FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[wally_wabash]

As an important aside, let me say that Division III is, in my view, now at the point that too many of its members are wanting to be like the big boys.  I'm not talking about scholarships.  I'm talking about perhaps too much emphasis on athletics by too many schools.  After all,  a founding principle of DIII, and one still often articulated, is athletic competition with emphasis on the participation of the student-athlete.  Now, as reflected on these boards, there is more and more emphasis on winning and advancing throughout the playoffs.  Not by everyone, of course, but by  more than a few institutions.  I could argue that schools and their student-athletes might be, might be I'm saying,  just as well served, or better served, putting their equipment away after conference play is over, declaring a conference champion, and moving on.

If the "big boys" ever decide to withdraw from the NCAA, in order to take all of the (March Madness and College Football Playoff) loot, I think that what you are describing will happen.  D-3 national playoffs wouldn't exist without subsidization from D-I TV broadcast revenue.  If that breakup happens (and I think that it's very possible), then I suspect we might see "bowl games" (minus the travel to warm destinations) before Thanksgiving break, matching conference champs in football (OAC vs WIAC, NCAC vs HCAC, etc.).  Other sports might have some sort of regional championship (maybe a four-team Great Lakes regional basketball championship among conference champs from the NCAC, OAC, HCAC, and MIAC, held at Hope, Wooster, Witt, or Calvin), but that would probably be the end of it.  While I enjoy seeing the "battles" for a trip to Salem as much as the next guy, like sigma one, I'm not so sure that scaling back the commitments associated with being a D-III athlete (non-traditional seasons, etc.) would be a bad thing.

Hmmm...who pays for the bowl games?  Travel, lodging, trophy(?), venue, etc.?  Do we think those things would just magically happen in the absence of an NCAA sponsored tournament?  With respect to timing, those games on the first weekend of the tournament (which is when these hypothetical "bowl" games would take place) are often lightly attended; the game is on the front end of the Thanksgiving break.  If the goal is to make money by selling tickets, I don't know how feasible that is.  And we should keep in mind that the goal here would be to make money.  We get a tournament because the NCAA subsidizes the cost.  Without that organization behind it, there is no postseason. 

Narrowing the focus to Wabash specifically, I don't know what the appeal is for an exhibition game the week after the Monon Bell Classic.  That "bowl" game won't approach the magnitude of Wabash's season finale.  To be fair playoff games are also different from the Bell game, but there is a substantial pot of gold at the end of that rainbow.  An exhibition game in front 1,500 people against the MIAA champion the week after playing in front of 11,000 fans?  Why?  I can easily see justification for student athletes from 32 teams extending their season in pursuit of a national championship...I don't know if I see the same justification for extending the season for an exhibition. 

[DagarmanSpartan]

What are Oberlin's prospects for this season?

The only reason I ask is because this may be the last year that CWRU and Oberlin play each other for a LONG time, once CWRU joins the PAC.

[wally_wabash]

What are Oberlin's prospects for this season?

The only reason I ask is because this may be the last year that CWRU and Oberlin play each other for a LONG time, once CWRU joins the PAC.

Probably a bit of a reboot for Oberlin this year.  I would expect CWRU to be fine in that game. 

[smedindy]

As an important aside, let me say that Division III is, in my view, now at the point that too many of its members are wanting to be like the big boys.  I'm not talking about scholarships.  I'm talking about perhaps too much emphasis on athletics by too many schools.  After all,  a founding principle of DIII, and one still often articulated, is athletic competition with emphasis on the participation of the student-athlete.  Now, as reflected on these boards, there is more and more emphasis on winning and advancing throughout the playoffs.  Not by everyone, of course, but by  more than a few institutions.  I could argue that schools and their student-athletes might be, might be I'm saying,  just as well served, or better served, putting their equipment away after conference play is over, declaring a conference champion, and moving on.

If the "big boys" ever decide to withdraw from the NCAA, in order to take all of the (March Madness and College Football Playoff) loot, I think that what you are describing will happen.  D-3 national playoffs wouldn't exist without subsidization from D-I TV broadcast revenue.  If that breakup happens (and I think that it's very possible), then I suspect we might see "bowl games" (minus the travel to warm destinations) before Thanksgiving break, matching conference champs in football (OAC vs WIAC, NCAC vs HCAC, etc.).  Other sports might have some sort of regional championship (maybe a four-team Great Lakes regional basketball championship among conference champs from the NCAC, OAC, HCAC, and MIAC, held at Hope, Wooster, Witt, or Calvin), but that would probably be the end of it.  While I enjoy seeing the "battles" for a trip to Salem as much as the next guy, like sigma one, I'm not so sure that scaling back the commitments associated with being a D-III athlete (non-traditional seasons, etc.) would be a bad thing.

Hmmm...who pays for the bowl games?  Travel, lodging, trophy(?), venue, etc.?  Do we think those things would just magically happen in the absence of an NCAA sponsored tournament?  With respect to timing, those games on the first weekend of the tournament (which is when these hypothetical "bowl" games would take place) are often lightly attended; the game is on the front end of the Thanksgiving break.  If the goal is to make money by selling tickets, I don't know how feasible that is.  And we should keep in mind that the goal here would be to make money.  We get a tournament because the NCAA subsidizes the cost.  Without that organization behind it, there is no postseason. 

Narrowing the focus to Wabash specifically, I don't know what the appeal is for an exhibition game the week after the Monon Bell Classic.  That "bowl" game won't approach the magnitude of Wabash's season finale.  To be fair playoff games are also different from the Bell game, but there is a substantial pot of gold at the end of that rainbow.  An exhibition game in front 1,500 people against the MIAA champion the week after playing in front of 11,000 fans?  Why?  I can easily see justification for student athletes from 32 teams extending their season in pursuit of a national championship...I don't know if I see the same justification for extending the season for an exhibition.

If there is no playoff structure for D-3 I'd just rather end the season. I can't see playoffs ending, though.

[wabco]

Smed

I think better stated is:   

"If there is no playoff structure for D-3 I'd just rather just end the season by thrashing the Dannies and walking away. I can't see playoffs ending, though."

[ExTartanPlayer]

As an important aside, let me say that Division III is, in my view, now at the point that too many of its members are wanting to be like the big boys.  I'm not talking about scholarships.  I'm talking about perhaps too much emphasis on athletics by too many schools.  After all,  a founding principle of DIII, and one still often articulated, is athletic competition with emphasis on the participation of the student-athlete.  Now, as reflected on these boards, there is more and more emphasis on winning and advancing throughout the playoffs.  Not by everyone, of course, but by  more than a few institutions.  I could argue that schools and their student-athletes might be, might be I'm saying,  just as well served, or better served, putting their equipment away after conference play is over, declaring a conference champion, and moving on.

If the "big boys" ever decide to withdraw from the NCAA, in order to take all of the (March Madness and College Football Playoff) loot, I think that what you are describing will happen.  D-3 national playoffs wouldn't exist without subsidization from D-I TV broadcast revenue.  If that breakup happens (and I think that it's very possible), then I suspect we might see "bowl games" (minus the travel to warm destinations) before Thanksgiving break, matching conference champs in football (OAC vs WIAC, NCAC vs HCAC, etc.).  Other sports might have some sort of regional championship (maybe a four-team Great Lakes regional basketball championship among conference champs from the NCAC, OAC, HCAC, and MIAC, held at Hope, Wooster, Witt, or Calvin), but that would probably be the end of it.  While I enjoy seeing the "battles" for a trip to Salem as much as the next guy, like sigma one, I'm not so sure that scaling back the commitments associated with being a D-III athlete (non-traditional seasons, etc.) would be a bad thing.

Hmmm...who pays for the bowl games?  Travel, lodging, trophy(?), venue, etc.?  Do we think those things would just magically happen in the absence of an NCAA sponsored tournament?  With respect to timing, those games on the first weekend of the tournament (which is when these hypothetical "bowl" games would take place) are often lightly attended; the game is on the front end of the Thanksgiving break.  If the goal is to make money by selling tickets, I don't know how feasible that is.  And we should keep in mind that the goal here would be to make money.  We get a tournament because the NCAA subsidizes the cost.  Without that organization behind it, there is no postseason. 

Narrowing the focus to Wabash specifically, I don't know what the appeal is for an exhibition game the week after the Monon Bell Classic.  That "bowl" game won't approach the magnitude of Wabash's season finale.  To be fair playoff games are also different from the Bell game, but there is a substantial pot of gold at the end of that rainbow.  An exhibition game in front 1,500 people against the MIAA champion the week after playing in front of 11,000 fans?  Why?  I can easily see justification for student athletes from 32 teams extending their season in pursuit of a national championship...I don't know if I see the same justification for extending the season for an exhibition.

All excellent points, not much to add except a personal anecdote confirming wally's suspicion of attendance and general "meh" campus attitude toward said games: my senior year at CMU, we played Gettysburg in a bowl game at our place on that front end of Thanksgiving break.  There was NOBODY there other than parents, friends, relatives of the junior and senior players.  It's not like CMU is known for big attendance, but still, I was surprised at how few people came, from both teams (especially since Gettysburg is only about three hours away; my parents essentially drove PAST it every time they came to one of my home games).  It was maybe a quarter of what we'd get for a home conference game like Case Western or even nonconference games like Allegheny.

I loved playing the game; I'm glad we did it in that specific context, it gave us one more game on the back end of a 6-4 season that we had closed with some serious momentum.  But wally makes a point about the likely sparse attendance at these types of games, and how it may be a real downer from the season finale for teams that have a big rivalry game or win a conference title (remember, in this hypothetical we're talking about what happens if the playoffs don't exist).

[wally_wabash]

All excellent points, not much to add except a personal anecdote confirming wally's suspicion of attendance and general "meh" campus attitude toward said games: my senior year at CMU, we played Gettysburg in a bowl game at our place on that front end of Thanksgiving break.  There was NOBODY there other than parents, friends, relatives of the junior and senior players.  It's not like CMU is known for big attendance, but still, I was surprised at how few people came, from both teams (especially since Gettysburg is only about three hours away; my parents essentially drove PAST it every time they came to one of my home games).  It was maybe a quarter of what we'd get for a home conference game like Case Western or even nonconference games like Allegheny.

I loved playing the game; I'm glad we did it in that specific context, it gave us one more game on the back end of a 6-4 season that we had closed with some serious momentum.   But wally makes a point about the likely sparse attendance at these types of games, and how it may be a real downer from the season finale for teams that have a big rivalry game or win a conference title (remember, in this hypothetical we're talking about what happens if the playoffs don't exist).

Omitted from my earlier post, but in hindsight probably shouldn't have been...I do see and completely respect the idea of "one more game" for the players, especially the seniors.  I don't think anybody would be opposed to these games based on that part of the equation alone. 

[D3MAFAN]

All excellent points, not much to add except a personal anecdote confirming wally's suspicion of attendance and general "meh" campus attitude toward said games: my senior year at CMU, we played Gettysburg in a bowl game at our place on that front end of Thanksgiving break.  There was NOBODY there other than parents, friends, relatives of the junior and senior players.  It's not like CMU is known for big attendance, but still, I was surprised at how few people came, from both teams (especially since Gettysburg is only about three hours away; my parents essentially drove PAST it every time they came to one of my home games).  It was maybe a quarter of what we'd get for a home conference game like Case Western or even nonconference games like Allegheny.

I loved playing the game; I'm glad we did it in that specific context, it gave us one more game on the back end of a 6-4 season that we had closed with some serious momentum.   But wally makes a point about the likely sparse attendance at these types of games, and how it may be a real downer from the season finale for teams that have a big rivalry game or win a conference title (remember, in this hypothetical we're talking about what happens if the playoffs don't exist).

Omitted from my earlier post, but in hindsight probably shouldn't have been...I do see and completely respect the idea of "one more game" for the players, especially the seniors.  I don't think anybody would be opposed to these games based on that part of the equation alone.

I also agree, when the student-athlete has another chance to play a game, it means so much to the individual, because for many that may be the last organize football game they ever play.

[DagarmanSpartan]

What are Oberlin's prospects for this season?

The only reason I ask is because this may be the last year that CWRU and Oberlin play each other for a LONG time, once CWRU joins the PAC.

Probably a bit of a reboot for Oberlin this year.  I would expect CWRU to be fine in that game.

Well, Case had an unusually hard time beating Oberlin last season, so I can't help but be cautious.

At the same time though, Case has one of the longest winning streaks in Division III going against the Yeoman (the last Oberlin win in the series was something like 25 years ago).

Every year, I keep wondering if this is going to be the season in which Case gets upset.

It's a shame that we won't be playing them any more.  Geographically, they're probably the closest Division III program to Case after John Carroll and Baldwin-Wallace.  Case, Western Reserve, and Case Western Reserve all have long series histories with Oberlin.

[wally_wabash]

Well, Case had an unusually hard time beating Oberlin last season, so I can't help but be cautious.

Yep...Case wasn't the only team that had trouble beating those guys last year.  When fully stocked, the 2012 Yeomen were quite formidable. 

[smedindy]

What are Oberlin's prospects for this season?

The only reason I ask is because this may be the last year that CWRU and Oberlin play each other for a LONG time, once CWRU joins the PAC.

Probably a bit of a reboot for Oberlin this year.  I would expect CWRU to be fine in that game.

Well, Case had an unusually hard time beating Oberlin last season, so I can't help but be cautious.

At the same time though, Case has one of the longest winning streaks in Division III going against the Yeoman (the last Oberlin win in the series was something like 25 years ago).

Every year, I keep wondering if this is going to be the season in which Case gets upset.

It's a shame that we won't be playing them any more.  Geographically, they're probably the closest Division III program to Case after John Carroll and Baldwin-Wallace.  Case, Western Reserve, and Case Western Reserve all have long series histories with Oberlin.

Ah, but the UAA beckoned...

[ADL70]

What are Oberlin's prospects for this season?

The only reason I ask is because this may be the last year that CWRU and Oberlin play each other for a LONG time, once CWRU joins the PAC.

Probably a bit of a reboot for Oberlin this year.  I would expect CWRU to be fine in that game.

Well, Case had an unusually hard time beating Oberlin last season, so I can't help but be cautious.

At the same time though, Case has one of the longest winning streaks in Division III going against the Yeoman (the last Oberlin win in the series was something like 25 years ago).

Every year, I keep wondering if this is going to be the season in which Case gets upset.

It's a shame that we won't be playing them any more.  Geographically, they're probably the closest Division III program to Case after John Carroll and Baldwin-Wallace.  Case, Western Reserve, and Case Western Reserve all have long series histories with Oberlin.

Ah, but the UAA beckoned...

then NCAC went to 9 conf games

and the PAC beckoned

[Bishopleftiesdad]

What are Oberlin's prospects for this season?

The only reason I ask is because this may be the last year that CWRU and Oberlin play each other for a LONG time, once CWRU joins the PAC.

Probably a bit of a reboot for Oberlin this year.  I would expect CWRU to be fine in that game.

Well, Case had an unusually hard time beating Oberlin last season, so I can't help but be cautious.

At the same time though, Case has one of the longest winning streaks in Division III going against the Yeoman (the last Oberlin win in the series was something like 25 years ago).

Every year, I keep wondering if this is going to be the season in which Case gets upset.

It's a shame that we won't be playing them any more.  Geographically, they're probably the closest Division III program to Case after John Carroll and Baldwin-Wallace.  Case, Western Reserve, and Case Western Reserve all have long series histories with Oberlin.

Ah, but the UAA beckoned...

then NCAC went to 9 conf games

and the PAC beckoned

But case used to be part of the NCAC before they were part of the UAA.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Now, now, it seems like everyone's getting their wires crossed.  Bishopleftiesdad, I believe, has inferred the original meaning behind "the UAA beckoned" comment.  It wasn't a slap at CWRU's move to the PAC starting next year, it was in reference to Case leaving the NCAC years ago.

I'm glad the UAA and NCAC schools got to play a bunch in the last few seasons, although I think everyone will be better off with the alignment(s) to come.  I am curious to see how long the dual-conference format holds up for the UAA schools in the SAA (WashU and Chicago) and PAC (CWRU and CMU).  Wouldn't be surprised if the realignment dominoes aren't quite done falling yet.  The NCAC is in a nice spot, I think, but I understand there may be some gripes about a 9-game conference schedule that might depress SOS numbers for schools that wish to play a couple of tougher OOC games.

[wally_wabash]

I'm glad the UAA and NCAC schools got to play a bunch in the last few seasons, although I think everyone will be better off with the alignment(s) to come.  I am curious to see how long the dual-conference format holds up for the UAA schools in the SAA (WashU and Chicago) and PAC (CWRU and CMU).  Wouldn't be surprised if the realignment dominoes aren't quite done falling yet.  The NCAC is in a nice spot, I think, but I understand there may be some gripes about a 9-game conference schedule that might depress SOS numbers for schools that wish to play a couple of tougher OOC games.

We've got nine league games starting this year, so that part of it is a done deal.  I may/have/will again grouse about the cost of the full round robin, namely cutting the number of elective non-conference games down to just one, but ultimately I think this arrangement is here to stay.  The sense that I get is that this full round robin arrangement is one that is pretty universally supported by the memberships' presidents, ADs, and coaches.  It isn't changing anytime soon. 

The affect on SOS is that it's just going to kind of equalize things.  You won't see an NCAC team carry a top-15 SOS like you saw Wabash do a couple of years ago.  You also won't see an NCAC team have something way down in the bottom 10th percentile like we saw from Wittenberg last year.  It's all going to settle right around the middle, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.  The bigger thing that nine league games does is that it takes away opportunities for comparisons to be made amongst teams in the region's different conferences based on results versus common opponents.  With so many teams playing just one non-league game now, there's just less intersecting data available.  The importance of the subjective leeway the RACs have when ranking teams in the North region going forward takes on added significance here.