FB: Presidents' Athletic Conference

[Bob.Gregg]

Hey, am I the only one with picks on this board?

You might be since Pick 'ems are supposed to be on another board...


On another front, the PAC, while competitve inside, appears to be woeful this year, perhaps the worst I've seen in 25 years covering.

Might have to rename to the Pathetic Athletic Conference.

[ScotsFan]

Hey, am I the only one with picks on this board?

You might be since Pick 'ems are supposed to be on another board...


On another front, the PAC, while competitve inside, appears to be woeful this year, perhaps the worst I've seen in 25 years covering.

Might have to rename to the Pathetic Athletic Conference.

Hey, you said it...   

I don't know if I'm more surprised at how easily Wooster dispacthed of Waynesburg or how W&J couldn't put perennial NCAC bottom dweller Oberlin away until late in the 4th quarter? 

That was a pretty impressive feat from Wooster holding Heller to under 100 yds for the first time in his collegiate carreer!  Especially considering just about everyone I saw with a prediction thought it would be a feat if Wooster held him under 200!

But, Oberlin being tied with W&J at 35's in the 4th quarter could be just as impressive a feat even though the Yeomen eventually ended up on the short end.  What an upset that would have been!

And then my alma mater, Westminster, just got it handed to them by the Berg?  I keep wondering when WC will return to the glory days of when I attended there in the late '80s to early '90s...  It doesn't appear to be anytime soon?! 

One thing's for sure.  The predicted top 3 in the PAC sure didn't perform like conference contenders on Saturday...

[SaintsFAN]

I thought from the time the pre-season conference rankings were released that Westminster didn't belong in the top 3...and those voting that way were definitely under the influence of hippie lettuce-- but there's nobody else to put up there...  Sometimes returning 17 starters from a 2-4 team isn't as good as it appears on paper. 

At any rate...it will be interesting to see how the top 2 bounce back.. they are our playoff candidates.   PAC is lucky to be ranked in the top 20 conference-wise this year. 

Next year should be better..

[Bob.Gregg]

SaintsFan

I'm not sure W&J needs to "bounce back".  The Presidents offense scored 49 points, and left a bunch on the table, particularly in a W&J defense-dominated third quarter.

Now, that's not to say that things can't be done better, especially punt-protection and execution.  Another week working the new defensive schemes won't hurt either.

[spikegrouchy]

Hey, am I the only one with picks on this board?

You might be since Pick 'ems are supposed to be on another board...


On another front, the PAC, while competitve inside, appears to be woeful this year, perhaps the worst I've seen in 25 years covering.

Might have to rename to the Pathetic Athletic Conference.

I keep checking for the PAC Pick'ems board and it doesn't seem to be set up yet.  If you know where it is, let me know.


You are right about the "new name" for the PAC.  Last year when W & J was beaten in the playoffs by an unranked team everyone thought it was a fluke.  I didn't.  The PAC schools are no where near being at the top of D3 football.  We can all "think" we are, but in reality that is just not the case.

I emailed the Geneva AD a couple of years ago after they had decided to get out of the NAIA and join NCAA D3.  I said that I hope they made the right decision.  After they lost to NAIA member Malone College by a big margin last year in the NCCAA Victory Bowl game, I wonder if they think that they should have stayed in a scholarship division.

Just as Westminster College has found out, just because you have had success in a scholarship division does not necessarily mean you are going to have success in D3.  

Let's see what happens when the PAC plays the MAC in 2010 & 2011.  Let's see how the PAC stacks up.

[Bob.Gregg]

PAC Pick-Em

[ScotsFan]

SaintsFan

I'm not sure W&J needs to "bounce back".  The Presidents offense scored 49 points, and left a bunch on the table, particularly in a W&J defense-dominated third quarter.

Now, that's not to say that things can't be done better, especially punt-protection and execution.  Another week working the new defensive schemes won't hurt either.

Just because W&J won doesn't mean they don't need to 'bounce back'.  Judging from the fact that Oberlin was at least a 30 point dog to the Presidents, and the fact that the game wasn't decided until the 4th quarter, I wouldn't have been too happy with that performance if I had been sitting on the W&J sidelines.  Maybe the offense doesn't need to 'bounce back' but I would definitely say that the defense would need to.  They won't make a post season run giving up 35 points to the likes of Oberlin...

[Bob.Gregg]

"30-point dog" isn't a fact at all.  Last I checked (and I did), there isn't a line on these games.  So, Oberlin being a "30-point dog" is a figment of somebody's imagination.

As far as the defense goes, they did "bounce back."  After allowing 213 yards in the first half, W&J's defense held the Yoemen to negative yards in the third quarter, and about 100 yards total in the second half, 50 of those yards on one busted play.

Call it bouncing back, adjustment, recognize in live play what was taught in practice, whatever.

Winning by 2 touchdowns a game that you should win isn't a crime.  In an opener, with a remade defense finding their game, it really wasn't that bad.  And when all 49 points come from your offense, it's not bad at all.  Could have been more, better? Sure.  And had that more, better come in the opportunities presented in the third quarter (by the defense), the outcome would have been clear sooner than it ultimately was.

[Ralph Turner]

I have used bornpowerindex.com and lazindex.com for the ASC pick'em for at least 4 years.

After the W&J-Oberlin game (and looking up the indices this evening), and considering the HFA's that they have told me, the W&J - Oberlin margin is about right.

Oberlin of the last two years is stronger.

[ScotsFan]

All I'm saying Bob is that W&J was up 56-14 after 3 quarters of play last year vs. Oberlin and then they called off the dogs and let their JV's finish up the game in the 4th quarter.  I don't think they had the luxury of calling off the dogs this year.  If you want to take solace in the fact that a middle of the road at best NCAC team almost took down your nationally ranked Presidents, more power to ya...  I don't think I would be looking at things as positively as you seem to be seeing it.

And as for the spread, I know it isn't anything official.  But the guy that runs the NCAC Pick 'em contest is usually pretty spot on in determining spreads of games and he had the Yeomen actually at 34 1/2 point dogs FWIW...  So actually, I was being generous in stating that Oberlin was only a 30 point underdog.

[Bob.Gregg]

If you want to take solace in the fact that a middle of the road at best NCAC team almost took down your nationally ranked Presidents, more power to ya...  I don't think I would be looking at things as positively as you seem to be seeing it.

And as for the spread, I know it isn't anything official.  But the guy that runs the NCAC Pick 'em contest is usually pretty spot on in determining spreads of games and he had the Yeomen actually at 34 1/2 point dogs FWIW...  So actually, I was being generous in stating that Oberlin was only a 30 point underdog.

Fact, Oberlin was 3rd in a 10-team conference last year, up one spot from the year before.
Fact, Oberlin is a better team this year than they were last year.
Fact, Wooster only saw the south end of the northbound '07 Yoemen.
Fact, Nov. 8, you'll get to make a first-hand evaluation of the Yoemen.
Fact, 30 or 34.5 point spreads set by "the guy that runs the NCAC Pick 'em contest" aren't worth really anything, at least not to me.  Try spending that at the gas station and see if they'll give you even a nickle a gallon off the price...

FWIW--I don't typically find much worthwhile in point spreads, not in the pros, the D-I's and certainly not at the D-III level.  I find much more value in "did you win the games you were supposed to win", in evaluating where things could have been done better, and in finding ways to improve those areas over which you have control.

[SaintsFAN]

Bob,

You're right...maybe not bounce back...but I'd hate to be their next opponent.


Thomas More is off this week and then travel to Waynesburg..  What should I expect Scotsfan?

[ScotsFan]

Fact, Oberlin was 3rd in a 10-team conference last year, up one spot from the year before.
Fact, Oberlin is a better team this year than they were last year.
Fact, Wooster only saw the south end of the northbound '07 Yoemen.
Fact, Nov. 8, you'll get to make a first-hand evaluation of the Yoemen.
Fact, 30 or 34.5 point spreads set by "the guy that runs the NCAC Pick 'em contest" aren't worth really anything, at least not to me.  Try spending that at the gas station and see if they'll give you even a nickle a gallon off the price...

FWIW--I don't typically find much worthwhile in point spreads, not in the pros, the D-I's and certainly not at the D-III level.  I find much more value in "did you win the games you were supposed to win", in evaluating where things could have been done better, and in finding ways to improve those areas over which you have control.

Looks like someone forgot to take their happy pill... 

Thomas More is off this week and then travel to Waynesburg..  What should I expect Scotsfan?

I'll have to wait until I see the spread...   

BTW, have fun talking amongst yourselves again...  All I was trying to do was stir up a little conversation in an otherwise fairly slow PAC message board but I had forgotten how overly sensitive W&J fans can get...    At least there doesn't appear to be any more of the obnoxious vanilla ice wannabes in here any more.  A start I guess...

[Bob.Gregg]

Why run off now, Scotsfan?  You wanted to "stir up a little conversation in an otherwise fairly slow PAC message board".  Now, having accomplished that, you run away because somebody didn't agree with your stirring utensil?

We don't have to agree to converse.  In fact, the exercise itself is more engaging, more beneficial if the parties DON'T agree.  But, that just the way one old, unhappy, overly-sensitive W&J person sees it.

Nice talking with you.  Sorry you had to leave just when the discussion got stirred up.

[Pat Coleman]

Oberlin was also 5-5 overall last year, let's not forget. And because of the NCAC schedule, Oberlin didn't play Ohio Wesleyan or Wooster. They played the No. 1 and No. 2 teams, thankfully, but not No. 4 and No. 5.

Beat No. 6, beat No. 7, beat No. 8, beat No. 9, beat No. 10. Lost to No. 1 and No. 2.