FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[wabco]

What about the Butler model?  Or the Valpo model?  I think in both cases they are DIV I but the football team is essentially with little or no school scholarship support and probably with lower cost/number of coaches (thereby reducing the cost of the program).  The football facilities are there and look like they are good ones.  Butler remodeled (reduced) the Butler Bowl to accommodate.  Witt played Butler twice in the last 4 years as a first game.  Butler is able to attract some decent to good players.  Why Div III wants to play a watered down DIV I is beyond me ... but what the hay.

Probably it means dropping out of MAC  ... but watch the MAC in the near future.  Would not be surprised to see Western and even Central looking for a realigned conference affiliation. 

Probably not to the AD's liking ... but would keep DIV I ... just not really use all the scholarships for football and would meet Title IX issues.

[wally_wabash]

What about the Butler model?  Or the Valpo model?  I think in both cases they are DIV I but the football team is essentially with little or no school scholarship support and probably with lower cost/number of coaches (thereby reducing the cost of the program).  The football facilities are there and look like they are good ones.  Butler remodeled (reduced) the Butler Bowl to accommodate.  Witt played Butler twice in the last 4 years as a first game.  Butler is able to attract some decent to good players.  Why Div III wants to play a watered down DIV I is beyond me ... but what the hay.

Probably it means dropping out of MAC   ... but watch the MAC in the near future.  Would not be surprised to see Western and even Central looking for a realigned conference affiliation. 

Probably not to the AD's liking ... but would keep DIV I ... just not really use all the scholarships for football and would meet Title IX issues.

I think that's the whole thing- you don't want to trade your place in the MAC for some combination of PFL and Horizon/Summit/OVC affiliations.  If you're not going to be in a P5 league (and EMU isn't), the MAC is a really nice place to be. 

[wabco]

At the same time ... the cost of the MAC is pretty darn heavy, even if it is a nice place to be.  Unless there is income I am not aware of, it would seem to me prudent management of the University as a whole to look at a Butler-esk approach to football.

[formerd3db]

What about the Butler model?  Or the Valpo model?  I think in both cases they are DIV I but the football team is essentially with little or no school scholarship support and probably with lower cost/number of coaches (thereby reducing the cost of the program).  The football facilities are there and look like they are good ones.  Butler remodeled (reduced) the Butler Bowl to accommodate.  Witt played Butler twice in the last 4 years as a first game.  Butler is able to attract some decent to good players.  Why Div III wants to play a watered down DIV I is beyond me ... but what the hay.

Probably it means dropping out of MAC  ... but watch the MAC in the near future.  Would not be surprised to see Western and even Central looking for a realigned conference affiliation. 

Probably not to the AD's liking ... but would keep DIV I ... just not really use all the scholarships for football and would meet Title IX issues.

I have to agree with you on the consideration of the FCS non-scholarship mode for Eastern Michigan if they were to make a change.  I would rather see them do that as opposed to dropping football entirely.   Besides, the attendance for games at many of the FCS schools (regardless of the non-scholarship schools or not) is not much more and/or the same (and even sometimes less ) than many DIII and DII schools and certainly such as Eastern Michigan's.   Also, while the coaches are likely paid much less than their "like" FBS counterpeople, I believe many of the FCS schools still have the same number of coaches on their staffs, or at least very close to the same.

I've also previously mentioned my opinion about the MAC in general.  IMO, those schools are not really FBS.  If we are honest, they are more in line with the mid-majors and I personally believe they should be FCS.

Also, I have the opposite opinion about DIII schools scheduling DI FCS non-scholarship schools.  I believe there are some positive aspects regarding that (many of us have discussed this topic at length in the past on some of the other boards).  Of course, there are some people who disagree with that in regards to those games not counting in SOS.  However, my counter to that is, it really doesn't matter for most of the DIII schools-if you want to get to the playoffs, simply win your conference and you get the AQ-period.  On a somewhat related tangent returning to the MAC topic above, if the MAC were ever to go to FCS (which is unlikely), I still personally like to see them play one or two non-conference games against FBS schools (I always like to see the underdogs beat the "really big time" guys, although that scenario would not be happening in the future if those schools were to go to that subdivision because FBS conferences are not allowing that now, or at least in the process of phasing that out. 

Anyway, as Mr. Ypsi recently said, it will remain to be seen what Eastern eventually decides to do, although he has hinted (from his inside sources ) that apparently the administration is in favor of continuing in FBS and the MAC.  Good additional comments you guys.   

[Bombers798891]

Also, I have the opposite opinion about DIII schools scheduling DI FCS non-scholarship schools.  I believe there are some positive aspects regarding that (many of us have discussed this topic at length in the past on some of the other boards).  Of course, there are some people who disagree with that in regards to those games not counting in SOS.  However, my counter to that is, it really doesn't matter for most of the DIII schools-if you want to get to the playoffs, simply win your conference and you get the AQ-period. 

Agreed, especially with this bolded part. In our current system, with the shrinking number of Pool C bids, (As well as the top heavy nature of some conferences resulting in runners up in those conference being incredibly obvious choices if they go 9-1) the majority of teams don't have very good chances for a Pool C anyway. Yes, we always go crazy figuring out the last couple, but once you get past the obvious calls, you've got so few spots...just play for your Pool A bid

[ExTartanPlayer]

Just looking at this school year, gymnastics was the only sport that EMU was better than mediocre.

They've won five conference championships this year. What are you talking about?

Lol.  It's a shame this was glossed over.  It's really quite amusing.  ADL, I like you, but I have no idea where you got this.

Baseball: 8-8 conference, 17-26 overall. 
Men's Basketball: 9-9 conference, 18-15 overall.
Men's Cross Country: MAC champions
Football: Not good.
Men's Golf: 2nd at MAC championships
Men's Swimming: MAC champions
Men's Track (Indoor): 2nd at MAC championships
Men's Track (Outdoor): still waiting
Wrestling: 3-5 conference, 8-7 overall

Women's Basketball: 10-8 conference, 22-12 overall
Women's Cross Country: MAC champions
Women's Golf: 4th at MAC championships (of 10)
Gymnastics: MAC champions
Women's Soccer: 2-7-2 conference, 5-11-3 overall
Softball: 9-13 conference, 19-31 overall
Women's Swimming: 2nd at MAC championships
Women's Tennis: 2-6 conference, 5-16 overall
Women's Track (Indoor): MAC champions
Women's Track (Outdoor): still waiting
Volleyball: 6-10 conference, 14-16 overall

The "health" of an athletic department is obviously characterized by more than just on-field success, but it appears that the majority of the programs are plenty competitive.  And the aforementioned statement about mediocrity is kind of laughable.  There are a few clunkers but (sans football) every program is at least competitive with their conference rivals, most are at least middle-of-the-pack, and they notched championships in men's cross country, men's golf, men's swimming, women's cross country, women's gymnastics, and women's track plus second-place finishes in men's golf, men's track, and women's swimming.  That's eight of the 18 sports with championships contested to date finishing first or second in the conference (and all of those sports have at least eight participating members in the conference; no second-out-of-three teams stuff).  The only programs that were really below average (besides football) are women's soccer, women's tennis, maybe volleyball or softball (the latter two being somewhat below-average but hardly outright bad).

If that's a "mediocre" athletic department, we should all be striving for mediocrity.

[Mr. Ypsi]

ETP, thanks for posting this.  Aside from football, they are very much competitive in nearly all sports in D1.  Both men's and women's basketball have had periods of dominance, as has women's soccer.  My next door neighbor is an AC in men's track (sprinters) and assures me that they WILL win the outdoor title!

I think my ideal situation would be that the MAC stay D1, but go FCS in football.  That way EMU could stay MAC and D1, but drastically downgrade football (the loss of MANY millions of dollars per year is VERY harmful to the educational mission of the school).  Since several MAC schools still think they have a 'puncher's chance' of real success in D1 FBS, this will probably not happen.  If that scenario does not happen, I am at a loss what to recommend.  I wouldn't like to leave D1 (since most teams are competitive), but have resigned myself that the football team will NEVER be competitive, no matter what CC will try to conjure up.

I think CC is a great coach; I doubt he can perform miracles.

[ADL70]

Just looking at this school year, gymnastics was the only sport that EMU was better than mediocre.

They've won five conference championships this year. What are you talking about?

Lol.  It's a shame this was glossed over.  It's really quite amusing.  ADL, I like you, but I have no idea where you got this.

Baseball: 8-8 conference, 17-26 overall. 
Men's Basketball: 9-9 conference, 18-15 overall.
Men's Cross Country: MAC champions
Football: Not good.
Men's Golf: 2nd at MAC championships
Men's Swimming: MAC champions
Men's Track (Indoor): 2nd at MAC championships
Men's Track (Outdoor): still waiting
Wrestling: 3-5 conference, 8-7 overall

Women's Basketball: 10-8 conference, 22-12 overall
Women's Cross Country: MAC champions
Women's Golf: 4th at MAC championships (of 10)
Gymnastics: MAC champions
Women's Soccer: 2-7-2 conference, 5-11-3 overall
Softball: 9-13 conference, 19-31 overall
Women's Swimming: 2nd at MAC championships
Women's Tennis: 2-6 conference, 5-16 overall
Women's Track (Indoor): MAC champions
Women's Track (Outdoor): still waiting
Volleyball: 6-10 conference, 14-16 overall

The "health" of an athletic department is obviously characterized by more than just on-field success, but it appears that the majority of the programs are plenty competitive.  And the aforementioned statement about mediocrity is kind of laughable.  There are a few clunkers but (sans football) every program is at least competitive with their conference rivals, most are at least middle-of-the-pack, and they notched championships in men's cross country, men's golf, men's swimming, women's cross country, women's gymnastics, and women's track plus second-place finishes in men's golf, men's track, and women's swimming.  That's eight of the 18 sports with championships contested to date finishing first or second in the conference (and all of those sports have at least eight participating members in the conference; no second-out-of-three teams stuff).  The only programs that were really below average (besides football) are women's soccer, women's tennis, maybe volleyball or softball (the latter two being somewhat below-average but hardly outright bad).

If that's a "mediocre" athletic department, we should all be striving for mediocrity.

Mea culpa  haste makes waste

I was going to acknowledge 789891's correction but then the post scrolled off the current page. Somehow my quick search missed those championships. They didn't exactly jump out on either the EMU or MAC sites. What I had found were the sports with the w/l records that XTP has in his post. Thanks to him for the detail.

[Joe Wally]

Nothing official yet, but it appears from the college's web page that Craig Knoche has come to Wabash from the University of Chicago to serve as offensive coordinator.  From his bio at U.C., which is still up, it looks like he did West Coast recruiting for the Maroons, which will help to supplement the loss of B.J. Hammer:

http://sports.wabash.edu/coaches.aspx?rc=339&path=football

http://athletics.uchicago.edu/sports/fball/coaches/craig_knoche

[wabco]

Joe Wally

Good info on Coach Craig Knoche. 

I think the LGs will be more diverse with  O plan/opportunities.  Senior left handed QB with a strong arm and returning good receivers.  Two RBs who are experienced hard running/punishing backs.  O line with experience. D will be just fine.  Reload rather than recruit as starters.  And good recruiting class.  Any blanks filled in with coaching staff who understands and experience working within the "Wabash Model".  Winning tradition/attitude.  After shakedown cruise with Albion, would not like to be on our schedule ... especially Witt and Dannies ... what with time to adjust and focus upon them.

[sigma one]

Knoche is on board and has been active for about a week.  He has that West Coast recruiting experience JW referenced and also knows Chicagoland well.
Before the EMU discussion started, someone mentioned that Wabash would take a step back because of the head-coaching change and the loss of the defensive coordinator, mentioning that it took ER several years to get back to Creighton's best.  To set the record straight, indeed, Creighton's last team did finish 11-2 (losing to DPU). And he certainly took Wabash up a notch or two.  But he also had seasons of 7-3 and 6-4 following his 12-1 season of 2002 and the loss of  Knott, Short, Boulais, el al.  Those were players he had not recruited; he had them for their last two years.  In 2008, Raeburn's first year, the team finished 10-2 (including his only Monon Bell loss).  Not really much of a decline, much less a falling off; they made he playoffs.  After that, his yearly records were 9-2, 8-2, 12-1, 8-2, 9-1, 10-2, and 12-1.  So, in ER's first two years Wabash made the playoffs twice and were a combined 19-4. 
     What will happen next?  Will they be back in the playoffs?  New head coach (Morel--but not new to the program), new DC (Ramsey), new OC (Knoche).  Wabco reminds us who Wabash has returning for 2016.  The Little Giants are very likely not to miss a step.  I'm not saying they will advance to the Elite 8 again, but they will be fine.  I've heard that there are 60+ deposited freshmen at this point, with that number probably gong up be 3-5 additionally when it's all settled.

       
     

[formerd3db]

Knoche coming on board certainly appears to be a big plus for Wabash.  Just curious if anyone knows, what was the reason he decided to leave Chicago and join Wabash?

[sigma one]

I suppose if you asked him, you would get boilerplate:  great program, competitive, etc.  Whatever his reasons, they must be powerful because his wife remains as the head women's basketball coach at the University of Chicago.

[ADL70]

Maybe she's no longer going to be his wife.

[wally_wabash]

Knoche coming on board certainly appears to be a big plus for Wabash.  Just curious if anyone knows, what was the reason he decided to leave Chicago and join Wabash?

Here's a great reason: