FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[D O.C.]

Aplogist

[bleedpurple]

Aplogist

Spelling is hard for all of us at bar time. 

[bleedpurple]

I have actually mentioned this idea, but the powers that be turn over often in recent years and I'm sure the new people haven't heard it. I'll write about it at some point. I need to do some legwork and pull up examples of how it would have worked in previous years.

As frustrating as the turnover can be, maybe therein lies the opportunity for change!

[D3MAFAN]

Should 8 conferences be earmarked for "play-in" games like the NCAA basketball tourney?

I don't see room in the calendar for play-in games. That would be expanding the calendar (and/or the field) and the Division III membership is unlikely to sign off on that.

Even if we asked those conferences to finish their season a week early, then we are changing their calendar to either play 12 games in a row with no bye or come into camp a week earlier. In many cases, the conferences that would likely play in these games would also be ones where schools and athletic departments would not be amenable to paying to open the dorms a week earlier, etc.

I think a system in which we ask conferences to "earn" that automatic bid by surpassing a relatively low bar, something like having the champ be in the top 15-20 of their region, is a viable alternative as the field gets squeezed. For example, last year, this would have excluded Christopher Newport for sure, probably Mount Ida and St. Scholastica, all of whom got blitzed in the first round.

If a champ of one of those conferences goes 9-0 or 10-0, in, automatically, no questions asked. I have no problem with that. if they go 8-2, 7-3, 6-4, then we should have the ability to reassign that bid as an at-large.

This is just a thumbnail sketch of the idea. Needs more detail around it. But this is the solution I think it worth exploring. It gives those conferences a fair shot at getting into the field, which I think those conferences need in order to improve. But if they don't produce a team that can even pretend to be competitive, then we shouldn't feel obliged to give them a bid every year.

First of all, I like your idea.  But I question why there isn't room for the play in weekend.  It appears that even the teams with 10 games all have a bye week this year?  Doesn't look like the season would need to start sooner.  Just end quicker.  10 weeks, 10 games.

I think if we forced those conferences to play their 10 games straight through without a bye then there would be some legitimate concerns raised for the safety of the student-athletes. Very few schools choose to schedule this way and for good reason.

I disagree for two reasons:
1. A quick look at bye's for this season shows the bulk of the bye's falling in to two categories.  The first being totally random throughout the league season for conferences with an odd number of teams.  The second being predominately towards the beginning of the season, case in point, the OAC where most members took the second week as a bye.  If the conference was concerned about injuries they would have taken off a week in the middle.  No offense intended to either the conference or the teams.  It doesn't appear to be a factor in the decision making process.
2. My second reason is that I've seen no reason (studies or articles) to indicate that a longer season increases the rate of injury.  More injuries sure, but do injuries INCREASE in the latter weeks of a season.

Respectfully submitted.  And I apologize for hijacking the WIAC board and I'll leave the last word on this to Pat.

I think you make a valid point in that regard, I have even seen teams that have had their bye-week during week one and agree if there was any concession to the safety of players, conference leadership, would find away to prevent that team from going 10 straight weeks without a bye. Also, since every division but DI-BCS have a playoff, you do see teams going over 10 weeks without a bye. However, if a team wins the championship at the end of the day, none of the coaches or players would say if they had a chance to change something, I am sure adding a bye-week would be at the bottom of the list. 


500 posts, YES!

[WarhawkDad]

Should 8 conferences be earmarked for "play-in" games like the NCAA basketball tourney?

I don't see room in the calendar for play-in games. That would be expanding the calendar (and/or the field) and the Division III membership is unlikely to sign off on that.

Even if we asked those conferences to finish their season a week early, then we are changing their calendar to either play 12 games in a row with no bye or come into camp a week earlier. In many cases, the conferences that would likely play in these games would also be ones where schools and athletic departments would not be amenable to paying to open the dorms a week earlier, etc.

I think a system in which we ask conferences to "earn" that automatic bid by surpassing a relatively low bar, something like having the champ be in the top 15-20 of their region, is a viable alternative as the field gets squeezed. For example, last year, this would have excluded Christopher Newport for sure, probably Mount Ida and St. Scholastica, all of whom got blitzed in the first round.

If a champ of one of those conferences goes 9-0 or 10-0, in, automatically, no questions asked. I have no problem with that. if they go 8-2, 7-3, 6-4, then we should have the ability to reassign that bid as an at-large.

This is just a thumbnail sketch of the idea. Needs more detail around it. But this is the solution I think it worth exploring. It gives those conferences a fair shot at getting into the field, which I think those conferences need in order to improve. But if they don't produce a team that can even pretend to be competitive, then we shouldn't feel obliged to give them a bid every year.

First of all, I like your idea.  But I question why there isn't room for the play in weekend.  It appears that even the teams with 10 games all have a bye week this year?  Doesn't look like the season would need to start sooner.  Just end quicker.  10 weeks, 10 games.

I think if we forced those conferences to play their 10 games straight through without a bye then there would be some legitimate concerns raised for the safety of the student-athletes. Very few schools choose to schedule this way and for good reason.

I disagree for two reasons:
1. A quick look at bye's for this season shows the bulk of the bye's falling in to two categories.  The first being totally random throughout the league season for conferences with an odd number of teams.  The second being predominately towards the beginning of the season, case in point, the OAC where most members took the second week as a bye.  If the conference was concerned about injuries they would have taken off a week in the middle.  No offense intended to either the conference or the teams.  It doesn't appear to be a factor in the decision making process.
2. My second reason is that I've seen no reason (studies or articles) to indicate that a longer season increases the rate of injury.  More injuries sure, but do injuries INCREASE in the latter weeks of a season.

Respectfully submitted.  And I apologize for hijacking the WIAC board and I'll leave the last word on this to Pat.

No apologies necessary, absolutely great discussion and it has helped to upgrade the quality of discussion to something of real substance from the typical "who has the bigger dog"!   

[Pat Coleman]

I think you make a valid point in that regard, I have even seen teams that have had their bye-week during week one and agree if there was any concession to the safety of players, conference leadership, would find away to prevent that team from going 10 straight weeks without a bye. Also, since every division but DI-BCS have a playoff, you do see teams going over 10 weeks without a bye. However, if a team wins the championship at the end of the day, none of the coaches or players would say if they had a chance to change something, I am sure adding a bye-week would be at the bottom of the list. 


500 posts, YES!

I'm talking about the regular season schedule, obviously, not playoffs.

Of course, yes, there are 10-team conferences where the bye is in Week 2. The Centennial Conference takes a conference-wide bye midseason, even though it is a 10-team league. Some of the schools which don't play Week 1 actually only play nine-game schedules in those remaining 10 weeks.

I am not saying there's a study or anything that backs this up. There's a perception, and perception is enough to shape policy when it comes to student-athlete safety.

[oshfb]

Can someone from Oshkosh tell me what UW-UO is suppose to mean?  Prior to the game they showed a recruiting video and the students in it kept chanting UW-UO.  Did they add a word to their name that I don't know about?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUN4aorM8nw

I assume that's the video you're talking about. They are just fully saying double-u slowly. You-double-you-oh if you will. Hope that clears up any confusion.

That was 3 1/2 minutes of my life I'll never get back.

[oshfb]

I disagree for two reasons:
1. A quick look at bye's for this season shows the bulk of the bye's falling in to two categories.  The first being totally random throughout the league season for conferences with an odd number of teams.  The second being predominately towards the beginning of the season, case in point, the OAC where most members took the second week as a bye.  If the conference was concerned about injuries they would have taken off a week in the middle.  No offense intended to either the conference or the teams.  It doesn't appear to be a factor in the decision making process.
2. My second reason is that I've seen no reason (studies or articles) to indicate that a longer season increases the rate of injury.  More injuries sure, but do injuries INCREASE in the latter weeks of a season.

Respectfully submitted.  And I apologize for hijacking the WIAC board and I'll leave the last word on this to Pat.

I disagree. Regardless of where the bye week lands it is still beneficial to the athlete.

Even with a BYE in week 2 the athletes have been at it for 3-4 weeks when you include camp. That breaks up the season into 3 weeks, a bye week, then the remaining 9 games. That is still better than an entire season without a bye week.

[emma17]

I have actually mentioned this idea, but the powers that be turn over often in recent years and I'm sure the new people haven't heard it. I'll write about it at some point. I need to do some legwork and pull up examples of how it would have worked in previous years.

This would be a very interesting read Pat, I hope you will share it once you have time to get it done. 

Your write up will no doubt elicit great feedback from the boards and strengthen any recommendation you make.
Opening up more playoff spots for higher ranked teams that don't win their conference should help scheduling.         

[NewHawk]

the bye week is certainly beneficial to the coaches.  A week two bye week for a strong team gave them time to see their starters, find their weaknesses and make adjustments for the season and coach up the players.  As for the fans, the second week bye  is awful.  I know it has to do with when you can get opponents but to finally have football and then lose it for a week is flat out depressing.  I would rather see a bye week in the meat of the schedule when it does give players time to rest up and prepare for a big game, but I think it would be a mistake to eliminate it.   Having a bye weeks may not decrease serious injuries , but it lets those stingers and sore ankles heal before they have to play again.

[Pat Coleman]

I have actually mentioned this idea, but the powers that be turn over often in recent years and I'm sure the new people haven't heard it. I'll write about it at some point. I need to do some legwork and pull up examples of how it would have worked in previous years.

This would be a very interesting read Pat, I hope you will share it once you have time to get it done. 

Your write up will no doubt elicit great feedback from the boards and strengthen any recommendation you make.
Opening up more playoff spots for higher ranked teams that don't win their conference should help scheduling.       

I appreciate that. This is probably an offseason piece, though I will try to get it done sooner.

[badgerwarhawk]

Can someone from Oshkosh tell me what UW-UO is suppose to mean?  Prior to the game they showed a recruiting video and the students in it kept chanting UW-UO.  Did they add a word to their name that I don't know about?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUN4aorM8nw

I assume that's the video you're talking about. They are just fully saying double-u slowly. You-double-you-oh if you will. Hope that clears up any confusion.

That was 3 1/2 minutes of my life I'll never get back.

Ok, now I get it. 

[wartknight]

Can someone from Oshkosh tell me what UW-UO is suppose to mean?  Prior to the game they showed a recruiting video and the students in it kept chanting UW-UO.  Did they add a word to their name that I don't know about?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUN4aorM8nw

I assume that's the video you're talking about. They are just fully saying double-u slowly. You-double-you-oh if you will. Hope that clears up any confusion.

That was 3 1/2 minutes of my life I'll never get back.

Ditto
I thought I was watching an updated version of a kid's show from the 80's or 90's!

[bleedpurple]

Can someone from Oshkosh tell me what UW-UO is suppose to mean?  Prior to the game they showed a recruiting video and the students in it kept chanting UW-UO.  Did they add a word to their name that I don't know about?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUN4aorM8nw

I assume that's the video you're talking about. They are just fully saying double-u slowly. You-double-you-oh if you will. Hope that clears up any confusion.

That was 3 1/2 minutes of my life I'll never get back.

"...so many buildins, great classes..."   

[Brian R. Carroll]

I expect that UWL's gradually improving Eagles will defeat UWRF by a score of 27-14 this afternoon in La Crosse. This is essential if the Eagles are to finish with a winning WIAC record, which would be a boost for Coach Dettwiler's program. I think the Eagle defense is on the upswing and will largely hold the Falcons in check. It should be noted that RF won 2 seasons ago in La Crosse, their only win that year.