FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[jknezek]

I think there are many schools that are giving coaches admissions targets. It's been discussed around these boards many times. And when you have a target, you do what you have to in order to reach it. UMU and the purple powers are a different case from, say, Methodist. Success matters. And I'm not squashing anything. I just have a good idea of the enrollment pressure many of these schools are under. It's well documented. So when you see these massive numbers it's not hard to put 2 and 2 together. Most of the time 4 is the right answer. As for the rest, both the WIAC and NJAC have roster limits. Though the NJAC relaxed theirs for the 3 CAC schools. Oddly enough roster limits coincided with some of the schools least likely to benefit from extra enrollment dollars. What does that imply? You don't need a 5 deep for football though I agree it doesn't hurt the team.

[wally_wabash]

I think your beef is with admissions policies and not football coaches.  That's an interesting perspective though because most of the football/admissions tidbits I hear about are football teams being at the mercy of admissions decisions rather than the other way around.  Based on what you describe, I think the only issue is if a school is enrolling a boatload of kids that don't fit the school's academic profile.  If there's any disservice done to a student I think it would be using football to entice a student that likely won't succeed academically- which I think the school pays for in the long run and is a horrible idea.  But again, that's on admissions, not coaches. 

And you're right.  Nobody needs a 5-deep on Saturdays.  But you do if you intend to have a meaningful developmental (JV) program.  That activity requires bodies.  Lots of them. 

[smedindy]

In today's environment, practically every school needs to hit their enrollment targets or there will be some budget issues. However you can bring in the headcount while following Title IX and not destroying the academics is fine by me.

[wally_wabash]

wabco-

Albion has a lot to replace, particularly on offense.  Certainly I think Wabash is the superior side, but I'm exercising caution next weekend.  I think Albion's style is brutal to play in Week 1.  They hung 682 yards and 65 points on Stevens Point in Week 1 last year.  Stevens Point is not Wabash, but they aren't in the over-200 club either.  There's definitely challenge here for the LGs. 

[badgerwarhawk]

I think there are many schools that are giving coaches admissions targets. It's been discussed around these boards many times. And when you have a target, you do what you have to in order to reach it. UMU and the purple powers are a different case from, say, Methodist. Success matters. And I'm not squashing anything. I just have a good idea of the enrollment pressure many of these schools are under. It's well documented. So when you see these massive numbers it's not hard to put 2 and 2 together. Most of the time 4 is the right answer. As for the rest, both the WIAC and NJAC have roster limits. Though the NJAC relaxed theirs for the 3 CAC schools. Oddly enough roster limits coincided with some of the schools least likely to benefit from extra enrollment dollars. What does that imply? You don't need a 5 deep for football though I agree it doesn't hurt the team.

The WIAC did have a 100 player roster limit in the past but it no longer applies.   

[jknezek]

I think there are many schools that are giving coaches admissions targets. It's been discussed around these boards many times. And when you have a target, you do what you have to in order to reach it. UMU and the purple powers are a different case from, say, Methodist. Success matters. And I'm not squashing anything. I just have a good idea of the enrollment pressure many of these schools are under. It's well documented. So when you see these massive numbers it's not hard to put 2 and 2 together. Most of the time 4 is the right answer. As for the rest, both the WIAC and NJAC have roster limits. Though the NJAC relaxed theirs for the 3 CAC schools. Oddly enough roster limits coincided with some of the schools least likely to benefit from extra enrollment dollars. What does that imply? You don't need a 5 deep for football though I agree it doesn't hurt the team.

The WIAC did have a 100 player roster limit in the past but it no longer applies.

Thats a painful hole in my argument for sure! Bummer.

[Bishopleftiesdad]

It does happen in baseball. Not too much in the NCAC. Take a look at rosters in the OAC. Most of them are mid 40's. Ocassionally I will see freshman classes in the 20's. baseball only has 9 players. And it is not as physically hazardous for your health.

[badgerwarhawk]

I think there are many schools that are giving coaches admissions targets. It's been discussed around these boards many times. And when you have a target, you do what you have to in order to reach it. UMU and the purple powers are a different case from, say, Methodist. Success matters. And I'm not squashing anything. I just have a good idea of the enrollment pressure many of these schools are under. It's well documented. So when you see these massive numbers it's not hard to put 2 and 2 together. Most of the time 4 is the right answer. As for the rest, both the WIAC and NJAC have roster limits. Though the NJAC relaxed theirs for the 3 CAC schools. Oddly enough roster limits coincided with some of the schools least likely to benefit from extra enrollment dollars. What does that imply? You don't need a 5 deep for football though I agree it doesn't hurt the team.

The WIAC did have a 100 player roster limit in the past but it no longer applies.

Thats a painful hole in my argument for sure! Bummer.

The WARHAWKS carried 105 on last year's roster.  UW-Eau Claire carried fewer than 90.  Title IX is possibly a significant factor impacting roster sizes in our league.  UW-EC has a large female enrollment and I know two women's coaches who were asked to carry extra players on their rosters to help balance the football roster in WHITEWATER.     

[HansenRatings]

I think there are many schools that are giving coaches admissions targets. It's been discussed around these boards many times. And when you have a target, you do what you have to in order to reach it. UMU and the purple powers are a different case from, say, Methodist. Success matters. And I'm not squashing anything. I just have a good idea of the enrollment pressure many of these schools are under. It's well documented. So when you see these massive numbers it's not hard to put 2 and 2 together. Most of the time 4 is the right answer. As for the rest, both the WIAC and NJAC have roster limits. Though the NJAC relaxed theirs for the 3 CAC schools. Oddly enough roster limits coincided with some of the schools least likely to benefit from extra enrollment dollars. What does that imply? You don't need a 5 deep for football though I agree it doesn't hurt the team.

The WIAC did have a 100 player roster limit in the past but it no longer applies.

Thats a painful hole in my argument for sure! Bummer.

The WARHAWKS carried 105 on last year's roster.  UW-Eau Claire carried fewer than 90.  Title IX is possibly a significant factor impacting roster sizes in our league.  UW-EC has a large female enrollment and I know two women's coaches who were asked to carry extra players on their rosters to help balance the football roster in WHITEWATER.   

Title IX actually gives UWP a pretty decent advantage in terms of impact on football roster size. Thanks engineering!

[badgerwarhawk]

I think there are many schools that are giving coaches admissions targets. It's been discussed around these boards many times. And when you have a target, you do what you have to in order to reach it. UMU and the purple powers are a different case from, say, Methodist. Success matters. And I'm not squashing anything. I just have a good idea of the enrollment pressure many of these schools are under. It's well documented. So when you see these massive numbers it's not hard to put 2 and 2 together. Most of the time 4 is the right answer. As for the rest, both the WIAC and NJAC have roster limits. Though the NJAC relaxed theirs for the 3 CAC schools. Oddly enough roster limits coincided with some of the schools least likely to benefit from extra enrollment dollars. What does that imply? You don't need a 5 deep for football though I agree it doesn't hurt the team.

The WIAC did have a 100 player roster limit in the past but it no longer applies.

Thats a painful hole in my argument for sure! Bummer.

The WARHAWKS carried 105 on last year's roster.  UW-Eau Claire carried fewer than 90.  Title IX is possibly a significant factor impacting roster sizes in our league.  UW-EC has a large female enrollment and I know two women's coaches who were asked to carry extra players on their rosters to help balance the football roster in WHITEWATER.   

Title IX actually gives UWP a pretty decent advantage in terms of impact on football roster size. Thanks engineering!

UW-P's 2015 roster included 109 players which was the largest roster within the league.  UW-EC and UW-Stout had the smallest rosters. 

[wally_wabash]

Alright, I took in the scrimmage vs. Wheaton at the Hollett today.  Impressions...

- Super, super, super vanilla offense from Wabash.  Nearly everything was a run between the tackles, I'd say 70% of the plays.  Of the remaining 30%, 20% were runs outside the tackles, and 10% passes.  I don't think I saw more than maybe one ball get thrown more than 10 yards downfield...so yeah.  I don't really know how to evaluate Wabash's offense based on what I saw today.  Grade: incomplete. 

- The starting 11 defense played quite well.  Wheaton connected on a couple of middle range passes against this unit, but really had trouble running.   Wheaton enjoyed great field position all day (see above), but scored just once against the first line of Wabash's defense.  That score came on a QB scramble from about 30 yards out on a 4th down play.  In a controlled scrimmage where everybody is told that the only rule is to leave QBs alone, I don't know what defenses are supposed to do in that situation.  I thought the scoring play could have been blown dead in the backfield, it wasn't, and Bowers kind of had a wide open path to the end zone because, per the terms of the practice, he was off limits.   So take that for what it's worth.  Otherwise, the top line defense looked good. 

- So many penalties.  So, so many penalties.  Both sides.  I'm sure neither staff left feeling great about that part of the deal. 

- Wheaton's second/third units pretty badly outplayed Wabash's second/third units.  Not really a nicer way to say that.  Peltz is a ridiculous talent to be playing backup quarterback.  Good for Wheaton, bad for Wabash.  He absolutely picked apart Wabash's backup defense. 

- Specials...Did not see any placekicking so null set there.  Plenty of punting though.  Thought the punters did a good job.  One bad snap, but that was handled and the ball got away clean.  Thumbs up for the punt team.  Couple of missteps in the return game today.  One punt that was allowed to drop and bounce at the 20, ended up downed on the 1.  And then one kickoff mishandled back into the end zone then brought out put the offense up against the goal line again.  Simple things to correct, really. 

So overall, I don't know.  I don't know how much any of this scrimmage means.  Wabash has been better in this practice with Wheaton and they've been worse, and either way Wabash winds up having a good year.  I didn't see anybody leave the game with obvious injury, so that's probably the biggest thing.  Next week it counts!  WAF!

[wally_wabash]

NCAC Pick 'Em is back! The first set of games are up.

[ADL70]

Any Bishops faithful making the trek to Texas? 

[umhb2001]

Any Bishops faithful making the trek to Texas?

I was wondering the same thing.

[Bishopleftiesdad]

Not me. But Son played baseball and is two years removed.
Bishops roster has 37 freshman and 100 players.
http://www.battlingbishops.com/roster.aspx?path=football