FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[NCF]

They need the bodies to pay tuition, however, I still think it does make sense to have some type of roster limit.

Why is that?? More motivation to play hard to make the team, possibly?

My guess as to the main reason would be: Less players for the coaches to worry about during practice. Limited budgets in D3 mean limited number of coaches, the more kids you have to teach the harder it is for coaches to get specific work done, IMO. Much like in a classroom with students/teachers, you'd ideally have a low player/coach ratio for teaching purposes.

I would agre with all of this and add:more kids mean either longer practice or more standing around by non-starters or 2nd/3rd teamers. More kids=more dicontent, especially on game days when they don't dress, but are expected to be at the game  eithe on the sidelines or in the stands.I guess I just think that you should have to earn a spot on a college roster, not just enroll in school and gaet a free pass. It's kind of like giving everyone a trophy or not keeping score. Ask the players and many of them would prefer smaller numbers. I think coaches do recruits a big disservice by getting them on campus when they know the kid will have a hard time getting on the field.There are travel team limits and play-off limits, it makes sense to extend them to the regular season as well. JMHO

I heard people knock Coach Kehres (Mount Union) for this a couple of times. Don't know if there's any truth to it, but it's been brought up.

I remember a father of a Mount player came on these message boards awhile back. Talking crap that Kehres promissed his son the world when he was recruited, but his kid never gets dressed for Saturday games.

I've heard this from parents (most are/were NOT from NC). Here's the deal -if you want to play EARN IT. Stop complaining when you don't bust yor butt every day at practice, and do all the other things outside of practice that need to be done. My son hears plenty of B******G on Saturdays by guys who don't dress, but don't work hard either.Sorry for going off on a tirade, my apologies.

[Gregory Sager]

They need the bodies to pay tuition, however, I still think it does make sense to have some type of roster limit.

Why is that?? More motivation to play hard to make the team, possibly?

My guess as to the main reason would be: Less players for the coaches to worry about during practice. Limited budgets in D3 mean limited number of coaches, the more kids you have to teach the harder it is for coaches to get specific work done, IMO. Much like in a classroom with students/teachers, you'd ideally have a low player/coach ratio for teaching purposes.

I would agre with all of this and add:more kids mean either longer practice or more standing around by non-starters or 2nd/3rd teamers. More kids=more dicontent, especially on game days when they don't dress, but are expected to be at the game  eithe on the sidelines or in the stands.I guess I just think that you should have to earn a spot on a college roster, not just enroll in school and gaet a free pass. It's kind of like giving everyone a trophy or not keeping score. Ask the players and many of them would prefer smaller numbers. I think coaches do recruits a big disservice by getting them on campus when they know the kid will have a hard time getting on the field.There are travel team limits and play-off limits, it makes sense to extend them to the regular season as well. JMHO

Tell it to the presidents and directors/trustees who need to ensure that their schools are covering their budgets by reaching their enrollment goals. Tell it to the admissions staff whose jobs depend upon reaching those goals.

A lot of D3 schools have tuition-driven budgets. Not everybody has an endowment nestegg of two or three billion dollars off of which they can draw year after year.

The college is the dog. Football is the tail. The tail doesn't wag the dog, NCF; it's the other way around.

Unless you're a DI school where some football programs seem to have power over the administration.

Amen!

[NCF]

They need the bodies to pay tuition, however, I still think it does make sense to have some type of roster limit.

Why is that?? More motivation to play hard to make the team, possibly?

My guess as to the main reason would be: Less players for the coaches to worry about during practice. Limited budgets in D3 mean limited number of coaches, the more kids you have to teach the harder it is for coaches to get specific work done, IMO. Much like in a classroom with students/teachers, you'd ideally have a low player/coach ratio for teaching purposes.

I would agre with all of this and add:more kids mean either longer practice or more standing around by non-starters or 2nd/3rd teamers. More kids=more dicontent, especially on game days when they don't dress, but are expected to be at the game  eithe on the sidelines or in the stands.I guess I just think that you should have to earn a spot on a college roster, not just enroll in school and gaet a free pass. It's kind of like giving everyone a trophy or not keeping score. Ask the players and many of them would prefer smaller numbers. I think coaches do recruits a big disservice by getting them on campus when they know the kid will have a hard time getting on the field.There are travel team limits and play-off limits, it makes sense to extend them to the regular season as well. JMHO

Tell it to the presidents and directors/trustees who need to ensure that their schools are covering their budgets by reaching their enrollment goals. Tell it to the admissions staff whose jobs depend upon reaching those goals.

A lot of D3 schools have tuition-driven budgets. Not everybody has an endowment nestegg of two or three billion dollars off of which they can draw year after year.

The college is the dog. Football is the tail. The tail doesn't wag the dog, NCF; it's the other way around.

Unless you're a DI school where some football programs seem to have power over the administration.

Having roster limits doesn't mean football runs the school, and we all know that PSU wasn't/isn't the only D1 with that power:) K+!!!

[NCF]

Kick-off can't come soon enough!:)

[02 Warhawk]

Kick-off can't come soon enough!:)

I know. I look at my calendar and 8/21 can't come soon enough. Then 8/31 will soon follow for the "real" kickoff. 9/1 should be fun too at the UWL/NCC game.

[NCF]

Kick-off can't come soon enough!:)

I know. I look at my calendar and 8/21 can't come soon enough. Then 8/31 will soon follow for the "real" kickoff. 9/1 should be fun too at the UWL/NCC game.

are those your scrimmage dates?

[Gregory Sager]

They need the bodies to pay tuition, however, I still think it does make sense to have some type of roster limit.

Why is that?? More motivation to play hard to make the team, possibly?

My guess as to the main reason would be: Less players for the coaches to worry about during practice. Limited budgets in D3 mean limited number of coaches, the more kids you have to teach the harder it is for coaches to get specific work done, IMO. Much like in a classroom with students/teachers, you'd ideally have a low player/coach ratio for teaching purposes.

I would agre with all of this and add:more kids mean either longer practice or more standing around by non-starters or 2nd/3rd teamers. More kids=more dicontent, especially on game days when they don't dress, but are expected to be at the game  eithe on the sidelines or in the stands.I guess I just think that you should have to earn a spot on a college roster, not just enroll in school and gaet a free pass. It's kind of like giving everyone a trophy or not keeping score. Ask the players and many of them would prefer smaller numbers. I think coaches do recruits a big disservice by getting them on campus when they know the kid will have a hard time getting on the field.There are travel team limits and play-off limits, it makes sense to extend them to the regular season as well. JMHO

Tell it to the presidents and directors/trustees who need to ensure that their schools are covering their budgets by reaching their enrollment goals. Tell it to the admissions staff whose jobs depend upon reaching those goals.

A lot of D3 schools have tuition-driven budgets. Not everybody has an endowment nestegg of two or three billion dollars off of which they can draw year after year.

The college is the dog. Football is the tail. The tail doesn't wag the dog, NCF; it's the other way around.

Not to be disrespectful and just so i understand correctly:you're saying it's ok for coaches to say anything to get bodies?

I'm not debating the ethics of recruiting. I'm simply describing the situation. Coaches can, will, and do say just about anything to recruit players. Some will draw the line -- a very distant line -- at promising a varsity starting role or playing time to a 17-year-old high-schooler. Some of them won't even stop at that. But they're all well aware that their competitors are making the same pitch to these kids.

It's not the coach's responsibility to self-police his recruiting pitch, unless his boss or bosses have a problem with it. He's a salesman; he's doing his job by pitching his school. It's the responsibility of the parents and of the kid himself to filter what they're hearing from that coach, and from all of the other coaches. They need to understand the difference between propaganda and fact. And they need to do the homework themselves as far as investigating the school in question (and that means more than a mere visit to the campus), and then make an informed decision. The coach isn't going to pay the kid's tuition; the parents, or in some cases the kid himself, are going to do that. It's therefore incumbent upon them to make the right decision without blaming someone else for it somewhere down the road if the kid ends up being dissatisfied because of something he should've known about (like playing time or roster size) going in.

If college presidents want tuition paying students, they need to ensure a quality product to justify said tuition. I have plenty of concerns about budgets, class offerings,etc. Colleges/universities need to cut their budgets and tighten their belts instead of allowing more and more unqualified stuents in so they can feed off the financial aid theses students provide. That explains a lot of what I've seen happen over the past three years.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. You've just opened up a speculative can of worms that really doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand.

(But, really, cut the size of the student body and thus the school's income ... and yet "ensure a quality product" in spite of said budget cuts?)

Do any college sports have team limits. If 100 guys showed up for bball or baseball, would they be allowed to be on the team as long as they pay tuition?

That's silly. There's no way in the world that you could keep that a secret. Plus, there's no way in the world that a baseball or basketball coach would ever recruit that many players, let alone land them all. Don't kid yourself, NCF; coaches in various sports at a wide spectrum of D3 schools have recruiting quotas to make. That includes baseball and basketball coaches as well as football coaches. Do you think that Tim Rucks really wants to have 170 kids show up for camp at Carthage every August? No; for the reasons you named, he'd rather have a much more manageable and coachable roster. But he has a recruiting quota to make. A large percentage of D3 coaches do.

If small, privates don't figure out a way to cap spending they will find their numbers dwindling no matter how many sports, clubs, activities they offer. JMHO

Again, you're getting pretty far afield from the topic at hand, and by introducing quality issues related to non-football-related aspects of college life you're also introducing a degree of subjectivity to it. Some kids and parents are satisfied with what they're getting at a particular college; other kids and parents end up being dissatisfied with the same college.

I don't disagree with anything you're saying, and as a parent of a current college kid you're seeing this up close and personal right now. But I'm talking about the big picture here, which is that, frankly, college education is an extremely competitive market not only for a 17-year-old applicant looking to get into a school, but for the schools themselves that are trying to draw students to their campuses.

[02 Warhawk]

Kick-off can't come soon enough!:)

I know. I look at my calendar and 8/21 can't come soon enough. Then 8/31 will soon follow for the "real" kickoff. 9/1 should be fun too at the UWL/NCC game.

are those your scrimmage dates?

8/21 - Kickoff (D3football.com's online magazine thingy they put out each year)
8/31 - Whitewater's first game (I'll be watching over the web)
9/1 - NCC/UWL game

[NCF]

Kick-off can't come soon enough!:)

I know. I look at my calendar and 8/21 can't come soon enough. Then 8/31 will soon follow for the "real" kickoff. 9/1 should be fun too at the UWL/NCC game.

are those your scrimmage dates?

8/21 - Kickoff (D3football.com's online magazine thingy they put out each year)
8/31 - Whitewater's first game (I'll be watching over the web)
9/1 - NCC/UWL game

Both great days!

[AndOne]

NCC lists a 9 game "Freshman schedule on their football page. Some schools, they play twice. Some games may get cancelled during the year as well. It provides an opportunity to get players on film who don't dress or play in the Varsity game.

I hate to even mention this as it could open up an old discussion, but I once read that the WIAC instituted the 100 roster limit for football in order to meet Title IX guidelines.

They need the bodies to pay tuition, however, I still think it does make sense to have some type of roster limit.

Why is that?? More motivation to play hard to make the team, possibly?

My guess as to the main reason would be: Less players for the coaches to worry about during practice. Limited budgets in D3 mean limited number of coaches, the more kids you have to teach the harder it is for coaches to get specific work done, IMO. Much like in a classroom with students/teachers, you'd ideally have a low player/coach ratio for teaching purposes.

Interesting that you brought this up, because I was wondering the same thing. So I sent the WIAC an email this morning asking why they have a roster limit.

I think my chances of getting a response is 50/50.

Warhawk---

Regardless of the "official" answer, if you get one, could the honest answer be that a conference with an average enrollment of about 9,700 per football playing school, doesn't really need bodies and their tuition monies to meet operating expenses ?
Its not like a school of 2,000-3,000 where 30-40 more students tuition dollars can make a big difference. 

[AndOne]

CCIW have any sort of roster limitations? Sorry if this was discussed already.

No, and as I posted about a half-hour ago, you'll never see the CCIW institute a roster limitation rule. CCIW schools need the tuition money, and they need the male bodies on campus as well to help offset the disproportionate female:male ratio that has become the norm at non-technical colleges and universities across the nation.

And carrying this one step further, not only do CCIW (and likely many other truly "small" small colleges/conferences) need the tuition money to both balance the budget, and also to often help balance the female:male ratio, another reason is that some schools have a policy of not cutting freshmen. Be it football, basketball, or another sport, freshman often make up a rather large percentage of a team's roster. Accordingly, if a school doesn't cut freshmen, this can certainly help account for a rather sizeable roster.

[02 Warhawk]

Regardless of the "official" answer, if you get one, could the honest answer be that a conference with an average enrollment of about 9,700 per football playing school, doesn't really need bodies and their tuition monies to meet operating expenses ?
Its not like a school of 2,000-3,000 where 30-40 more students tuition dollars can make a big difference.

No, I suppose not...but that still doesn't answer my question on why they have a roster limit policy in the first place. I'm not saying I'm for or against it, I'm just curious why they went out of their way to say they can't exceed 100 players. My guess it's something along the lines of what robertgoulet and newcardfan discussed:

My guess as to the main reason would be: Less players for the coaches to worry about during practice. Limited budgets in D3 mean limited number of coaches, the more kids you have to teach the harder it is for coaches to get specific work done, IMO. Much like in a classroom with students/teachers, you'd ideally have a low player/coach ratio for teaching purposes.

I would agre with all of this and add:more kids mean either longer practice or more standing around by non-starters or 2nd/3rd teamers. More kids=more dicontent, especially on game days when they don't dress, but are expected to be at the game  eithe on the sidelines or in the stands.I guess I just think that you should have to earn a spot on a college roster, not just enroll in school and gaet a free pass. It's kind of like giving everyone a trophy or not keeping score. Ask the players and many of them would prefer smaller numbers. I think coaches do recruits a big disservice by getting them on campus when they know the kid will have a hard time getting on the field.There are travel team limits and play-off limits, it makes sense to extend them to the regular season as well. JMHO

[02 Warhawk]

CCIW have any sort of roster limitations? Sorry if this was discussed already.

No, and as I posted about a half-hour ago, you'll never see the CCIW institute a roster limitation rule. CCIW schools need the tuition money, and they need the male bodies on campus as well to help offset the disproportionate female:male ratio that has become the norm at non-technical colleges and universities across the nation.

And carrying this one step further, not only do CCIW (and likely many other truly "small" small colleges/conferences) need the tuition money to both balance the budget, and also to often help balance the female:male ratio, another reason is that some schools have a policy of not cutting freshmen. Be it football, basketball, or another sport, freshman often make up a rather large percentage of a team's roster. Accordingly, if a school doesn't cut freshmen, this can certainly help account for a rather sizeable roster.

I agree. Mount Union doesn't cut their freshman. I read over on their board they had 99 freshman "tryout" at camp this year.    None will get cut, but most will quit within a year. I think their total camp is over 180 athletes....that's a crazy amount.

[NCF]

CCIW have any sort of roster limitations? Sorry if this was discussed already.

No, and as I posted about a half-hour ago, you'll never see the CCIW institute a roster limitation rule. CCIW schools need the tuition money, and they need the male bodies on campus as well to help offset the disproportionate female:male ratio that has become the norm at non-technical colleges and universities across the nation.

And carrying this one step further, not only do CCIW (and likely many other truly "small" small colleges/conferences) need the tuition money to both balance the budget, and also to often help balance the female:male ratio, another reason is that some schools have a policy of not cutting freshmen. Be it football, basketball, or another sport, freshman often make up a rather large percentage of a team's roster. Accordingly, if a school doesn't cut freshmen, this can certainly help account for a rather sizeable roster.

I agree. Mount Union doesn't cut their freshman. I read over on their board they had 99 freshman "tryout" at camp this year.    None will get cut, but most will quit within a year. I think their total camp is over 180 athletes....that's a crazy amount.

I would agree with that!

[Langhorst_Ghost]

Bluejay season preview is up...

http://www.elmhurstbluejays.com/news/2012/8/16/FB_0816125619.aspx

Borrowing a quote from Head Coach Tim Lester - "The key to moving up in this league is playing to your highest potential with sustained consistency. Having strong leadership and maturity will help bring out the consistency. In my four years here, we've moved from the lower half of the league standings to the top half of the league standings. I believe that we can continue to climb up in the standings. The question is how big of a step can we make?"

Couldn't agree more - looking forward to September 1st.