FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[Li'l Giant]

Smeds,

I agree. Like a lot of people I expected Michigan to win that game. I don't think the refs were the cause of their loss. Nebraska's defense stiffened when it needed to and they took adavantage of the breaks they got.

I think there's more than depth there, if you mean number of players at each position. I think if you mean number of good players overall, then yes, I agree with you.

I didn't mean that there are no bad BCS conference officiating crews. For example the crew that completely blew the final play of the OU/Tx Tech game.

[KC]

Like the past few years, the conference is going to be tough to predict again next year.  Put Witt and Wabash at or near the top, Hiram and Earlham at or near the bottom, and you really can argue the rest any way you want.  Earlier a point was made that building a championship caliber team takes a committment from the school in building up the program's numbers.  This year Kenyon actually did contend by definition, but I don't think anyone would really argue they were an elite team in the conference.  Good enough to beat Gheny, good enough to beat Wooster before their season tanked, but they were no Wabash.  Kenyon will probably never be a powerhouse because the school doesn't want such a small campus to be dominated by the football team.  Most, or at least many in the faculty are opposed to the new fieldhouse, and the AD is a former swim coach who is probably quite content as long as the team doesn't suck.  But who could you go out and say is going to be better than them next year?  The NCAC is almost looking like the NFL parity wise, with legit arguments that can be made for just about every team next year.  Is that because the weak teams in the conference have gotten better or because the stronger have gotten worse?

[DarkSide-D]

Kenyon will probably never be a powerhouse because the school doesn't want such a small campus to be dominated by the football team. Most, or at least many in the faculty are opposed to the new fieldhouse...

Interesting point KC.  Over the summer I visited the Kenyon campus for a Transcript transfer, and thought I would strick up a lil conversation with the registrar about the new athletic facilities (or one of the assistants in the office) and they had no clue whatsoever about the giant building under construction just down the street.  She simply said that she knew they were building something.  I know that one person is no fair representation of the schools administration, but that was sad.

[BashBacker#16]

Pretty interesting rumors out of Butler today that they have hired Jeff Voris, head coach at Carroll College and a DePauw alum.  15-34 career record!  Was also a finalist for the DPU job the last 2 times it opened???  I can't imagine there are many Butler alums "high fiving" about this hire.  Good guy, great player, but interesting hire...

[smedindy]

At Butler, you takes whats youse can get.

[wally_wabash]

Kenyon will probably never be a powerhouse because the school doesn't want such a small campus to be dominated by the football team. 

Why?  What's the difference, in principle, between having a football team that is competitive annually and having a swim team that wins the national championship every year for the last quarter-century?  Is there something inherently damaging to a college's academic reputation if they have a football team that wins regularly?  And if so, isn't that a bit unfair to the student-athletes? 

The NCAC is almost looking like the NFL parity wise, with legit arguments that can be made for just about every team next year. Is that because the weak teams in the conference have gotten better or because the stronger have gotten worse?

This I don't agree with.  Last year, Kenyon was an aberration. Kenyon's wins over Wooster and Allegheny are two of the three times in the last EIGHT seasons that somebody named Hiram/Earlham/Kenyon/Oberlin/Denison beat somebody named Allegheny/OWU/Wabash/Wittenberg/Wooster.  Further, most of the games between those two groups are not close at all (the numbers I ran on this last year had the average margin of victory at somewhere between 4 and 5 touchdowns if I remember correctly).  There isn't parity.  I do think that the teams at the bottom are getting better, but they still have a ways to go. 

[oldguy]

Kenyon will probably never be a powerhouse because the school doesn't want such a small campus to be dominated by the football team.  


Why?  What's the difference, in principle, between having a football team that is competitive annually and having a swim team that wins the national championship every year for the last quarter-century?  Is there something inherently damaging to a college's academic reputation if they have a football team that wins regularly?  And if so, isn't that a bit unfair to the student-athletes? 

I agree with KC on this point.  There are always members of the faculty and administration that are against athletics and especially football.  Either they were dorks in High School and college or some athlete wouldn't be friends with them, or they think all the good-looking girls would only date jocks, or whatever.  There are always faculty members at schools who have a personal vendetta of some sort against athletics that would love to see football and other sports disappear.  I, personally, have come across many and have had to bite my tongue to keep from starting a heated argument.

[DarkSide-D]

Though I hate to do it, I have to agree with Oldguy.   There are ALWAYS members of the faculty that dislike athletics.  Whether you are talking about the Kenyons, Witts, Woosters of the world or if you are talking the Ohio States, Michigans, Miamis of the world.  There are those of the administration who don't buy into the philosophy that athletics allow for the athlete to become a better rounded individual (Mind, Body, and Soul).

I remember my first year at Woo when a professor chewed me out because the team was traveling to play Bash.  That meant we would have to leave on a Friday.  Granted, I didn't have to miss his class, since it was at 8 am, but he still felt he needed to belittle me.  God, I really hated that D-bag!!

[smedindy]

I think you're painting some of these faculty with a very broad brush. I believe that some faculty have issues with athletics because of the resources it eats up and the perception that some schools lower admissions standards to admit athletes all in the name of a good team.

In fact, in D-1, a lot of those arguements are solid arguements against big time football, because D-1 football does eat up a lot of resources and more often than not is a money loser.

[DarkSide-D]

Smeds,

I don't think that either Oldguy or myself are painting these administrations with broadbrushes.  We both said "members of", and "those of" the administration.  I can't speak for Oldguy, but I know many faculty members at Woo who wholeheartedly support the athletics.  But there are still those who wish to eliminate athletics on campus.  It has happend in the past at woo where no intercollegiate sports were played at Woo (although that was over a hundred years ago).  But there are still some members of the faculty who wish to limit the roll of sports at Woo.  If one looks at the history of Woo's sports, it comes and goes in spurts where the administration will support its programs, then roll them back.

[KC]

I didn't say all faculty, I said many if not most.  There were huge fans of the football team at Kenyon, and also those who held it against you.  I experienced both first hand.  I even had a professor who consistently tried to explain things in terms I could understand, using these awful football analogies that just showed he had no idea what he was talking about.  Some faculty look down on football players, just like they look down on Greeks or whatever else the lightning rod of the day is.  I would expect it to be a little different at Wabash since it is an all dude school, but I'm sure there are professors there who dislike jocks.  As far as the stat from the 8 last years, that was my point.  I won't deny that Kenyon, Denison, and Oberlin used to really suck.  They still might not be that good, but you could make a valid (if ultimately incorrect) argument that any or all of them will finish higher then Gheny, OWU, and Wooster next year.  I don't see that happening, but it isn't that unreasonable.  Two teams at the top, two at the bottom, and 6 in some uncertain order in the middle.  Parity.

[smedindy]

I do still think it's a big five - little five. With good scheduling and luck one of the little five can rise up, but in reality none of the little five should be favored over Allegheny or OWU.

[wally_wabash]

The final standings can be a bit misleading given the unbalanced schedule that we have in the NCAC.  Every year there is one team that finishes with a better conference record than AC/OWU/WC/WU/CoW.  That's almost never because said team beat any of the aforementioned five head-to-head.  It's because one of the aforementioned five played, and probably lost, to the other four in the group.  Parity implies that any team in the league can beat any other team in the league on any given gameday, and that simply isn't the case in the NCAC.  Over 8 seasons, the record is 3 wins, 100+ losses for the bottom five vs. the top five.  

You compared the NCAC to the NFL with regards to parity....the NFL has parity.  5 of the 6 teams in the NFC playoffs this year were not in the NFC playoffs last year.  That's parity.  

And I'm still curious as to what the difference is between Kenyon pouring resources into having a nationally superior swimming team (you don't win 87 national championships in a row or whatever it is without plenty of support from somewhere) and dedicating some resources to having a competitive football team.  I'm not picking on you here, KC, I'm genuinely curious as to why good football programs are a lightning rod (both internally and externally) for criticisms about academic integrity, which I'm assuming is the impetus behind the opposition to the football team at Kenyon (and everywhere else...every school has this faction).  

[KC]

I don't know how or why Kenyon swimming got so good, but it has gotten to the point where the monster feeds off itself and excellence is expected.  The swim team certainly must have some pull somewhere because they constantly recruit kids from Brazil and other exotic locales that your typical Kenyon kid has never visited, much less been raised in.  But the typical reaction to this among the faculty, students, and whoever else is probably the same as most people's reading this, "who cares?"  They may be excellent, but no one really notices them, they are a niche group, albeit one with resources from some mysterious place.  Football is not a niche in the United States, certainly not in Ohio.  Kenyon is a very liberal school, and so are the professors.  When our illustrious AD removed us from the conference a few years ago, there was a debate among the trustees to do away with the team.  One of the reasons was because football is a barbaric game that flies in the face of the ideals of an institution of higher learning or some crap like that.  That mindset obviously didn't win out, but that it was even there speaks to the general opinion of football by some around the school.

Again, I won't argue about the last eight years.  But does anyone really think that number is going to stay at three wins for the "little five" next year?

[scotty]

just heard today that Wooster cornerback and punt returner, Keith Adams, has reenrolled...should be a definite plus for next season...welcome back...