FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[GRIZ_BACKER]

Wally

I disagree with your Franklin rating.  Two losses.  After that, little sisters of the poor.  I would rank Wabash in relation to Franklin the same as the SAT does.  Wabash is better as a football team and academically. Probably grinds Griz ... but ... live with it.

From the view behind scarlet and grey glasses. LMAO.  The rest of the regulars on this board appear to be grounded in reality.

[formerd3db]

sigma one:

Oh not at all - I was not upset with you in my reply post to yours commenting on the fall break game scheduling topic.  My apologies if I came across that way as it was not my intent.  I, too, have followed your own postings on these boards for a long time and have much respect for yours as well as yours are always insightful, have legit points and well researched and are always respectfully stated even when you have a different opinion from anyone.  Thank you for you kind comments to me also.

Again, I agree with you and the others that most schools are not going to schedule the break for the sake of the football program.  And as Wally and GrizFan have mentioned in contributing to the discussion, that type of schedule just seems to happen every couple of years or so, but sometimes, we can get surprised and actually have a decent turnout in attendance for those games - rare, but it occurs.   Anyway, thanks for the discussion - which, IMO, is just another good mid-week topic for in-season between games and in-between actual statistics and "status of the team" talk!  

[bashbrother]

The great thing about Div. III is that we have a tournament.....  we can all Monday Morning this thing to death.

I too,  believe that Franklin, based on results against quality opponents, should be ranked in or around the Top 5. (based on what i believe their team strength to be)   Unfortunately,  if you lose (2) games to anyone,  it does impact pollsters and you rarely ever see a two loss team in the Top 10 of any poll at any NCAA level.  If you look at the Div. 1 rankings this week. (AP)   #11, #12, & #14 all have 2-losses.   #11 Texas A&M lost to #1 Alabama,  #8 Auburn.   Are they better than #7 Miami... absolutely they are.....   but Miami has not lost a game and "Poll weight" has drifted them into the Top 10.

As we all know,  the polls do not tell the whole story..... but again,  fortunately enough,  in Div. III we have a tourney that settles it!   

[BashBacker#16]

SigmaOne,

On the bash receivers...  Laird, Hodges, and Hildebrand are certainly not far off from what we've had "out there."  You don't think?  When was the last ball you saw that was dropped?  If we threw 40 times a game I bet we aren't having this discussion.

Hoping Stella starts running with swagger again - has seemed timid and doesn't seem to have that burst he had earlier.

Grizz Backer - I'd say 4-5 slots below Bash.  AFCA last week had Bash #13 and Franklin #18. 

Wally - what's the saying, "close doesn't count unless we are talking horse shoes and hand grenades."  They lost 2 games.  They didn't win them, they lost.  Would of, could of, should of's...   We can agree to disagree. 

[GRIZ_BACKER]

SigmaOne,

On the bash receivers...  Laird, Hodges, and Hildebrand are certainly not far off from what we've had "out there."  You don't think?  When was the last ball you saw that was dropped?  If we threw 40 times a game I bet we aren't having this discussion.

Hoping Stella starts running with swagger again - has seemed timid and doesn't seem to have that burst he had earlier.

Grizz Backer - I'd say 4-5 slots below Bash.  AFCA last week had Bash #13 and Franklin #18. 

Wally - what's the saying, "close doesn't count unless we are talking horse shoes and hand grenades."  They lost 2 games.  They didn't win them, they lost.  Would of, could of, should of's...   We can agree to disagree.

We will see come playoff time

[smedindy]

Can you really count a lost to a 1-AA team and Mt. Union against them? And a loss to Mt. Union not of the normal 49-7 variety??

In Massey, Butler is ranked one below Mt. Union.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Since I am commenting on the rankings, it still also "bugs" me that Franklin is all the way up to #11.  They have 2 losses.  I realize they played Mount tough.  It was also week 1.  They lost to Butler.  They have lost twice.

Rankings are supposed to order the teams based on how good they are at football, not what their record is at this point in the season.  The key question is, of the ten teams ranked ahead of them (nine, since Mount Union is a piece of this hypothetical): would all ten of them have performed equally well in those games?  Of the teams ranked right below them would anyone else have done better?  Johns Hopkins, Illinois Wesleyan, Wabash...how sure are you that they would have done better than the following:

1) Franklin didn't just kind of play Mount tough for a while, they led the defending national champions and current #1 team in the country on their home field with seven minutes remaining.  Mount has gone on to win their next six games by 37, 70, 51, 62, 55, and 48 points; even playing the dregs of the OAC, that suggests that this Mount Union is awfully darned good and Franklin, despite playing in the "little sisters of the poor" conference, would be beating most of the OAC teams just as badly.  I don't care that their conference stinks and thus they can't really rack up any 'quality' in-conference wins.  That's a really, really good team.

2) Two ways to look at the Butler loss: one, it shouldn't even count as a game at all, for the purposes of Division III rankings.  Let's pretend that Franklin is 5-1 with a three-point road loss to the #1 team in the country.  You're telling me that team is ranked too high at #11?  If Wabash had opened with Mount, lost by three, then rolled of five straight wins against the bottom of the NCAC, where are you ranking them?  I'm guessing you wouldn't argue that #11 was too high of a ranking.

Second viewpoint: if we do count the Butler loss, if anything, it helps Franklin's argument.  They lost by three points (and not fluky, either, it was a very even game statistically) to a team that just totally obliterated Wittenberg the week before.  We tend to look at football games in an absolute of "wins" and "losses" (which matters for determining STANDINGS) but when you're judging teams against one another for a power ranking, you also have to consider style points at least a little.  Standings list the teams in the order of their records; rankings list the teams in the order of how good they actually are at the game, so I don't care that there are two L's in the column, only that Franklin showed more in those two L's than most teams would show in their wins.  If you genuinely believe that more than ten teams would have performed equally well in those games, or more than ten teams would beat Franklin, that's fine, but I don't see how one argues that some of the teams currently ranked in the teens would have done better (or even close to as well) as Franklin did in those two games.

[02 Warhawk]

Can you really count a lost to a 1-AA team and Mt. Union against them? And a loss to Mt. Union not of the normal 49-7 variety??

In Massey, Butler is ranked one below Mt. Union.

Mount beats Butler 10 out of 10 times. The Massey ratings are ridiculous...is this the poll that has Whitewater as No. 1 in DIII?

[The_Bishop]

Not to derail the top-25 polling discussion but interesting stat from last week's OWU/HC game:

Mason Espinosa's 417 yards passing raised his career total to 10,213, making him the first player in NCAC history to surpass the 10,000-yard mark and moving him into 24th place on the all-time Division III list.  His 413 yards total offense increased his career total to 10,019, again making him the first player in NCAC history to surpass the 10,000-yard mark.

My question:  who are the other 23 guys ahead of him on this list?  That is just an absurd number of passing yards over a 4-year DIII career.

Higlights from the game:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWGDLAJsZpc

[wabndy]

For all this talk Butler's opponents are getting, it will be interesting to see how the regional rankings comparatively seed Franklin, Wittenberg and Wabash.

SOS numbers:
96 Wittenberg  6-0 1.000 .5135 (94) .5019 0.510 
129 Wabash  7-0 1.000 .4773 (126) .5032 0.486 
141 Franklin  5-1 .833 .5278 (81) .3865 0.481 

By these numbers, Witt should have a higher regional ranking thank Franklin.  The greater (momentary) SOS should also slate Witt higher than Wabash.  It's not every year, however, that the committee in this region would have access to one of the lowly secondary criteria, "results vs. common non Division III opponents."  I throw in the "in this region" caveat since most North region teams typically do not need to schedule a non D3 opponent to round out their schedule.  Would the region give any weight to the comparative results against Butler when seeding Franklin and Witt?

It's also interesting to note how Franklin's OOWP kills their overall SOS ranking.

[wally_wabash]

Not to derail the top-25 polling discussion but interesting stat from last week's OWU/HC game:

Mason Espinosa's 417 yards passing raised his career total to 10,213, making him the first player in NCAC history to surpass the 10,000-yard mark and moving him into 24th place on the all-time Division III list.  His 413 yards total offense increased his career total to 10,019, again making him the first player in NCAC history to surpass the 10,000-yard mark.

My question:  who are the other 23 guys ahead of him on this list?  That is just an absurd number of passing yards over a 4-year DIII career.

Higlights from the game:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWGDLAJsZpc

Crudely pasted from the record book...career total offense leaders:

Player, Team Years Plays Yards
Jason Boltus, Hartwick................................................................ 2005-08 1,839 14,231
Josh Vogelbach, Guilford........................................................... 2005-08 *2,240 13,904
Alex Tanney, Monmouth (IL).................................................... $2007-11 1,879 13,850
Justin Peery, Westminster (MO).............................................. 1996-99 2,001 13,645
Adam Knoblauch, Delaware Valley....................................... 2002-05 1,985 12,833
Kirk Baumgartner, Wis.-Stevens Point.................................. 1986-89 2,007 12,767
Josh Brehm, Alma......................................................................... 2003-06 1,946 12,247
John Port, Albright....................................................................... $2001-05 1,816 12,195
Rocky Pentello, Capital............................................................... $2002-06 1,770 12,126
Ben McLaughlin, Louisiana Col................................... 2006-07, 09-10 1,709 12,007
Adam King, Howard Payne....................................................... 2001-04 1,798 11,588
Joel Steele, Anderson (IN)......................................................... 2000-03 1,641 11,325
Nate Wara, Wis.-Oshkosh........................................................... 2009-12 1,742 11,202
Kam Kniss, North Central (IL)................................................... 2003-06 1,628 11,035
Keith Ricca, Catholic.................................................................... 2005-08 1,782 10,919
Shane Brozowski, Castleton..................................................... 2009-12 1,688 10,904
Alex Kofoed, Saint John's (MN)............................................... 2004-07 1,577 10,818
Mark Novara, Lakeland............................................................... 1994-97 1,653 10,801
Andrew Benkwitt, Utica............................................................. 2009-12 1,583 10,688
Hewitt Tomlin, Johns Hopkins................................................ 2008-11 1,496 10,677
Bill Borchert, Mount Union....................................................... 1994-97 1,274 10,639
Tanner Kelly, Albright.................................................................. 2006-09 1,687 10,576
Jim Ballard, Wilmington (OH)/Mount Union............... 1990, 91-93 1,328 10,545
Tom Arth, John Carroll................................................................ 1999-02 1,557 10,493
Dan Whalen, Case......................................................................... 2006-09 1,583 10,492

Jake Knott had 12,054 yards of total offense in his career (11,213 passing yards).  He's apparently not on this list for reasons passing understanding. 

[Schwami]

Wally, why did you have to bring up Rocky Pentello again?

By the way, in view of the recent QB discussion, it is interesting to note that Mount Union hasn't had anyone on this list since the mid-90's, nor is anyone from Whitewater on the list.

[smedindy]

Can you really count a lost to a 1-AA team and Mt. Union against them? And a loss to Mt. Union not of the normal 49-7 variety??

In Massey, Butler is ranked one below Mt. Union.

Mount beats Butler 10 out of 10 times. The Massey ratings are ridiculous...is this the poll that has Whitewater as No. 1 in DIII?

Really? It's not a poll, my friend, it's an algorithm, and it's pretty darn sound, especially now since the teams are all pretty much connected. (Of course, throw out the NESCAC which is included and normalized against the entire CF Universe. Not my choice to do it, but hey...)

The one common opponent between Mt. Union and Butler had similar results. Now, that's a pretty decent indicator of the relative strengths. Butler's three losses have come to South Dakota State, Dartmouth and San Diego. South Dakota State beat Northern Iowa who beat Iowa. San Diego laid the only defeat on Mercer, and the Ivy usually plays decent football.

Plus, Mt. Union's power rankings are hurt by their back-loaded OAC schedule. They've played all the OAC dregs and none of the good teams, and they squeaked by their one quality opponent. Since any sound algorithm brings in diminishing returns, then pounding Marietta into submission only gets you so far.

Without any contra evidence, I don't think its out of line. It's a useful tool when comparing programs that don't have much, if any, crossover. It is a better tool for basketball and other sports where you have more non-conference results to really do a comparison, but in football it's useful still.

[GRIZ_BACKER]

Since I am commenting on the rankings, it still also "bugs" me that Franklin is all the way up to #11.  They have 2 losses.  I realize they played Mount tough.  It was also week 1.  They lost to Butler.  They have lost twice.

Rankings are supposed to order the teams based on how good they are at football, not what their record is at this point in the season.  The key question is, of the ten teams ranked ahead of them (nine, since Mount Union is a piece of this hypothetical): would all ten of them have performed equally well in those games?  Of the teams ranked right below them would anyone else have done better?  Johns Hopkins, Illinois Wesleyan, Wabash...how sure are you that they would have done better than the following:

1) Franklin didn't just kind of play Mount tough for a while, they led the defending national champions and current #1 team in the country on their home field with seven minutes remaining.  Mount has gone on to win their next six games by 37, 70, 51, 62, 55, and 48 points; even playing the dregs of the OAC, that suggests that this Mount Union is awfully darned good and Franklin, despite playing in the "little sisters of the poor" conference, would be beating most of the OAC teams just as badly.  I don't care that their conference stinks and thus they can't really rack up any 'quality' in-conference wins.  That's a really, really good team.

2) Two ways to look at the Butler loss: one, it shouldn't even count as a game at all, for the purposes of Division III rankings.  Let's pretend that Franklin is 5-1 with a three-point road loss to the #1 team in the country.  You're telling me that team is ranked too high at #11?  If Wabash had opened with Mount, lost by three, then rolled of five straight wins against the bottom of the NCAC, where are you ranking them?  I'm guessing you wouldn't argue that #11 was too high of a ranking.

Second viewpoint: if we do count the Butler loss, if anything, it helps Franklin's argument.  They lost by three points (and not fluky, either, it was a very even game statistically) to a team that just totally obliterated Wittenberg the week before.  We tend to look at football games in an absolute of "wins" and "losses" (which matters for determining STANDINGS) but when you're judging teams against one another for a power ranking, you also have to consider style points at least a little.  Standings list the teams in the order of their records; rankings list the teams in the order of how good they actually are at the game, so I don't care that there are two L's in the column, only that Franklin showed more in those two L's than most teams would show in their wins.  If you genuinely believe that more than ten teams would have performed equally well in those games, or more than ten teams would beat Franklin, that's fine, but I don't see how one argues that some of the teams currently ranked in the teens would have done better (or even close to as well) as Franklin did in those two games.

Thanks for the unbiased love tartan.  While the large majority of the regular posters on this board clearly understand your points, there are a couple on here that act like tradition or name recognition trumps resume.  IMO Bash needs to worry about how they are going to outscore and/or beat Wittenberg more than where they are in the polls.  To date they havent played anyone even close to being a top 25 team. 

[firstdown]

Griz_Backer

The only focus for Wabash is Hiram.  While Franklin is to be commended for its games with Mount Union and Butler, one might ask the same question.  With all due respect, steam rolling a bunch of cream puffs like the HCAC does not help make your case.  I have no doubt that Franklin will make some noise the big dance, but polls are really beauty contests or like arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin and give fans something to discuss between Saturdays.