Around the Nation board

[redswarm81]

. . . From where I sit, NESCAC hasn't left Division III for football--on the contrary, their policy with respect to football appears more consistent with the principles of Division III athletics than even the NCAA's Division III national playoff.

I should have clarified my applause for the NCAA's encouragement of regional competition.  I'm not defending the NCAA's geographical line-drawing that they call "regions."  I'm especially not defending the two different definitions that the NCAA uses for "in-region."  I should have used the word "local."  I'm applauding the practice of encouraging local competition.

Since the NESCAC plays NO other d3 teams, however local they may be, in my view they are not a part of d3 for football.

Local is to be preferred (as I'm sure both the 'academics' and the 'bean counters' at every d3 school agree), but why such arbitrary (and contradictory) rules?  Can't schools be trusted to do what is in their interests (including economic interests)?  Calling some games 'in-region' (even if between schools 2,000 miles apart, in a location an additional 2,000 miles away), yet a rivalry game 202 miles away (which isn't even 202 miles, but that is what the NCAA software says) 'non-region' is insane.

Using an 'in-region' rule requires that rules be set.  But such rules will inevitably be arbitrary, capricious, and sometimes downright stupid.  All games between d3 opponents should count for SoS and Pool B and C; to do otherwise invites ridicule.  IF some rich school(s) start abusing the 'open' system, the topic can be revisited.

But I doubt any school will desire to both waste resources and be subjected to vituperation.

So only teams that play out of conference games are Division III in your view?  I think that's a rather restrictive criterion.

Knock yourself out complaining about the NCAA's multiple definitions of "in-region," you'll get no argument from me.

But you're unlikely to persuade me if you're suggesting that Division III football ought to be restricted to those who are willing to play outside their conference, and by extension, outside any geographical limit that might be called "local."

Football is not in any school's economic interest at any level, least of all Division III.

I think that the NCAA promotes and endorses some pretty hypocritical and ruinous policies.  I happen to believe that their policy emphasizing local competition is one of their best policies.  Their definitions of "in-region" aren't entirely consistent with their policy of promoting local competition.  I further believe that it is bald hypocrisy for the NCAA to contradict/controvert its "local competition" policy by promoting and financing a national tournament.  Some believe the opposite, i.e. that its emphasis on local competition is hypocritical viz. its national tournament.  But I suspect those who believe differently than I do understand that a policy promoting regular season travel on the scale of the national tournament is inconsistent with an academics-first focus.  (Is "academics-first" one of the arbitrary rules that so rankles you?)

[Mr. Ypsi]

redswarm, I think you are missing my point on non-con games.  NESCAC could choose to skip the national tourney and still be d3.  But if they never play ANYONE outside of NESCAC, are they not simply NESCAC football?  How are they d3 football?

You now seem to be opposed to national tourneys in general.  That is your prerogative.

BUT ... why then is there even a d3?  Couldn't conferences set their own rules?

And why is Williams so damned proud of the Directors' Cup?!  It is, after all, based on national tournament results.  (And a horribly flawed calculation, but that is a separate rant. )  If NESCAC was so 'pristine', shouldn't they opt out of ALL national tournaments?  (Try running that one by their basketball (among other sports) teams?! )

[Mr. Ypsi]

BTW, redswarm, I'm a retired professor.  "Academics first" is unlikely to rankle me!

[redswarm81]

redswarm, I think you are missing my point on non-con games.  NESCAC could choose to skip the national tourney and still be d3.  But if they never play ANYONE outside of NESCAC, are they not simply NESCAC football?  How are they d3 football?

You now seem to be opposed to national tourneys in general.  That is your prerogative.

BUT ... why then is there even a d3?  Couldn't conferences set their own rules?

And why is Williams so damned proud of the Directors' Cup?!  It is, after all, . . . blah blah blah having nothing to do with Division III football blah blah blah . . .

Doc, I think I understand your point.  It's the evidence and argument you're using to make your point that I don't understand.

According to your argument point, NESCAC can choose to skip the national tournament and still be Division III football.  Well, NESCAC does choose to skip the national tournament, but you don't regard them as Division III football--why not?  As near as I can tell, it's only because they don't play out of conference.

So your answer to my earlier question must be yes--only teams that play out of conference games can be considered Division III football.  If I'm missing something, let me know.

Keeping football as a non-revenue activity, and not offering football scholarships are also a part of Division III football aren't they, Doc?

I know you're a retired professor, but (at least where NESCAC football is concerned) you don't seem to be an enthusiastic advocate of the proper role of athletics as secondary to academics.

[K-Mack]

Keith,
I should have been more clear in what Ypsi said that I was agreeing with.  He said "The committee this year went for the flawed SoS, like white on rice!"  The flawed SoS is the point I agree with- as I agree with you in their failure to apply criteria consistently from year to year.

At the end of the day, it could very well end up that NCC and/or St. Thomas advances to the Stagg.  However, I still believe that despite their 10-0 records and SoS, the reward of home field throughout should first have been earned by dethroning the sitting champion.  Then, if the same situation exists next year at selection time, they are the clear #1 seeds, no complaints from me.  Of course, that would require looking at past performance, I know, I know....it's all about this year only.

That's fair, dethroning the sitting champion, as it usually applies in D3. But in years like 2004, when defending champ St. John's missed the field, it would not be useful.

My point on that has been while I think UWW is the No. 1 team (based on what I've observed this year) and would have been a common sense No. 1 seed, I don't mind asking UMU or UWW to go on the road in the semis to win the title because it's the same thing UMHB, Wesley, St. John's, Linfield et. al. are asked to do every year.

I'm sure if UWW was at home this week and NC was on the road, nobody'd be making an issue of it. But ah well.

[Ralph Turner]

redswarm, I think you are missing my point on non-con games.  NESCAC could choose to skip the national tourney and still be d3.  But if they never play ANYONE outside of NESCAC, are they not simply NESCAC football?  How are they d3 football?

You now seem to be opposed to national tourneys in general.  That is your prerogative.

BUT ... why then is there even a d3?  Couldn't conferences set their own rules?

And why is Williams so damned proud of the Directors' Cup?!  It is, after all, based on national tournament results.  (And a horribly flawed calculation, but that is a separate rant. )  If NESCAC was so 'pristine', shouldn't they opt out of ALL national tournaments?  (Try running that one by their basketball (among other sports) teams?! )

One of the reasons for the NESCAC's not participating in the D3football playoffs has been stated that it interferes with exam schedules. 

When one looks at the Championship dates for the Spring sports, the proverbial wheels come off the wagon.
Baseball, softball, track & field, golf, etc. compete right thru the exams.

[hazzben]

redswarm, I think you are missing my point on non-con games.  NESCAC could choose to skip the national tourney and still be d3.  But if they never play ANYONE outside of NESCAC, are they not simply NESCAC football?  How are they d3 football?

Well said Mr. Y, and redswarm81, I think the argument is pretty clear...

[Freebird]

. . . From where I sit, NESCAC hasn't left Division III for football--on the contrary, their policy with respect to football appears more consistent with the principles of Division III athletics than even the NCAA's Division III national playoff.

I should have clarified my applause for the NCAA's encouragement of regional competition.  I'm not defending the NCAA's geographical line-drawing that they call "regions."  I'm especially not defending the two different definitions that the NCAA uses for "in-region."  I should have used the word "local."  I'm applauding the practice of encouraging local competition.

Since the NESCAC plays NO other d3 teams, however local they may be, in my view they are not a part of d3 for football.

Local is to be preferred (as I'm sure both the 'academics' and the 'bean counters' at every d3 school agree), but why such arbitrary (and contradictory) rules?  Can't schools be trusted to do what is in their interests (including economic interests)?  Calling some games 'in-region' (even if between schools 2,000 miles apart, in a location an additional 2,000 miles away), yet a rivalry game 202 miles away (which isn't even 202 miles, but that is what the NCAA software says) 'non-region' is insane.

Using an 'in-region' rule requires that rules be set.  But such rules will inevitably be arbitrary, capricious, and sometimes downright stupid.  All games between d3 opponents should count for SoS and Pool B and C; to do otherwise invites ridicule.  IF some rich school(s) start abusing the 'open' system, the topic can be revisited.

But I doubt any school will desire to both waste resources and be subjected to vituperation.

So only teams that play out of conference games are Division III in your view?  I think that's a rather restrictive criterion.

Knock yourself out complaining about the NCAA's multiple definitions of "in-region," you'll get no argument from me.

But you're unlikely to persuade me if you're suggesting that Division III football ought to be restricted to those who are willing to play outside their conference, and by extension, outside any geographical limit that might be called "local."

Football is not in any school's economic interest at any level, least of all Division III.

I think that the NCAA promotes and endorses some pretty hypocritical and ruinous policies.  I happen to believe that their policy emphasizing local competition is one of their best policies.  Their definitions of "in-region" aren't entirely consistent with their policy of promoting local competition.  I further believe that it is bald hypocrisy for the NCAA to contradict/controvert its "local competition" policy by promoting and financing a national tournament.  Some believe the opposite, i.e. that its emphasis on local competition is hypocritical viz. its national tournament.  But I suspect those who believe differently than I do understand that a policy promoting regular season travel on the scale of the national tournament is inconsistent with an academics-first focus.  (Is "academics-first" one of the arbitrary rules that so rankles you?)

For many D3 and NAIA schools athletics and specifically football raise their totally enrollment which increases revenue. For many schools having a football teams means around 100 additional students. My dad is the provost at an NAIA school that added football about 10 years ago. Previous to that it was a respected soccer/basketball/baseball centered school and many students objected to the idea of football knowing it would draw attention away from those other sports. In the end it came down to the value of having adding more kids to the campus and the extra attention nationally that football can provide.

[redswarm81]

redswarm, I think you are missing my point on non-con games.  NESCAC could choose to skip the national tourney and still be d3.  But if they never play ANYONE outside of NESCAC, are they not simply NESCAC football?  How are they d3 football?

You now seem to be opposed to national tourneys in general.  That is your prerogative.

BUT ... why then is there even a d3?  Couldn't conferences set their own rules?

And why is Williams so damned proud of the Directors' Cup?!  It is, after all, based on national tournament results.  (And a horribly flawed calculation, but that is a separate rant. )  If NESCAC was so 'pristine', shouldn't they opt out of ALL national tournaments?  (Try running that one by their basketball (among other sports) teams?! )

One of the reasons for the NESCAC's not participating in the D3football playoffs has been stated that it interferes with exam schedules. 

When one looks at the Championship dates for the Spring sports, the proverbial wheels come off the wagon.
Baseball, softball, track & field, golf, etc. compete right thru the exams.

So, in order to keep academics ahead of athletics and avoid hypocrisy--as everyone but me states so logically and so eloquently--NESCAC schools ought to participate in the Division III football tournament, that interferes with the exam schedule for a minimum of what, 60 students?

How can I not see the wisdom in such an inescapable conclusion?

[Ralph Turner]

...

One of the reasons for the NESCAC's not participating in the D3football playoffs has been stated that it interferes with exam schedules.  

When one looks at the Championship dates for the Spring sports, the proverbial wheels come off the wagon.
Baseball, softball, track & field, golf, etc. compete right thru the exams.

So, in order to keep academics ahead of athletics and avoid hypocrisy--as everyone but me states so logically and so eloquently--NESCAC schools ought to participate in the Division III football tournament, that interferes with the exam schedule for a minimum of what, 60 students?
How can I not see the wisdom in such an inescapable conclusion?

Thanks for the response.  

No, I believe that they can compete in any format and championship that they wish.  However, the raison d'etre for which they conduct their football championship is literally "disconnected" from Division III.

They are hypocritical if they say that they do not wish to interfere with the academic schedule of their student athletes when they participate in post season tourneys that overlap final semseter/trimester exams.  I dare say that the NESCAC post-season participants in sports other than football are likely to be competing long after the football champion has been beaten in the first or second round of the football playoffs.  An example is the Bowdoin Men's Soccer team, which shall be competing in San Antonio next weekend.

I just seek intellectual consistency.

[retagent]

I have just read the ongoing disagreement. Without commenting on the merits, it appears that some are trying to be more erudite and pedantic than is necessary. Someone taught me that using $100 words rather than $.02 words, when the $.02 word would suffice, is a waste of money. I know you're smart, let's not hurt yourself by twisting your vocabulary in circles in order to prove to yourself that you possess intelligence. My hair hurts, so I'm going to take an analgesic. (Heaven forbid that I would say tylenol, when I'm actually speaking about a generic ibuprofen tablet. It probably wouldn't have the desired effect - RIGHT!)

[usee]

Ralph, Great post! +k

[Ralph Turner]

I have just read the ongoing disagreement. Without commenting on the merits, it appears that some are trying to be more erudite and pedantic than is necessary. Someone taught me that using $100 words rather than $.02 words, when the $.02 word would suffice, is a waste of money. I know you're smart, let's not hurt yourself by twisting your vocabulary in circles in order to prove to yourself that you possess intelligence. My hair hurts, so I'm going to take an analgesic. (Heaven forbid that I would say tylenol, when I'm actually speaking about a generic ibuprofen tablet. It probably wouldn't have the desired effect - RIGHT!)

Tylenol ^TM  (Brand name, created by some marketing genius)  Acetaminophen (long $100 word for the actual compound, also known as "generic", most properly named, N-(4-hydroxyphenyl)acetamide )

Advil ^TM  (Brand name)  Ibuprofen ("generic" from the old nomenclature iso-butyl-propanoic-phenolic acid and now known as (RS)-2-(4-(2-methylpropyl)phenyl)propanoic acid)

[frank uible]

In my view (which is not that of an insider) NESCAC's posture on football is not about academics but is about football. Since its posture on other sports is not about football but is about the other sport, then its football and non-football postures are not inconsistent. All this does not mean I necessarily agree with NESCAC's posture on football - which, if one cares, I don't.

[Mr. Ypsi]

In my view (which is not that of an insider) NESCAC's posture on football is not about academics but is about football. Since its posture on other sports is not about football but is about the other sport, then its football and non-football postures are not inconsistent. All this does not mean I necessarily agree with NESCAC's posture on football - which, if one cares, I don't.

I have no insider info on NESCAC's reasoning, either.  But redswarm claims it is for academic reasons, and is therefore a virtue.  As Ralph rather pointedly observed, this is blatant nonsense since they participate in all other post-season tourneys, which also occur during final exam times.

This has gotten rather silly.  It all began when I said that IMO, NESCAC football was not a part of d3 (since they NEVER play anyone outside of NESCAC, they are NESCAC football, not d3 football).  I seriously doubt that ADs at Williams, Amherst, etc., care about my opinion, and d3 has not expelled them, so why the kerfluffle?

IMO, NESCAC is a valued member of d3 in all other sports, but does not exist in d3 football.