FB: Ohio Athletic Conference

[Desertraider]

But we must include Wilmington lest they have hurt feelings. So (drumroll!) - Wilmington with 139 conference losses since 1998. If only they had the benefit of those extra 6 years. They could a been contenders!

If you go back to 1992 on their website (from 92-97 they show no conference affiliation) then the losses would go to 179. Wow that makes Musky look less terrible.

[Desertraider]

Ah what the heck. Against teams they have played at least 3x since 1893 Hiram has a .500 or better record against only 8. They are:
Ashland
Bethany
Case
Kalamazoo
Kenyon
Oberlin
Thiel
Garrettsville (not a college team).

They have a winning record against only Ashland, Case and Thiel. All the rest they are at .500

[Desertraider]

When do the Rose Hulman fans come in and promise Mount hasn't seen a team like them before?

[Mr. Ypsi]

When do the Rose Hulman fans come in and promise Mount hasn't seen a team like them before?

Don't hold your breath!

A) I don't recall that RHIT fans even exist recently.

B) If they did, I doubt they would be dumb enough to go that route.

That trash only occurs in the playoffs from non-North Region fans giddy about a team not used to the playoffs.  By now I doubt there is ANY fan of ANY team who would go there - unless they were under ten years old!

[Desertraider]

So you're saying there's a chance!

[Craft_Beermeister]

When do the Rose Hulman fans come in and promise Mount hasn't seen a team like them before?

I haven't seen any bragging but, I saw a posting on Twitter the other day that when Rose Hulman head football coach was asked why play powerhouse Mount Union  the arcile indicated "Coach Jeff Sokol says they scheduled the game four years ago as a measuring stick.  He enters his 8th season at Rose and has the best career winning percentage.  He is 48-23 at the school and took the Engineers to their first ever appearance in the Division III playoffs in 2016.".

As a fellow engineer I'm might be tempted to root for the Fightin' Engineer, but as an old time engineer I would conclude that their odds of winning aren't very good.  i hope the Engieers put up a good fight and the game is competitive for the most part.  I'm ready for some football.  I hope Ross Hulman can make a game out of it and when the game is over Choach Sokol gets out his slide rule or whatever he uses to measure the progress he has made with his team.

[jknezek]

When do the Rose Hulman fans come in and promise Mount hasn't seen a team like them before?

I haven't seen any bragging but, I saw a posting on Twitter the other day that when Rose Hulman head football coach was asked why play powerhouse Mount Union  the arcile indicated "Coach Jeff Sokol says they scheduled the game four years ago as a measuring stick.  He enters his 8th season at Rose and has the best career winning percentage.  He is 48-23 at the school and took the Engineers to their first ever appearance in the Division III playoffs in 2016.".

As a fellow engineer I'm might be tempted to root for the Fightin' Engineer, but as an old time engineer I would conclude that their odds of winning aren't very good.  i hope the Engieers put up a good fight and the game is competitive for the most part.  I'm ready for some football.  I hope Ross Hulman can make a game out of it and when the game is over Choach Sokol gets out his slide rule or whatever he uses to measure the progress he has made with his team.

I think this is a fair point from the RHIT coach. From some team sources I know, W&L took a lot from the playoff game at UMU last year. I don't think the Generals would schedule UMU for a regular season opener, they tend to look other directions, but several of the people around the program that I have talked to said it was a really good experience for the team.

W&L has been to the playoffs several times, and taken some whoopings, but going to UMU was different. The term "measuring stick" was used, but mainly in terms of guys seeing the speed and strength required to compete at the National Championship level. The guys at W&L were toddlers when Bridgewater was that good, and the ODAC hasn't produced a team of that quality since. So there was a lot of talk about missing angles on tackles because they underestimated speed and especially the difference in special teams, where a small numbers team like W&L tends to use a lot of underclassmen. But they also took a lot of pride in how well the running game and scheme worked in the open field, even if they couldn't keep moving the chains once the field compressed.

To be fair, there were also some thanks for the weather which limited the damage that UMU would have done through the air. Had the Generals lost by 60, I'm not sure there would have been so much positivity. But controlling the clock, moving the ball... yeah, moral victories which aren't really what you play for. But sometimes you take what you can when you play the National Champs.

So I think the RHIT coach has a fair point. If you see your program moving forward and improving, and you want to really know what it takes, schedule a top tier team and see what happens. If it works out better than expected, even if you lose, it can be a good experience.

[DuffMan]

So I think the RHIT coach has a fair point. If you see your program moving forward and improving, and you want to really know what it takes, schedule a top tier team and see what happens. If it works out better than expected, even if you lose, it can be a good experience.

I would agree here.  Look what Whitewater did in 2002-started the season with MUC and SJU.  They took their lumps (44-21 and 42-18), but within a couple of years, they went on a tear.

[jknezek]

So I think the RHIT coach has a fair point. If you see your program moving forward and improving, and you want to really know what it takes, schedule a top tier team and see what happens. If it works out better than expected, even if you lose, it can be a good experience.

I would agree here.  Look what Whitewater did in 2002-started the season with MUC and SJU.  They took their lumps (44-21 and 42-18), but within a couple of years, they went on a tear.

I really think that is the exception, not the rule. I don't think teams like RHIT or NC Wesleyan have programs that are geared toward that level of success. I think it's just a way of showing your team where it is at. I think it's better for teams on the rise, like RHIT or Franklin a few years ago, than teams that seem to wallow a bit, like NC Wes or Bethany. But some of that is a function of how far out you have to schedule and how sustainable the program becomes.

W&L, of course, didn't choose to play UMU. It's just how it shook out. But I think, for the most part, while they wish they could have had an opponent more likely to provide that elusive first playoff win, the team was happy for the experience of playing UMU.

[Dr. Acula]

When do the Rose Hulman fans come in and promise Mount hasn't seen a team like them before?

I haven't seen any bragging but, I saw a posting on Twitter the other day that when Rose Hulman head football coach was asked why play powerhouse Mount Union  the arcile indicated "Coach Jeff Sokol says they scheduled the game four years ago as a measuring stick.  He enters his 8th season at Rose and has the best career winning percentage.  He is 48-23 at the school and took the Engineers to their first ever appearance in the Division III playoffs in 2016.".

As a fellow engineer I'm might be tempted to root for the Fightin' Engineer, but as an old time engineer I would conclude that their odds of winning aren't very good.  i hope the Engieers put up a good fight and the game is competitive for the most part.  I'm ready for some football.  I hope Ross Hulman can make a game out of it and when the game is over Choach Sokol gets out his slide rule or whatever he uses to measure the progress he has made with his team.

I think this is a fair point from the RHIT coach. From some team sources I know, W&L took a lot from the playoff game at UMU last year. I don't think the Generals would schedule UMU for a regular season opener, they tend to look other directions, but several of the people around the program that I have talked to said it was a really good experience for the team.

W&L has been to the playoffs several times, and taken some whoopings, but going to UMU was different. The term "measuring stick" was used, but mainly in terms of guys seeing the speed and strength required to compete at the National Championship level. The guys at W&L were toddlers when Bridgewater was that good, and the ODAC hasn't produced a team of that quality since. So there was a lot of talk about missing angles on tackles because they underestimated speed and especially the difference in special teams, where a small numbers team like W&L tends to use a lot of underclassmen. But they also took a lot of pride in how well the running game and scheme worked in the open field, even if they couldn't keep moving the chains once the field compressed.

To be fair, there were also some thanks for the weather which limited the damage that UMU would have done through the air. Had the Generals lost by 60, I'm not sure there would have been so much positivity. But controlling the clock, moving the ball... yeah, moral victories which aren't really what you play for. But sometimes you take what you can when you play the National Champs.

So I think the RHIT coach has a fair point. If you see your program moving forward and improving, and you want to really know what it takes, schedule a top tier team and see what happens. If it works out better than expected, even if you lose, it can be a good experience.

At a minimum the coaching staff can use it as game example of how the proper execution they probably harp on in practice daily works against everyone including the national champions.  If everyone does their job our system can move the ball against anyone.  I think that's a great thing to be able to remind kids.

[jknezek]

At a minimum the coaching staff can use it as game example of how the proper execution they probably harp on in practice daily works against everyone including the national champions.  If everyone does their job our system can move the ball against anyone.  I think that's a great thing to be able to remind kids.

Thank you for putting this better than I did! +K

[Bombers798891]

At a minimum the coaching staff can use it as game example of how the proper execution they probably harp on in practice daily works against everyone including the national champions.  If everyone does their job our system can move the ball against anyone.  I think that's a great thing to be able to remind kids.

Thank you for putting this better than I did! +K

Agreed. I know Ithaca took a lot of pride from what their offense was able to do against Mount in '07, even in a 24-point loss

[wally_wabash]

So I think the RHIT coach has a fair point. If you see your program moving forward and improving, and you want to really know what it takes, schedule a top tier team and see what happens. If it works out better than expected, even if you lose, it can be a good experience.

I would agree here.  Look what Whitewater did in 2002-started the season with MUC and SJU.  They took their lumps (44-21 and 42-18), but within a couple of years, they went on a tear.

I really think that is the exception, not the rule. I don't think teams like RHIT or NC Wesleyan have programs that are geared toward that level of success. I think it's just a way of showing your team where it is at. I think it's better for teams on the rise, like RHIT or Franklin a few years ago, than teams that seem to wallow a bit, like NC Wes or Bethany. But some of that is a function of how far out you have to schedule and how sustainable the program becomes.

W&L, of course, didn't choose to play UMU. It's just how it shook out. But I think, for the most part, while they wish they could have had an opponent more likely to provide that elusive first playoff win, the team was happy for the experience of playing UMU.

It is, and I did the empirical legwork to prove this a few years ago.  I'll quote that post below- do note that I haven't updated this since 2015 and the conversation then also included UWW- the other gold standard program at the time.  But the evidence is clear.  Your program doesn't vault into the top 10 because you decided to go get kicked around by Mount Union for a couple of years. 

It's been floated that there is a massive advantage to playing UWW or UMU because to be the best you have to play the best or whatever.  Maybe...I'm not sold.  I think it's useful, I don't think that's the thing that puts a program over the top.  Yes, UWW played UMU in 2002 and 2003 and then 24 months later they were a fixture in Salem.  This doesn't happen to everybody.  In fact, it doesn't happen to anybody else.  I did a quick and dirty look at who Mount Union (since 1999) and UWW (since 2005) played in their non-league schedules and I added in the five-year records of those teams in seasons immediately following their games with the division's heavyweights.  The results:

vs. Mount Union:
1999- Albion, 27-13 (5-year record after this game)
2000- Allegheny, 25-26
2001- Allegheny, 27-25
2002- UWW, 56-9
2003- UWW, 62-8
2004- Wash U, 30-22
2005- Wash U, 29-21
2006- Averett, 20-30
2007- Averett, 21-29
2008- SJF, 44-14*
2009- SJF, 46-13*
2010- UW-Oshkosh, 34-10 (2011-present)
2011- UW-Oshkosh, 27-7 (2012-present)
2012- Franklin, 16-7* (2013-present)
2013- Franklin, 8-3* (2014-present)
2014- Bethany, TBD

vs. UWW:
2005- St. Norbert, 43-10*
2005- Lakeland, 26-25
2006- Lakeland, 25-26
2006- UMHB, 28-10*
2007- Lakeland, 21-26
2007- UMHB, 59-7*
2008- Puget Sound, 3-42
2009- Puget Sound, 7-38
2010- Adrian, 31-11
2011- Franklin, 25-10*
2012- Wash U, 12-9
2012- Buffalo St., 13-8
2013- Wash U, 4-6
2013- Buffalo St., 8-3
2014- Franklin, TBD*
2015- TCNJ, TBD

The teams that I have asterisked on this list are teams that have really strong post-UMU/UWW records.  But we're looking for meaningful improvement that might be attributed, to some degree, to having played against these two powerhouse teams.  The asterisked teams were already established and were carrying excellent year-over-year win-loss records prior to playing these games.  So we can't really say playing UMU/UWW made them demonstrably better: they were already really good. 

The rest of the list isn't exactly a murderer's row of Division III football teams.  In a reasonably objective analysis here, I would say that teams that have benefitted perhaps/maybe/somewhat from these non-league games are '02/'03 UWW (obviously), '10/'11 UW-Oshkosh (although put a pin in this one...remains to be seen if UW-O has a legitimate beefy program here or if their w/l spike has a lot to do with a transcendent player), and 2010 Adrian.   Where it really matters, in the win/loss records, one team played these kinds of games and catapulted to the top of the division, two more appear to have significantly strengthened their positions, and the other 13 are either treading water (playoff caliber teams, but still not really touching the UMU/UWW level of excellence) or are otherwise fairly inconsequential in the macroscopic view of the division. 

As an aside here, maybe it's not just about getting that experience against the best, but there can be some other benefits to playing a team likely to win 10 games (or even 9 games in a bad year).  You get a nice SOS bump out of the deal which can help you on Selection Sunday.  However, I believe Wash U is the only team on our list here that has ever received an at-large bid (2013).  Their result against UWW (a tight loss) was no doubt about as good of a loss as you can have, but even then if we are to take that season's regional rankings leading into the final week of games, Wash U wasn't getting in unless Millsaps lost (they did) and that that loss happened to be against a common opponent (Rhodes, and it was).  That's amazing parlay right there.  So can you get some kind of edge with the committee by playing one of these teams?  In 2013, we saw it in the selections and we heard it from the commissioner- it was a resounding YES.  In 2014 (and many other years going back in time), the answer has been NO.  That inconsistency is frustrating and I think most coaches and ADs who strategize about their scheduling would fall on the side of preferring to be 9-1 in the at-large pool (with that loss to the league champion, obviously), than being 8-2 with an extra loss to UWW/UMU.  Historically (and yes I know there are a few exceptions), 9-1 is a better deal, regardless of the other criteria. 

So this is all kind of a way to look at the ideas here that 1) playing UWW or UMU is an automatic boon to your program.  It isn't.  It was for UWW for sure.  But what else happened in the early/mid 2000s at UWW that flipped the switch?  It wasn't just that they went and played a game with Mount Union and everything worked out.  There is a ton of administrative muscle behind that program.  Yes, the Mount Union games helped.  But the Mount Union game doesn't matter without the institutional support.  2) Playing September games with Mount Union or UWW is a matter of manliness or courage or whatever- it isn't.  The risk/reward for 98% of the division for playing a September game with those teams simply isn't worth it.  Find yourself in the at-large pool and there is very little evidence that having played one of those teams and lost helps.  Even find yourself in the automatic qualifier pool and it can still hurt- does Franklin have to play at Wabash in the 2014 championship if they don't lose to UWW?  Maybe it still plays out that way, but seeding 9-1 Franklin and 9-1 Wabash probably isn't as obvious as it was with 8-2 Franklin. 

In the end, the system doesn't incentivize people playing non-league games with those two schools.  The risk/reward isn't there and the data don't really support the notion that just lining up against those dudes will turn your program into the next powerhouse (if it did, coaches would be leaping over one another to get games with those teams). 

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

It may not automatically make your program better ... but it cannot necessarily hurt to try. Some programs see the light and turn the corner (including coaching staffs) and others do not. It is difficult to grade each institution on the same curve. Not everything, including administrations, Presidents, etc., see the same things the same way.

[reality check]

Apologies if this has been mentioned but ONU has a 2018 roster up on the website and a notable name is missing.  QB Will Freed is not listed.  Kickoff mentioned that he would have a tough time holding off McFadden for the job but it looks like that isn't a competition after all?!?  I don't want to speculate but it's an interesting twist.