FB: Presidents' Athletic Conference

[Llamaguy]

Cleveland,

I agree with your post for the most part, but I don't buy the 'competition' in the PAC as the reason they couldn't move forward in the postseason.

There have been countless seasons where the PAC competition didn't exist, yet didn't  prove to be an obstacle for deep playoff runs.    Don't get me wrong, I would like to see the team more 'battle tested' during the season, but you can only play who is on your schedule.

That schedule may be well received next season with the graduating class anyway, but I have to wonder if W&J gets into the postseason again, will this flop be considered into the seeding process for future seasons? 

May be a mute point but other than the 2004 trip to the Regional final, when has a PAC team made a deep run in the playoffs since 1999?

W&J lost in the 1st Rd in 2000,2005,2007
Waynesburg lost in the 1st Rd in 2003
W&J lost in the 2nd Rd in 1999,2001,2002,2006

Is there a problem with being tested during the regular season? I don't know, but the playoff results have been pretty static since the miracle 2nd half Bridgewater had against W&J in 2000.

[Ralph Turner]

I think that W&J and the Pres AC benefit from being the strongest conference in their neck of the woods.

The 2004 South Regional Finals W&J loss to UMHB (52-16) was by a larger margin of victory than UMHB pasted on Trinity in the first round (32-13) or top-seed HSU in the second round (42-28) of the 2004 playoffs.

The W&J Presidents have a lot of good will in the NCAA.  They get the benefit of the doubt every season, and have usually been ranked high in the D3football.com Top 25 in week #11:

2003 -- (Wayneburg #22)
2004 -- W&J #5
2005 -- W&J #6
2006 -- W&J #20
2007 -- W&J #7

[Llamaguy]

I think that W&J and the Pres AC benefit from being the strongest conference in their neck of the woods.

The 2004 South Regional Finals W&J loss to UMHB (52-16) was by a larger margin of victory than UMHB pasted on Trinity in the first round (32-13) or top-seed HSU in the second round (42-28) of the 2004 playoffs.

The W&J Presidents have a lot of good will in the NCAA.  They get the benefit of the doubt every season, and have usually been ranked high in the D3football.com Top 25 in week #11:

2003 -- (Wayneburg #22)
2004 -- W&J #5
2005 -- W&J #6
2006 -- W&J #20
2007 -- W&J #7

And even that 2004 run started with a dbl overtime thriller over BC in the first round. It is a fine line but several of W&J's playoff losses have come at home, meaning they were the higher seed. Atleast in the NCAA's eyes.

[the_burghboy]

Maybe I'm missing something but why is 1999 the mark that is measured here? 

[Llamaguy]

Maybe I'm missing something but why is 1999 the mark that is measured here? 

1. Because that is how far the current D3football.com records are published.
2. Who cares how you scheduled 10 years ago when there were only 16 teams in the field and one win equaled a deep run in the playoffs.

IMO the PAC, specifically W&J, gets their high seed because they win their OOC games and roll the PAC every year. A 10-0 , 9-1 season will get you a high seed in the tournament by the current NCAA standards. Does not make you the best conference in the Northern end of the South region.

[the_burghboy]

So llamaguy, you don't think W&J's reputation as a program prior to 1999 has any bearing on how they are ranked or seeded? 

If Bethany goes 10-0 next season, would they get a high seed in your opinion? 

[Llamaguy]

So llamaguy, you don't think W&J's reputation as a program prior to 1999 has any bearing on how they are ranked or seeded? 

If Bethany goes 10-0 next season, would they get a high seed in your opinion? 

I will agree with you to a point. I don't think what happened 10 years ago matters, now the past 2 to 3 years yes! I'll use Bridgewater as an example, they had high regard after their 2001 Stagg Bowl appearance. Now after two straight years of not making the playoffs I see them having to climb the ladder to "South  region powerhouse" again.

To answer your question about Bethany, no. Although a conference with playoff wins does hold higher regard than those that have never won an NCAA playoff game.

[@d3jason]

Question: Is California (PA) success' drawing away some of the kids that W&J used to get in the early to mid-90's? I know (think) Luckhardt is there now.

[the_burghboy]

I'm probably biased, but I think part of it is Luckhardt, and part of it is the success in recent years of Duquesne and possibly even Robert Morris. 

Without being too personal, I work in a local school district, as well as my wife.  I'm also from a local school district that had a pretty good pipeline for players that contributed to the success in those years you speak of.

I don't think there is as much talent there in their defense, but also know of several cases where the successful student athlete was given luke warm to no attention from W&J, and have had success at other schools. 

I think a kid coming out and wanting to play at a competitive level in small college has more options available to them, but I also admit I think there is a certain player W&J recruited during the Luckhardt years that they don't get now. 

[@d3jason]

I'm probably biased, but I think part of it is Luckhardt, and part of it is the success in recent years of Duquesne and possibly even Robert Morris. 

Without being too personal, I work in a local school district, as well as my wife.  I'm also from a local school district that had a pretty good pipeline for players that contributed to the success in those years you speak of.

I don't think there is as much talent there in their defense, but also know of several cases where the successful student athlete was given luke warm to no attention from W&J, and have had success at other schools. 

I think a kid coming out and wanting to play at a competitive level in small college has more options available to them, but I also admit I think there is a certain player W&J recruited during the Luckhardt years that they don't get now. 

Thanks. Those were some great teams. I thought they were going to win it all in '94, but Albion played they game of their life.

[the_burghboy]

So llamaguy, you don't think W&J's reputation as a program prior to 1999 has any bearing on how they are ranked or seeded? 

If Bethany goes 10-0 next season, would they get a high seed in your opinion? 

I will agree with you to a point. I don't think what happened 10 years ago matters, now the past 2 to 3 years yes! I'll use Bridgewater as an example, they had high regard after their 2001 Stagg Bowl appearance. Now after two straight years of not making the playoffs I see them having to climb the ladder to "South  region powerhouse" again.

To answer your question about Bethany, no. Although a conference with playoff wins does hold higher regard than those that have never won an NCAA playoff game.

I guess we can agree to disagree.  You don't think what happened ten years ago matters, yet seem to cite what happened nine seasons ago (1999) as relevant.   I think we are on the same page as to if W&J deserved to get a #1 seed, but I definitely would never consider one win in the 16 team field a 'deep' run either.

It may seem ancient history to some, but I think that the two Stagg Bowl appearances in the early 90's combined with the consistency of winning the conference/playoff appearances lends a resume that has given them a higher seed, or the rankings nationally during the season.  

To say they are deserving of that I think is subject for debate and have no problem with that.  

[Llamaguy]

So llamaguy, you don't think W&J's reputation as a program prior to 1999 has any bearing on how they are ranked or seeded? 

If Bethany goes 10-0 next season, would they get a high seed in your opinion? 

I will agree with you to a point. I don't think what happened 10 years ago matters, now the past 2 to 3 years yes! I'll use Bridgewater as an example, they had high regard after their 2001 Stagg Bowl appearance. Now after two straight years of not making the playoffs I see them having to climb the ladder to "South  region powerhouse" again.

To answer your question about Bethany, no. Although a conference with playoff wins does hold higher regard than those that have never won an NCAA playoff game.

I guess we can agree to disagree.  You don't think what happened ten years ago matters, yet seem to cite what happened nine seasons ago (1999) as relevant.   I think we are on the same page as to if W&J deserved to get a #1 seed, but I definitely would never consider one win in the 16 team field a 'deep' run either.

It may seem ancient history to some, but I think that the two Stagg Bowl appearances in the early 90's combined with the consistency of winning the conference/playoff appearances lends a resume that has given them a higher seed, or the rankings nationally during the season.  

To say they are deserving of that I think is subject for debate and have no problem with that.  

Fair enough, although I never said 1999 was relevant, just listed all the results I had from D3football.com for comparison as to how they made a deep run in the last 8-9 years? I still contend the last 2-3 years is what matters, in which case, UMHB and Wesley are the powers of the South, where in '02,'03,'04 it was Bridgewater, Trinity, UMHB, and W&J. W&J is still the first team on the 2nd tier because they continue to make the playoffs each year. A couple of runs to the Semis like Wesley has done and they can jump back onto the first tier again.

ps. If we are looking at all time historic D3 powers I would include Wittenburg & Ithaca in the 70's, Augustana in the 80's, Mt Union, Rowan (always a bridesmaid), UW-Lax, and W&J in the 90's, and Mt. Union and St. John's since 2000 with  UWW and UMHB about to join the group.

[Ralph Turner]

For those of you who are still wondering why W&J attempted a fake kick, here is an article about it from the local paper.
http://www.observer-reporter.com/OR/Story/11_18_W_amp_J_NCW_game_story

Copied from the ASC Board.

I agree with Coach Sirianni's call.  Go for it!

[Bob.Gregg]

...But Keith doesn't speak for the site, any more than the Observer-Reporter's sports columnist speaks for the newspaper as a whole. You're a media guy, right? Take off the W&J hat and think like a media person.

That's a joke--Keith doesn't speak for the site...He's 1/3 of the Kingsmen Trio--Pat, Keith & Gordon.  It might be convenient to say he doesn't in this instance, but he does.  Believe me, if Keith says something libelous, the SITE's errors & omissions insurance is going get examined.  And protestations that "Keith doesn't speak for the site" will fall on deaf ears.

And my comments on THIS topic, shy of the fact that Keith's original commentary included the Presidents, had NOTHING to do with my association with W&J.  They were about a regular columnist predicting a W&J loss in the first round and the publisher posting a comment that the site never predicted a first-round loss.  Period.

I have been a fair, regular and objective poster to these boards since their inception.  I've callled spades spades for years, and will continue to do so.  If that's not acceptable, I guess I'll just pull my W&J hat down over my ears and try to get ready for winter.  It came to Wash., Pa about a week earlier than I expected, but it's arrival wasn't a total surprise to me, either.

Thank you for a great site covering D-III football!

[Pat Coleman]

Yeah -- one columnist does not speak for the site nor one columnist for any publication.

If you read the newspaper and see the unsigned editorials on the editorial page, THAT is the opinion of the publication. Anything else is the opinion of one person.