OK teams, and 2 bad teams.  The OK teams beat each other.  The conference's average Massey number is better, but if you take the Top 4 or 5 teams, of course the conference who beats the pulp out of worse teams is going to be better.  The SCAC is penalized in Massey because the conference is so much more tightly bunched save the first place team and the 0 win Sewanee team.  The 5th place team is a good Austin team that probably won't lose by more than 3 scores @ DePauw on Saturday NEXT Saturday (and JUST might win, sadly).  Wabash beat the NCAC's 5th place team 62-24.  Wabash gets more help there for beating that team by more points than DePauw beats theirs.  I understand it's not quite that simple, but you get the point of what I'm getting at.

[DPU3619]

Alas, the NCAC does not get matched up against the ASC in the playoffs too often to make comparisons.  Last time was 2001 when Witt beat Hardin-Simmons at Hardin-Simmons.  

OK, Trinity made the Stagg Bowl in 2002.  Lost to Mount Union 48-7.  Wabash lost to Mount Union 45-16.  Some difference.

Last year Millsaps lost at home to Washington & Jefferson 35-20.  The same W & J team that beat Oberlin 49-35 (ok, maybe W&J was a different team at the end of the season than it was at the beginning of the season, but still  ).

The point wasn't that Wabash doesn't match-up with the ASC.  The point was that they don't match-up with the premier conference in the North, either, except for one UWW trip. 

[BashDad]

What about the two other match ups in 2002 and 2005 with the OAC?

[DPU3619]

You lost them both.  That's my point.  Played Cap close, but still lost.  Trinity played UMHB close a lot, but lost.  If the NCAC winner played the OAC in the first or second round more often, they'd have a playoff record more in the neighborhood of where the SCAC's is.  The SCAC has a couple bitter-beer face losses, but so does the NCAC.  It's the same boat, see?

[BashDad]

I forget what we're arguing about. So trinity sucks too?