FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[Turtle Head]

Wabash 35
Depauw 7

Half

So much for Depauw fans saying their defense was "similar" to Wiit's

Monkey Stomp in progress!  Stevie can you know what for making us tailgate in a farm field

Kinda like Wabash fans comparing their defense to Butler

[bashgiant]

Wabash 35
Depauw 7

Half

So much for Depauw fans saying their defense was "similar" to Wiit's

Monkey Stomp in progress!  Stevie can you know what for making us tailgate in a farm field

Kinda like Wabash fans comparing their defense to Butler

You are on a roll keep up the good work!

[formerd3db]

aueagle and bishopleftitesdad:

First, aueagle, thanks for the prior pre-game well-wishes before yesterday's Hope/Albion game.  As you already know, we didn't get it done. Although a disappointing game for Hope, it was, nonetheless, a very exciting game.  I still can't believe the drive we had to come almost all the way down the field in the last 50 seconds of the game.  Had there been a few more seconds, I believe we just might have pulled it out and won the game.  Other than the Illinois Wesleyan game earlier this year and this one, Hope's offense hasn't done those type of "almost herorics" in quite some time.  I just wish we would be the lucky ones sometime, like has happened to other teams this year (USC last night, Nebraska against both Northwestern and Michigan, etc.).   However, although it was a very tough, close and exciting game, we had it "in the bag" when we scored with less than 3 minutes left.  You can't give up big plays like we did in the ensuing Albion drive and expect to win.  Oh well.  Disappointing ending, although a 7-3 season showed much improvement for Hope this year.  Not sure how that will translate to next year since our Sr. QB Atwell is graduating and our backups have played very little.

Sorry to see your guy's Ohio Wesleyan let yesterday's game slip away also.  That was a great win and boost for Wooster's program (and great attendance for them), however, I'm sure that was as disappointing loss for OWU as Hope's was for us.  But, OWU had a decent season at 5-5.  I think with a little luck "here and there", it would have been better.  Also, as smedindy said, surprising that Denison ended up 7-3; that is great for that program. But in regards to OWU, from what you have mentioned over the course of this fall's season, I would think that OWU will be in a good position to build on even further for next year.  Anyway, it's on to watching the playoffs now-although obviously it would have been more fun to see our teams make it to the post-season. But...that's just the way it goes sometimes.

[WittFootball]

Are there too many teams in the NCAC?  Strength of schedule is a big criteria during the selection process for the playoffs.  With only one non-conference game per year, it is nearly impossible for teams like Witt and Wabash to increase their strength of schedule percentage.

Wabash should receive a Pool C bid, but strength of schedule may keep them out. I would like to see the day that the NCAC 2nd place team is a lock to make the playoffs like the Ohio Athletic Conference.

Good luck Wabash!

[ExTartanPlayer]

WittFootball, that is a fair question (and a point that Wally and others have made before) but it is not a problem unique to the NCAC...the very example that you list here, the OAC, also plays a 9-game conference schedule. I don't think you'll ever see the NCAC attain the status you describe where the runner up is a playoff lock; even the OAC runner up does not always get in.  The MIAC is one of the best in the nation and is unlikely to get their runner up in this year.

Further - to help with the SOS problem, not only does your conference need to have those OOC games, they have to WIN them. Given that Kenyon lost to Earlham this year and won four NCAC games, and Wooster went 7-2 in the NCAC after losing by 37 to eventual PAC champ W & J, it might be a tall order to assume that the average NCAC schools will actually win more of those OOC games than they lose, essentially making this somewhat of a moot point.

[BashDad]

#rankwooster

[Schwami]

A 9-1 OAC or MIAC team will almost certainly always get in.  The MIAC runner-ups are 8-2.

If SJF gets in because of their SOS, they benefit enormously from their ability to have 3 out of conference games.  Both of their losses were to conference teams.  Isn't the idea of the Pool C to reward a team that goes 9-1 and loses to a really strong conference champion?

Hard to believe that the playoff fate of the loser of the Wabash/Witt game this year may ultimately come down to what happened in the first game of the year between Wooster and W&J.

#rankwooster

[smedindy]

No, there's not too many teams in the NCAC. For all other sports, the size of the conference is almost optimal for scheduling and competition.

This is a weird year because there are three "B" slots thanks to some conference reshuffling. It's going to get harder to get a "C" and I think it's better that way. Win your league!

Yes, in my heart, Wabash should be in the playoffs. But if SJF gets the bid, I can't really complain since their schedule was tough - criteria wise. The E8 isn't mentioned often around here as a tough league, but it really is.

The key for the NCAC is to schedule smartly and win the games. The NCAC was 5-4 in non-conference games that counted. One hidden problem is Kenyon losing to Earlham.

The problem, of course, is that you never know what will happen to teams between the time you schedule and the time you play them. Mary Hardin-Baylor won't get one of the top seeds because Kean and Trinity took dives this year - and when they scheduled them they were going to be tough ones. Linfield won't get a top seed because of Cal Lutheran and Hardin-Simmons falling off. It happens.

[wally_wabash]

No, there's not too many teams in the NCAC. For all other sports, the size of the conference is almost optimal for scheduling and competition.

This is a weird year because there are three "B" slots thanks to some conference reshuffling. It's going to get harder to get a "C" and I think it's better that way. Win your league!

Yes, in my heart, Wabash should be in the playoffs. But if SJF gets the bid, I can't really complain since their schedule was tough - criteria wise. The E8 isn't mentioned often around here as a tough league, but it really is.

The key for the NCAC is to schedule smartly and win the games. The NCAC was 5-4 in non-conference games that counted. One hidden problem is Kenyon losing to Earlham.

The problem, of course, is that you never know what will happen to teams between the time you schedule and the time you play them. Mary Hardin-Baylor won't get one of the top seeds because Kean and Trinity took dives this year - and when they scheduled them they were going to be tough ones. Linfield won't get a top seed because of Cal Lutheran and Hardin-Simmons falling off. It happens.

There's really only so much you can do with the one non-league game and even if the NCAC wins all ten of their non-league games, it's not going to create an OWP buffer big enough to boost the SOS up into the .550s or so that you can obtain when you only play 7 league games.  That's the downside to the round robin.  And that's not an NCAC problem, that's an any-10-team-league problem.  You're pretty much dialed in to an SOS that lingers around .500.  Capital played Thomas More in the non-league, plus the rest of their OAC schedule and wound up with a 0.527 SOS.  Wooster landed at 0.526.  That's about as good as you can possibly do with a 9-game league schedule.   

The upside is that you also can't really wind up with a terrible SOS either.  Heidelberg played 1-9 Alma and ended up with a 0.476 SOS.  That's about as bad as you can do with a 9-game league schedule.  So you're always going to land somewhere around 0.500 +/- 0.025.  There are 102 D3 teams that fit in that window. 

[wabndy]

All of this is why the objective playoff criteria just aren't a good fit for football- not enough games.  Throw in the fact that the north and west are overloaded and the east and to a lesser extent south are underloaded, these objective criteria don't really lead to the most "intuitive" result whatever that means.

I think this is only going to get worse once those pool b conferences regain their AQ. Imagine this year if we only had 3-4 pool c bids. Those days may be coming soon.

I think the ncac is the right size. There are only two things they could do I improve SOS, not play a full round robin (which was a near disaster last year) or go the other way and add three more teams and play a conference championship game - which ain't gonna happen.

[sigma one]

Several years ago there was a semi-serious--perhaps more than that-- discussion among presidents of the NCAC schools about expanding the size of the conference and dividing into West and East divisions, whatever they would have called them.  Geography and potential new members were part of the discussion. 
     One obvious part of the conversation was that such an arrangement would cut down on travel.  There was some thinking that each division would function as a separate "entity," of perhaps at least seven members, each getting an automatic bid by winning their "conference."  The administration of both halves would be done by a central office, thus avoiding the expense of a separate "conference" office for both sides.  I believe there was some discussion with the NCAA about the possibility of this arrangement. 
     Of course, all sorts of problems arose.  Where would be the dividing line geographically?  How would the new arrangement keep old rivalries going?  Would the NCAA allow such a set up, with two automatic bids?  And more.  Some thought that the teams could play everyone in their own division and then play teams from the other division on a rotating basis, two or three games a year.  Depending on how this sorted out, there might be space to play a team outside the two divisions. The discussions took place in a damaged economic climate, so one could see what the presidents were thinking about.  There was a list of potential joiners from Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana, and Illinois.  Some quiet inquiries resulted.  As far as I can tell, the idea had its day and is now buried.  I can't imagine the Ohio teams wanting to split the state roughly in half, although I can see them relieved that they would not have to travel to Indiana as often (and think of not just football, but of all sports in this discussion).
     There was also discussion (how serious?) of a true break with the western schools forming a new alliance with with others geographically suitable.  One could imagine a conference with, say, Wabash, DePauw, Rose-Hulman, Earlham, Franklin, Hanover, Centre, and a couple of others. Who knows if teams in other conferences would withdraw to join such an alliance.   Isn't the thought intriguing though?   
     Returning briefly to the original and East/West idea:  Washington & Jefferson, maybe another from western PA, a school or two from Ohio, Earlham, Rose-Hulman, Franklin, Centre,  etc.  could make the split possible, however improbable when they are asked to leave their old conference affiliations.  I have no problem imagining that W & J would want to join (they have been nibbling at the edge of the NCAC for years), probably Earlham would come back, and others might be eager.   Just noodling. 
     
     

[Wabash Hokie]

No playoffs this year for Wabash.  Franklin hosts a 1st round game against Washington St Louis.

[Schwami]

No playoffs for Wabash this year.

Good luck Witt, represent!

[smedindy]

No, there's not too many teams in the NCAC. For all other sports, the size of the conference is almost optimal for scheduling and competition.

This is a weird year because there are three "B" slots thanks to some conference reshuffling. It's going to get harder to get a "C" and I think it's better that way. Win your league!

Yes, in my heart, Wabash should be in the playoffs. But if SJF gets the bid, I can't really complain since their schedule was tough - criteria wise. The E8 isn't mentioned often around here as a tough league, but it really is.

The key for the NCAC is to schedule smartly and win the games. The NCAC was 5-4 in non-conference games that counted. One hidden problem is Kenyon losing to Earlham.

The problem, of course, is that you never know what will happen to teams between the time you schedule and the time you play them. Mary Hardin-Baylor won't get one of the top seeds because Kean and Trinity took dives this year - and when they scheduled them they were going to be tough ones. Linfield won't get a top seed because of Cal Lutheran and Hardin-Simmons falling off. It happens.

There's really only so much you can do with the one non-league game and even if the NCAC wins all ten of their non-league games, it's not going to create an OWP buffer big enough to boost the SOS up into the .550s or so that you can obtain when you only play 7 league games.  That's the downside to the round robin.  And that's not an NCAC problem, that's an any-10-team-league problem.  You're pretty much dialed in to an SOS that lingers around .500.  Capital played Thomas More in the non-league, plus the rest of their OAC schedule and wound up with a 0.527 SOS.  Wooster landed at 0.526.  That's about as good as you can possibly do with a 9-game league schedule.   

The upside is that you also can't really wind up with a terrible SOS either.  Heidelberg played 1-9 Alma and ended up with a 0.476 SOS.  That's about as bad as you can do with a 9-game league schedule.  So you're always going to land somewhere around 0.500 +/- 0.025.  There are 102 D3 teams that fit in that window.

A full round robin is the way to go. I like the members of the conference - they're a good fit for everyone and each school has their moments in some sports.

It could really be worse, the MWC is so large there's no way to round-robin it and they almost had co-undefeated champs this year. Of course, Illinois Colllege and St. Norbert's both screwed up big time.

[Joe Wally]

damn.