FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[Pat Coleman]

Read the first line here: http://about.sewanee.edu/

"Known familiarly as "Sewanee" by its students, faculty, staff and friends, The University of the South offers an unmatched educational experience. "

It no doubt has confuzzled scribes, mediots and AP score reporting drones.

And their own athletics site.
http://sewaneetigers.com/landing/index

[jknezek]

Read the first line here: http://about.sewanee.edu/

"Known familiarly as "Sewanee" by its students, faculty, staff and friends, The University of the South offers an unmatched educational experience. "

It no doubt has confuzzled scribes, mediots and AP score reporting drones.

And their own athletics site.
http://sewaneetigers.com/landing/index

This should clear it up: http://www.sewanee.edu/styleguide/name

It seems like they want it both ways. It's nice to keep the pretentious name "The University of the South" even if no one wants to call it that, but it needs to keep Sewanee for name recognition and history. Either way, I usually enjoy my trips "up on the mountain", although in the 4 times I have been to Sewanee over the last 15 years it has never failed to rain on me.

[smedindy]

I kind of like the authoritarian version myself. Kind of says, "Back off, pretenders. We're the real deal." like some  B10/12/14 (14 now, right) school from the NCAC neck of the woods.

"Clayton Molesworth III, where did you go to school?"
"Why, my dear, I went to THE University of the South...."

[Li'l Giant]

I worked at the DA's office here with a guy who went to Sewanee. And he said he went to Sewanee. I never heard him utter the words "University of the South". I don't recall what the diploma on his office wall said, but if I recall correctly it was in Latin. Which may explain why I don't remember what it said.

[sigma one]

Well, that was good for some conversation and research.  I still like the sound of University of the South. (And still not as pretentious, in my view, as The Ohio State University.)   Thanks, everyone. 

[DagarmanSpartan]

The people from my high school that attended that school usually list "The University of the South" in their credentials, resumes, etc.

HOWEVER, they usually refer to their school as "Sewanee" in everyday speech.

[bashbrother]

While the Oberlin discussion had some legs and the "University of the South" back and fourth generated some historical interest.....  This board truly needs players to report, rosters to be published and Football to start.   

A week and two days until Wabash reports?   Have other NCAC Schools that play week 1 already reported?

Lastly, are there  any new NCAA rule changes this year that will affect D3?

[Pat Coleman]

As part of writing Kickoff I've talked to about 20 schools and most of them report between the 12th and the 16th if they play Week 1. As I think most people here know, the reporting date is dependent on the first day of classes as well as the first playing date, so that's why it varies.

[wally_wabash]

While the Oberlin discussion had some legs and the "University of the South" back and fourth generated some historical interest.....  This board truly needs players to report, rosters to be published and Football to start.   

A week and two days until Wabash reports?   Have other NCAC Schools that play week 1 already reported?

Lastly, are there  any new NCAA rule changes this year that will affect D3?

Yes!  There are some important rules changes this year. 

- Disqualification of a player deemed to be targeting a defenseless player above the head.  So you're going to take 15 yards for hitting above the head, accidental or not, and now players are going to be disqualified if it is determined that a defenseless player was targeted above the shoulders.  If the disqualification occurs in the second half of a game, the disqualified player is also disqualified from the first half of the next game.  

Okay, two things.  First, good for everybody trying to protect players.  Second, I am WAY uneasy with the idea that our officials, who will not have the benefit of replay, are being told to disqualify players who hit above the head.  I'm not one to rail on officials here, but now it's important: sometimes these guys have trouble keeping track of the down or where the correct spot of the ball is.  Now we have to trust them to make a split second decisions about 1) where a particular player was contacted, 2) whether that player was "defenseless" and 3) whether the player doing the hitting was "targeting".  That's an awful lot to process and decide in a matter of seconds and the ramifications are HUGE...particularly if a penalty occurs that carries over to the following week.  I just don't know how comofortable I am with our officials determining player intent.  My hope is that disqualifications are being reserved for really egregious behavior.  My gut tells me that this is going to be a point of emphasis thing and we might see a lot of players lose games because of this that probably don't deserve to. 

Now get a load of this one:

Minimum Time For A Play After Spiking The Ball
ARTICLE 5. a. If the game clock is stopped and will start on the referee's signal with three or more seconds remaining in the quarter, the offense may reasonably expect to throw the ball directly to the ground (Rule 7-3-2-e) and have enough time for another play.
b. With two seconds or one second on the game clock there is enough time for only one play. (A.R. 3-3-5-I)

Ergo, if Team A trails by two and hits a long pass down to the 15 yard line for a first down (clock stops to move the chains) and there is 2.5 seconds left on the game clock, the NCAA has decided that it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for a team to line up, snap the ball, and throw it into the ground before time expires, which is obviously horseplop.  Teams are going to lose games because of this. 

Optional equipment- Solid white towels that are no smaller than 4"x12" and no larger than 6"x12" are permitted. 

The importance of towel uniformity can not be understated.   

Also, officials are now allowed to communicate with each other over some kind of protected wireless system.  So the game officials can skype or gchat or whatever if they want, which may lead to fewer on-field instances of #touchingofficials.

[D3MAFAN]

While the Oberlin discussion had some legs and the "University of the South" back and fourth generated some historical interest.....  This board truly needs players to report, rosters to be published and Football to start.   

A week and two days until Wabash reports?   Have other NCAC Schools that play week 1 already reported?

Lastly, are there  any new NCAA rule changes this year that will affect D3?

Yes!  There are some important rules changes this year. 


- Disqualification of a player deemed to be targeting a defenseless player above the head.  So you're going to take 15 yards for hitting above the head, accidental or not, and now players are going to be disqualified if it is determined that a defenseless player was targeted above the shoulders.  If the disqualification occurs in the second half of a game, the disqualified player is also disqualified from the first half of the next game.  

Okay, two things.  First, good for everybody trying to protect players.  Second, I am WAY uneasy with the idea that our officials, who will not have the benefit of replay, are being told to disqualify players who hit above the head.  I'm not one to rail on officials here, but now it's important: sometimes these guys have trouble keeping track of the down or where the correct spot of the ball is.  Now we have to trust them to make a split second decisions about 1) where a particular player was contacted, 2) whether that player was "defenseless" and 3) whether the player doing the hitting was "targeting".  That's an awful lot to process and decide in a matter of seconds and the ramifications are HUGE...particularly if a penalty occurs that carries over to the following week.  I just don't know how comofortable I am with our officials determining player intent.  My hope is that disqualifications are being reserved for really egregious behavior.  My gut tells me that this is going to be a point of emphasis thing and we might see a lot of players lose games because of this that probably don't deserve to. 

Now get a load of this one:

Minimum Time For A Play After Spiking The Ball
ARTICLE 5. a. If the game clock is stopped and will start on the referee's signal with three or more seconds remaining in the quarter, the offense may reasonably expect to throw the ball directly to the ground (Rule 7-3-2-e) and have enough time for another play.
b. With two seconds or one second on the game clock there is enough time for only one play. (A.R. 3-3-5-I)

Ergo, if Team A trails by two and hits a long pass down to the 15 yard line for a first down (clock stops to move the chains) and there is 2.5 seconds left on the game clock, the NCAA has decided that it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for a team to line up, snap the ball, and throw it into the ground before time expires, which is obviously horseplop.  Teams are going to lose games because of this. 

Optional equipment- Solid white towels that are no smaller than 4"x12" and no larger than 6"x12" are permitted. 

The importance of towel uniformity can not be understated.   

Also, officials are now allowed to communicate with each other over some kind of protected wireless system.  So the game officials can skype or gchat or whatever if they want, which may lead to fewer on-field instances of #touchingofficials.

Thanks for the explanation. I agree that the game is played to fast for referees in Division III without replay to make a judgement call on whether a defensive player targeted an offensive player above the shoulders/head. I recently watched a segment on television (can't remember what network) that illustrated that over the last coulple years, many defensive players have been trying to talkle better when the offensive player is exposed, yet when the offensive player catches or receives the ball, they instinctively lower their head or cringe before the hit, resulting in the penalty and now ejections. The NCAA fell to realize that in Division III Football, most players only play 10 games. Therefore, losing one game is 10% of the season, unlike other sports. Now regarding the clock stoppage on the spike, I always thought this was intentional grounding, which should result in a loss of down and a 10 yard penalty. Yet, in this topic that is not the case.

[jknezek]

Yes!  There are some important rules changes this year. 

- Disqualification of a player deemed to be targeting a defenseless player above the head.  So you're going to take 15 yards for hitting above the head, accidental or not, and now players are going to be disqualified if it is determined that a defenseless player was targeted above the shoulders.  If the disqualification occurs in the second half of a game, the disqualified player is also disqualified from the first half of the next game.  

Okay, two things.  First, good for everybody trying to protect players.  Second, I am WAY uneasy with the idea that our officials, who will not have the benefit of replay, are being told to disqualify players who hit above the head.  I'm not one to rail on officials here, but now it's important: sometimes these guys have trouble keeping track of the down or where the correct spot of the ball is.  Now we have to trust them to make a split second decisions about 1) where a particular player was contacted, 2) whether that player was "defenseless" and 3) whether the player doing the hitting was "targeting".  That's an awful lot to process and decide in a matter of seconds and the ramifications are HUGE...particularly if a penalty occurs that carries over to the following week.  I just don't know how comofortable I am with our officials determining player intent.  My hope is that disqualifications are being reserved for really egregious behavior.  My gut tells me that this is going to be a point of emphasis thing and we might see a lot of players lose games because of this that probably don't deserve to. 

There is nothing here that isn't already in other sports as well. Soccer has red cards for dangerous tackles, punches will get you thrown out of most sports, and ice hockey, where a punch won't necessarily get you thrown out, has penalties for head hunting as well. In rugby it is illegal to tackley without attempting to wrap up, making the head hunting collisions targeted by this rule an ejectable offense. The refs are going to get some right and some wrong in that split second, but after a few ejections here and there players will get more concious of tackling form so it appears they are less likely to be head hunting.

It should cause some changes in how tackling is taught and reinforced and hopefully move players away from the SportsCenter collisions that have popped up ever more frequently and back to the wrap up and drive through center mass that is less entertaining but more effective.

[Li'l Giant]

Now get a load of this one:
Minimum Time For A Play After Spiking The Ball
ARTICLE 5. a. If the game clock is stopped and will start on the referee's signal with three or more seconds remaining in the quarter, the offense may reasonably expect to throw the ball directly to the ground (Rule 7-3-2-e) and have enough time for another play.
b. With two seconds or one second on the game clock there is enough time for only one play. (A.R. 3-3-5-I)

Ergo, if Team A trails by two and hits a long pass down to the 15 yard line for a first down (clock stops to move the chains) and there is 2.5 seconds left on the game clock, the NCAA has decided that it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for a team to line up, snap the ball, and throw it into the ground before time expires, which is obviously horseplop.  Teams are going to lose games because of this. 

Yeah, this is BS.

It makes me think of the Trent Tucker rule in the NBA. Of course, that is 0.3 of a second, not 3 full seconds.

[ADL70]

Denison recruiting class:

http://www.denisonbigred.com/sports/fball/2013-14/files/fbrecruits_13.pdf

The big get is Chagrin Falls All State QB Tommy Iammarino

[wally_wabash]

Yes!  There are some important rules changes this year. 

- Disqualification of a player deemed to be targeting a defenseless player above the head.  So you're going to take 15 yards for hitting above the head, accidental or not, and now players are going to be disqualified if it is determined that a defenseless player was targeted above the shoulders.  If the disqualification occurs in the second half of a game, the disqualified player is also disqualified from the first half of the next game.  

Okay, two things.  First, good for everybody trying to protect players.  Second, I am WAY uneasy with the idea that our officials, who will not have the benefit of replay, are being told to disqualify players who hit above the head.  I'm not one to rail on officials here, but now it's important: sometimes these guys have trouble keeping track of the down or where the correct spot of the ball is.  Now we have to trust them to make a split second decisions about 1) where a particular player was contacted, 2) whether that player was "defenseless" and 3) whether the player doing the hitting was "targeting".  That's an awful lot to process and decide in a matter of seconds and the ramifications are HUGE...particularly if a penalty occurs that carries over to the following week.  I just don't know how comofortable I am with our officials determining player intent.  My hope is that disqualifications are being reserved for really egregious behavior.  My gut tells me that this is going to be a point of emphasis thing and we might see a lot of players lose games because of this that probably don't deserve to. 

There is nothing here that isn't already in other sports as well. Soccer has red cards for dangerous tackles, punches will get you thrown out of most sports, and ice hockey, where a punch won't necessarily get you thrown out, has penalties for head hunting as well. In rugby it is illegal to tackley without attempting to wrap up, making the head hunting collisions targeted by this rule an ejectable offense. The refs are going to get some right and some wrong in that split second, but after a few ejections here and there players will get more concious of tackling form so it appears they are less likely to be head hunting.

It should cause some changes in how tackling is taught and reinforced and hopefully move players away from the SportsCenter collisions that have popped up ever more frequently and back to the wrap up and drive through center mass that is less entertaining but more effective.

No doubt that protecting players and players' heads is important.  Extremely important.  Wabash is very involved with the USAFootball Heads Up program, so the issue isn't lost in the heartland.  My concern isn't with the rule, my concern is with the enforcement and the ability of our league's officials to correctly determine when a disqualification is appropriate. 

For example, Wittenberg plays Ohio Wesleyan and Wabash in consecutive weeks this fall.  Let's say that early in the third quarter, Witt's best defensive player makes a tackle on an OWU WR running a quick crossing route and heads collide as an organic result of two kids playing hard and running into one another...there is no specific intent or malice on the part of the Wttenberg defender, but the crew that day decides that this helmet-to-helmet contact merits disqualification.  Now Wittenberg is without their best defender for two of the most important halves of football that they'll play all year.  Is that an appropriate penalty for something that happened as a result of simply playing football?  That's the kind of thing that I'm really worried can happen. 

[jknezek]

It's always easy to hypothecate a "worst case scenario" for why an action should not occur. If we had online forums at the time, don't you think we would have had the same discussion about spearing when it was outlawed? I remember some professional circles being very upset when horse collar tackles were outlawed. Are we not better off now that spearing and horse collars have been removed from the game? Given the potential injury risk of targeting the head, shouldn't we be erring on the side of protection knowing the studies that continue to come out? Keep your head up when you tackle, aim for center mass, don't get a reputation for head hunting, and the odds on having a penalty called incorrectly against you are very, very small.

On the flip side, if you head hunt another player the odds of you causing an injury are pretty large. Which side of this coin should we really be arguing about? Mistakes will happen, but I really think your hypothetical situation, while possible, is going to be such a low likelihood as to be laughable. We'll see how the rule is enforced, but I think if you get thrown out for head hunting, you are most likely going to deserve it.