FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[ExTartanPlayer]

My choice for the entire league would be to schedule a strong, yet competitive, opponent for the non-conference game. Maybe not the Purple, but a good team that can help the NCAC in it's SOS and increase the chances of a 9-1 runner-up locking down a "C" without question, and perhaps even a very strong 8-2 team if they lose to an upper-echelon CCIW or OAC team. Down the line, a team like Hiram or Kenyon can find winnable games in the MIAA, HCAC or PrAC for sure. (In fact, Kenyon is playing Earlham in 2013 and 2014, and Allegheny is facing Carnegie - Mellon in those years as well, which fit into my idea already).

For 'Bash, it certainly seems like Franklin or the CCIW would be a good choice.
Witt may continue to look to the OAC, also a stellar choice for them.

From a "selfish" standpoint for the league front-runners, I see what you're saying above; scheduling better opponents will indirectly improve the overall SOS ratings for the entire NCAC, but you still want the NCAC schools to be able to beat those teams to help your own OWP.

I think the Allegheny-CMU series should (and will) continue; I'm sure that Coach Lackner likes playing a geographic rival, and the programs are on roughly equal footing (although 'Gheny has gotten the better of us recently, most of the games have been competitive).

I think that Wooster-CWRU should continue as well, although the CWRU program is clearly a step ahead at the moment.  They're good geographic rivals with respectable-but-not-dominant Division III programs.  This may be tricky if CWRU wants to start a series with John Carroll or another OAC team, because you've pointed out that all of the NCAC open dates will occur in week 1 and 2 (also when the OAC open dates will occur), but I suspect they'll figure something out.

Although the OAC would make a logical geographic and scheduling fit for all of the Ohio schools (since they have the same Week 1/2 open dates followed by a conference round-robin), it's hard to imagine that working out from a competitive standpoint for the Hiram, Kenyon, OWU type teams.

Bethany (WV) would make a nice midlevel PAC opponent for some of the middle-lower tier opponents in the NCAC.  They're a program that's improved to the point of respectability, but not so much that the midlevel NCAC schools couldn't compete with and beat them.  Westminster and Geneva also might fit in here.

[Pat Coleman]

Here's some thoughts:

Wabash vs. Wheaton
Wittenberg vs. Ohio Northern
DePauw vs. Trine
Allegheny vs. Carnegie Mellon
Denison vs. Bluffton
Wooster vs. Case (for the fish, if nothing else)
Ohio Wesleyan vs. Marietta
Oberlin vs. Grove City
Hiram vs. Thiel
Kenyon vs. Olivet

Agreed that Franklin is also a good match for either of the Indiana schools. OWU/Marietta may be a bit of a stretch but I feel there should be some NCAC/OAC interplay.

[wally_wabash]

I have noticed that Wabash concludes its 2012, 2013 and 2014 seasons like 2011 - the Tiger / Tiger two-step.

What I don't like is that in Week 10 in 2013 and 2014, DPU faces Hiram. I know they have to play them (and maybe the Terriers will have improved a bit), but still there's a big chasm in gearing up for the Bell game with Wittenberg vs. Hiram.

Are we looking at the same schedules?  The schedule in front of me says that Wabash plays Wittenberg in week 6 in 2012. 

As for the week 10 opponent, I'm not sure it matters all that much.  Wabash played Witt last year and the Bell Game went fairly well.   In 2008 Wabash went into the Bell Game after games with Oberlin and Hiram (won by a total score of 123-7, btw), and that didn't work out so well on Bell Saturday.  I've been guilty of this myself, but I think it gets easy to overthink things like that.  Whether you're ready to go for Monon Bell or not, I believe, has to do with the week of practice you have going into it...not so much who you have to play in week 10. 

I seem to recall somebody, I think it was Wes, that actually thinks the opposite...that it's advantageous to have that tougher game going into the Bell Game.

[WABCOL86]

Anybody here read the Tuesday Morning Quarterback over on Page2 at ESPN.com?  Gregg Easterbrook covers a lot of topics there and likes mentioning small school football a lot.  In this weeks version, he mentions Mount Union.  He praises the school for it's winning records and some of the players that have lately gone into the NFL.  But also trakes them to task over SOS and running up the score on overmatched teams.  Interesting to read.  Love to see anyone's reaction to it....

[Pat Coleman]

Easterbrook does that on a regular basis. He's not very well-informed and ignores all attempts to set the record straight. Not very professional.

[wally_wabash]

Easterbrook's act when it comes to Mount Union is tired.  The guy is absolutely ignorant. 

[smedindy]

You are right, Wally. My quality control has gone to heck down here in So. Florida...

[Li'l Giant]

Nothing else to say about Easterbrook other than to agree with Pat and Wally.

[smedindy]

I sent Easterbrook yet another note on the OAC. But I think he likes to pick on them to shame others from running up the score mercilessly. He has a point about high school programs beating teams by 60+ points, but I think when you get to college it becomes a bit different. As long as your #1 offense or defense isn't out there when it's 42-0 late in the third then it's OK, because the #2 and #3 offense and defense needs the reps in your scheme.

Same for hoops as well, if its 85-50 with 10 minutes to go the starters better be out, but don't complain about the second or third team running the offense.

[Li'l Giant]

Well, he simply chooses to ignore the fact that UMU is in a conference. What are they supposed to do? not play conference opponents? When Oklahoma beat Iowa State 52-0 last year did he say that OU was supposed to ignore the fact the Big 12 requires them to play that game?

There's no point in pointing it out to him. He's just a douche and there's no fixing that.

[aueagle]

I'm all for OAC/NCAC play...been advocating that point for years....
Won't happen right now; the NCAC is to weak to compete & there
is (I feel) still bad blood from the 1980's split.
Ohio Wesleyan can only compete with Geneva, Grove City & Thiel
from the PAC and Wilmington, Otterbein & Marietta from the OAC.
bishopowu: Your recap of the CMU game and out-look on the
Bishop program is on-target.

[DPU3619]

I seem to recall somebody, I think it was Wes, that actually thinks the opposite...that it's advantageous to have that tougher game going into the Bell Game.

You are correct.  Ideally, I want a game I'll almost certainly win, but that I'm still challenged.  I'm not going to tell my players that, but I think it's very advantageous to still have to execute to win.  Maybe I make too much out of nothing, but with all the other stuff that happens around Monon, it's nice to have recently been in the high gear instead of playing 2 or 3 cupcakes before the biggest game of the year.

May not matter much this year, but in a year where both Wabash & DePauw are competitive, I think it's incredibly advantageous to be challenged in Game #9.

[ExTartanPlayer]

I sent Easterbrook yet another note on the OAC. But I think he likes to pick on them to shame others from running up the score mercilessly. He has a point about high school programs beating teams by 60+ points, but I think when you get to college it becomes a bit different. As long as your #1 offense or defense isn't out there when it's 42-0 late in the third then it's OK, because the #2 and #3 offense and defense needs the reps in your scheme.

I wrote a note, too, FWIW. 

His blanket statement that any game with a 50+ margin is unsportsmanlike is ridiculous.  I agree with smed - as long as the starters are out, it's fair game to let the backups play your system because they might have to start next year, or even next week if a starter gets hurt.  I would probably stop passing in the fourth quarter, but that's more of a personal preference; if you play a spread offense, I have no issue with letting the backup QB run the offense for a few series.

At some point, if you outright STOP playing the game (taking knees on first down or something like that) how is that any more sportsmanlike?  Do the players on the other team feel any better?  Would you prefer to lose a game 66-7 where you actually PLAYED four quarters of football, or lose 42-7 because the opponent started punting on first down in the third quarter?  Doesn't that make you feel worse? 

(Sorry, preaching to the choir here, should try to tell Easterbrook that)

Incidentally, someone pointed out that the NY Times article (which Easterbrook himself posted a link to) praised Kehres for his admirable sportsmanship, such as kicking field goals on first down once the game was out of hand, in an effort to keep the score down.  I'm guessing that Easterbrook didn't even read the article.

His assumption that UMU is scheduling patsies is also fallacious.  The OAC is certainly one of the better conferences in Division III (although we can squabble about whether they are really the "best" or fall into the 4-5-6 range).

[wally_wabash]

I would probably stop passing in the fourth quarter, but that's more of a personal preference; if you play a spread offense, I have no issue with letting the backup QB run the offense for a few series.

You're a Tartan...y'all stop passing once the ball gets kicked off.   

[smedindy]

Regardless of if they are the best league, or in the Top 5, most every team in the OAC would be competitive or outright favorites to win in most every D-3 conference.

Another point I made was this: if Mt. Union loads up on patsies, then how the heck are they steamrolling teams in the playoffs? In 2009, their first three PLAYOFF games were 55-0, 62-14, and 55-3. That year, they only beat 'Berg 44-14 and the Muskies 45-14, and they beat an 8-2 Otterbein team 58-7.

For someone as erudite and allegedly logical as he is, it makes no sense that he continues to harp on the Purple. He also doesn't understand the D-3 culture. We're not complaining about teams getting smoked by Mt. Union. We admire Mt. Union for doing that while playing in the same rules sandbox that we have, and for giving us something to shoot for.