FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[NCF]

Jeez - beating up on NPU has really been devalued, as IWU falls from 13 to 14!

(Just kidding.  They actually gained 20 points, but Platteville passed them by pounding LaCrosse - you know, the guys who beat NCC.  With UWL now 2-3, that result is beginning to look almost as much an anomaly as 2-4 Buff St over UWW. )

I'd like o have that win over UWW:). With the Big 3 not playing each other for a few weeks yet, you'll have to wait to see IWU rise (or fall ).

[AndOne]

Jeez - beating up on NPU has really been devalued, as IWU falls from 13 to 14!

(Just kidding.  They actually gained 20 points, but Platteville passed them by pounding LaCrosse - you know, the guys who beat NCC.  With UWL now 2-3, that result is beginning to look almost as much an anomaly as 2-4 Buff St over UWW. )

I personally don't care how many points my team gains or loses in a weekly poll. What I care about, and what I suspect the athletes and coaches care about, is the placement from week to week.
I don't think its much consolation to say "well, you may have dropped in the rankings, but you gained 20 points in the voting."
What if the Weenies had beaten NP 77-7 instead of 44-7? Would that have been enough to enable an undefeated team to maintain the same position in the poll? Are teams, in effect, penalized for not running up an astronomical score against a much weaker opponent? 

[USee]

Jeez - beating up on NPU has really been devalued, as IWU falls from 13 to 14!

(Just kidding.  They actually gained 20 points, but Platteville passed them by pounding LaCrosse - you know, the guys who beat NCC.  With UWL now 2-3, that result is beginning to look almost as much an anomaly as 2-4 Buff St over UWW. )

I personally don't care how many points my team gains or loses in a weekly poll. What I care about, and what I suspect the athletes and coaches care about, is the placement from week to week.
I don't think its much consolation to say "well, you may have dropped in the rankings, but you gained 20 points in the voting."
What if the Weenies had beaten NP 77-7 instead of 44-7? Would that have been enough to enable an undefeated team to maintain the same position in the poll? Are teams, in effect, penalized for not running up an astronomical score against a much weaker opponent?

I don't think the placement or the votes is much of an exact science other than it reflects the psychology of the voters (which is a proxy for all D3 fans I believe). If you look at Wheaton, they have stayed at #20 for 3 weeks despite drubbing 3 consecutive opponents (2 of them on the road). They did gain votes each week but at least 1 team has jumped them every week. They are clearly being penalized for a bad loss @Albion and likely won't move much until they play IWU and/or NCC.

These polls are versions of un-informed at best (and so are we) in that very few people have a deep knowledge of the relevant teams. Pat and Keith probably come as close as anyone and they can't know all the nuances. I think Wheaton is fairly placed until we know more. These polls are a constant balance of what we know and what we suspect is true. I think the UWW loss tells us they are a much different team than the Stagg Bowl teams. But does anyone really think they won't make a deep run in the playoffs because they lost to Buff State? I think the poll has been pretty accurate placing spots 1-15 over the years. 15-40 is always tough to quantify. I am looking forward to how this all plays out.

[AndOne]

Why isn't Jordan Roberts considered a Junior with him being out the entire season last year?

It's Division III...you can't really assume a kid is going to spend another $40,000 just to play football.

Wouldn't it "only" be $20,000 since it would be an additional semester, not a year?  Not that it changes the point...

Football is quite different than basketball (or other winter sports) in terms of what it takes financially to play a fifth year.  In the recent past, football players could get by as a part-time student in their 9th academic semester, paying only per credit hour for 1 class, given that they will earn the credits required to graduate during that semester.  I don't believe that a student has to have graduated in 4 years to earn a 5th.  In division I and II you must complete 80% of your degree requirement prior to your 5th year.  Division III doesn't clarify what qualifies as adequate progress toward a degree but leaves it up the the institution.   Now I am not 100% up on recent rules, so anyone is free to correct me...  here are the links that I don't have time to read through right now:

Brief NCAA D3 release on eligibility:
http://cometsports.utdallas.edu/custompages/MISC/ORIENTATION/NCAA%20Regulations.pdf

Full D3 bylaws:
http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D312.pdf


I know at least at Wheaton, pretty much every football player (that gets playing time) who has had the option of a fifth year because of injury has taken it just as Garrett Meador has this year.   Basketball is another story. Guys like Aaron Garriott and Joel Kolmodin have opted against a 5th year.

If you're a grad student, you only need to take one class. Still an expensive option for many students. With NC being on trimesters, football would "only" cost 1/3rd of a year.

This is from the 2012-2013 NCAA Division III Manuel (page 91):

14.1.9 graduate student/Postbaccalaureate Participation. A student-athlete who is enrolled in a
graduate or professional school of the institution he or she most recently attended as an undergraduate (regard-
less of whether the individual has received a U.S. baccalaureate degree or its equivalent), a student-athlete who is
enrolled and seeking a second baccalaureate or equivalent degree at the same institution, or a student-athlete who
has graduated and is continuing as a full-time student at the same institution while taking course work that would
lead to the equivalent of another major or degree as defined and documented by the institution, may participate
in intercollegiate athletics, provided the student has eligibility remaining and such participation occurs within
the applicable 10-semester/15-quarter period set forth in Bylaw 14.2 (see Bylaw 14.1.8.1.6.4). (Revised: 1/10/90,
1/16/93 effective 8/1/93, 7/22/08, 10/20/09)

The Manuel seems to specify that 5th year enrollment must be "full-time."

I may certainly be wrong, but I don't think you can just take one course. It seems like you could attend for only a quarter, trimester, or semester depending on what system your school operates under, but that your enrollment must be full-time during whatever academic calendar format you are attending.

I think the intent of the NCAA, especially when specifically relative to football, is that a kid not be able to play an entire season just by taking one class. They want your intent to be to attain a 2nd baccalaureate (BA/BS ?) degree or a MA degree. Thus the seemingly full-time requirement.

Discussion?

[izzy stradlin]

Why isn't Jordan Roberts considered a Junior with him being out the entire season last year?

It's Division III...you can't really assume a kid is going to spend another $40,000 just to play football.

Wouldn't it "only" be $20,000 since it would be an additional semester, not a year?  Not that it changes the point...

Football is quite different than basketball (or other winter sports) in terms of what it takes financially to play a fifth year.  In the recent past, football players could get by as a part-time student in their 9th academic semester, paying only per credit hour for 1 class, given that they will earn the credits required to graduate during that semester.  I don't believe that a student has to have graduated in 4 years to earn a 5th.  In division I and II you must complete 80% of your degree requirement prior to your 5th year.  Division III doesn't clarify what qualifies as adequate progress toward a degree but leaves it up the the institution.   Now I am not 100% up on recent rules, so anyone is free to correct me...  here are the links that I don't have time to read through right now:

Brief NCAA D3 release on eligibility:
http://cometsports.utdallas.edu/custompages/MISC/ORIENTATION/NCAA%20Regulations.pdf

Full D3 bylaws:
http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D312.pdf


I know at least at Wheaton, pretty much every football player (that gets playing time) who has had the option of a fifth year because of injury has taken it just as Garrett Meador has this year.   Basketball is another story. Guys like Aaron Garriott and Joel Kolmodin have opted against a 5th year.

If you're a grad student, you only need to take one class. Still an expensive option for many students. With NC being on trimesters, football would "only" cost 1/3rd of a year.

This is from the 2012-2013 NCAA Division III Manuel (page 91):

14.1.9 graduate student/Postbaccalaureate Participation. A student-athlete who is enrolled in a
graduate or professional school of the institution he or she most recently attended as an undergraduate (regard-
less of whether the individual has received a U.S. baccalaureate degree or its equivalent), a student-athlete who is
enrolled and seeking a second baccalaureate or equivalent degree at the same institution, or a student-athlete who
has graduated and is continuing as a full-time student at the same institution while taking course work that would
lead to the equivalent of another major or degree as defined and documented by the institution, may participate
in intercollegiate athletics, provided the student has eligibility remaining and such participation occurs within
the applicable 10-semester/15-quarter period set forth in Bylaw 14.2 (see Bylaw 14.1.8.1.6.4). (Revised: 1/10/90,
1/16/93 effective 8/1/93, 7/22/08, 10/20/09)

The Manuel seems to specify that 5th year enrollment must be "full-time."

I may certainly be wrong, but I don't think you can just take one course. It seems like you could attend for only a quarter, trimester, or semester depending on what system your school operates under, but that your enrollment must be full-time during whatever academic calendar format you are attending.

I think the intent of the NCAA, especially when specifically relative to football, is that a kid not be able to play an entire season just by taking one class. They want your intent to be to attain a 2nd baccalaureate (BA/BS ?) degree or a MA degree. Thus the seemingly full-time requirement.

Discussion?

I think you are correct.  If you are continuing as a new graduate student you must be full time.   However per the rest of the bylaws, if you are finishing an undergraduate degree and only need one class to complete it (given you are still within the allowed 10 semesters), you can be part-time, pay for only that class and still be eligible.

[79jaybird]

beating up a weaker team is nothing impressive.  Just like I don't think Elmhurst should garner any "cupcake votes" for barely beating Augie.  In fact, Augie stole a defeat from the jaws of victory.  That penalty really made a big difference. It allowed Elmhurst to have more options on a 3rd and 10. 
Looking ahead, if and this is a big If at the moment,  but If Wheaton has a full arsenal available and healthy next week, I think the Thunder spoil EC's HC.  The Thunder's O is operating at a level similar to NC's and well uh, you saw what happened in N-Ville a few weeks back.   This is the second of 3-major tests for Elmhurst.  They are 0-1 with IWU being the last 1 IMO. 

[NCF]

Why isn't Jordan Roberts considered a Junior with him being out the entire season last year?

It's Division III…you can't really assume a kid is going to spend another $40,000 just to play football.

Wouldn't it "only" be $20,000 since it would be an additional semester, not a year?  Not that it changes the point...

Football is quite different than basketball (or other winter sports) in terms of what it takes financially to play a fifth year.  In the recent past, football players could get by as a part-time student in their 9th academic semester, paying only per credit hour for 1 class, given that they will earn the credits required to graduate during that semester.  I don't believe that a student has to have graduated in 4 years to earn a 5th.  In division I and II you must complete 80% of your degree requirement prior to your 5th year.  Division III doesn't clarify what qualifies as adequate progress toward a degree but leaves it up the the institution.   Now I am not 100% up on recent rules, so anyone is free to correct me...  here are the links that I don't have time to read through right now:

Brief NCAA D3 release on eligibility:
http://cometsports.utdallas.edu/custompages/MISC/ORIENTATION/NCAA%20Regulations.pdf

Full D3 bylaws:
http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D312.pdf


I know at least at Wheaton, pretty much every football player (that gets playing time) who has had the option of a fifth year because of injury has taken it just as Garrett Meador has this year.   Basketball is another story. Guys like Aaron Garriott and Joel Kolmodin have opted against a 5th year.

If you're a grad student, you only need to take one class. Still an expensive option for many students. With NC being on trimesters, football would "only" cost 1/3rd of a year.

This is from the 2012-2013 NCAA Division III Manuel (page 91):

14.1.9 graduate student/Postbaccalaureate Participation. A student-athlete who is enrolled in a
graduate or professional school of the institution he or she most recently attended as an undergraduate (regard-
less of whether the individual has received a U.S. baccalaureate degree or its equivalent), a student-athlete who is
enrolled and seeking a second baccalaureate or equivalent degree at the same institution, or a student-athlete who
has graduated and is continuing as a full-time student at the same institution while taking course work that would
lead to the equivalent of another major or degree as defined and documented by the institution, may participate
in intercollegiate athletics, provided the student has eligibility remaining and such participation occurs within
the applicable 10-semester/15-quarter period set forth in Bylaw 14.2 (see Bylaw 14.1.8.1.6.4). (Revised: 1/10/90,
1/16/93 effective 8/1/93, 7/22/08, 10/20/09)

The Manuel seems to specify that 5th year enrollment must be "full-time."

I may certainly be wrong, but I don't think you can just take one course. It seems like you could attend for only a quarter, trimester, or semester depending on what system your school operates under, but that your enrollment must be full-time during whatever academic calendar format you are attending.

I think the intent of the NCAA, especially when specifically relative to football, is that a kid not be able to play an entire season just by taking one class. They want your intent to be to attain a 2nd baccalaureate (BA/BS ?) degree or a MA degree. Thus the seemingly full-time requirement.

Discussion?

I think you are correct.  If you are continuing as a new graduate student you must be full time.   However per the rest of the bylaws, if you are finishing an undergraduate degree and only need one class to complete it (given you are still within the allowed 10 semesters), you can be part-time, pay for only that class and still be eligible.

I know certain 5th year players that were only enrolled in one class, so they must have chosen to delay graduation and avoid an extra semester of tuition. That would seem like a smart choice.

[formerd3db]

Why isn't Jordan Roberts considered a Junior with him being out the entire season last year?

It's Division III...you can't really assume a kid is going to spend another $40,000 just to play football.

Wouldn't it "only" be $20,000 since it would be an additional semester, not a year?  Not that it changes the point...

Football is quite different than basketball (or other winter sports) in terms of what it takes financially to play a fifth year.  In the recent past, football players could get by as a part-time student in their 9th academic semester, paying only per credit hour for 1 class, given that they will earn the credits required to graduate during that semester.  I don't believe that a student has to have graduated in 4 years to earn a 5th.  In division I and II you must complete 80% of your degree requirement prior to your 5th year.  Division III doesn't clarify what qualifies as adequate progress toward a degree but leaves it up the the institution.   Now I am not 100% up on recent rules, so anyone is free to correct me...  here are the links that I don't have time to read through right now:

Brief NCAA D3 release on eligibility:
http://cometsports.utdallas.edu/custompages/MISC/ORIENTATION/NCAA%20Regulations.pdf

Full D3 bylaws:
http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D312.pdf


I know at least at Wheaton, pretty much every football player (that gets playing time) who has had the option of a fifth year because of injury has taken it just as Garrett Meador has this year.   Basketball is another story. Guys like Aaron Garriott and Joel Kolmodin have opted against a 5th year.

If you're a grad student, you only need to take one class. Still an expensive option for many students. With NC being on trimesters, football would "only" cost 1/3rd of a year.

This is from the 2012-2013 NCAA Division III Manuel (page 91):

14.1.9 graduate student/Postbaccalaureate Participation. A student-athlete who is enrolled in a
graduate or professional school of the institution he or she most recently attended as an undergraduate (regard-
less of whether the individual has received a U.S. baccalaureate degree or its equivalent), a student-athlete who is
enrolled and seeking a second baccalaureate or equivalent degree at the same institution, or a student-athlete who
has graduated and is continuing as a full-time student at the same institution while taking course work that would
lead to the equivalent of another major or degree as defined and documented by the institution, may participate
in intercollegiate athletics, provided the student has eligibility remaining and such participation occurs within
the applicable 10-semester/15-quarter period set forth in Bylaw 14.2 (see Bylaw 14.1.8.1.6.4). (Revised: 1/10/90,
1/16/93 effective 8/1/93, 7/22/08, 10/20/09)

The Manuel seems to specify that 5th year enrollment must be "full-time."

I may certainly be wrong, but I don't think you can just take one course. It seems like you could attend for only a quarter, trimester, or semester depending on what system your school operates under, but that your enrollment must be full-time during whatever academic calendar format you are attending.

I think the intent of the NCAA, especially when specifically relative to football, is that a kid not be able to play an entire season just by taking one class. They want your intent to be to attain a 2nd baccalaureate (BA/BS ?) degree or a MA degree. Thus the seemingly full-time requirement.

Discussion?

I think you are correct.  If you are continuing as a new graduate student you must be full time.   However per the rest of the bylaws, if you are finishing an undergraduate degree and only need one class to complete it (given you are still within the allowed 10 semesters), you can be part-time, pay for only that class and still be eligible.

I know certain 5th year players that were only enrolled in one class, so they must have chosen to delay graduation and avoid an extra semester of tuition. That would seem like a smart choice.

Aside from the injury situations that are being discussed here, one has to remember that another factor depends on the academic degree program that the football player is on (this obviously applies to all DIII student-athletes, yet I'll use the football term since this is a football site).  Some academic degress simply don't allow for graduation in a traditional 4 year track due to the class schedules and when the player can get those scheduled in any specific semester.  One such example could be student-teaching in the educational track.  Still, as you all have mentioned, the cost is not inexpensive for even a "less than full semester" class schedule at most of the small colleges/universities.  So that certainly is a factor which is in consideration for some of these players when they have to make the decision of coming back whether an injury (medical hardship) is involved or not.   

[USee]

The only significant player that has been out for the Thunder has been TE Hunter Thorson. The Thunder should be at full strength this week for only the 3rd time this year. (@Albion they were missing 4 1st team ALL CCIW players on offense). We will know a lot about both these teams after this weekend.

[Ghostbuster]

beating up a weaker team is nothing impressive.  Just like I don't think Elmhurst should garner any "cupcake votes" for barely beating Augie.  In fact, Augie stole a defeat from the jaws of victory.  That penalty really made a big difference. It allowed Elmhurst to have more options on a 3rd and 10. 

That was the Augustana MO last season, and unfortunately it looks like things haven't changed. Bad penalties and poor defense in the final minutes.

[USee]

Many have been trying to reconcile the Wheaton that lost @ Albion with the Thunder team that has steamrolled everyone since. Is it a different Wheaton team or just weaker opponents? Since Albion subsequently lost to Benedictine (whom Wheaton dismantled in week 1 does that give credence to "The CCIW is weaker..." argument? Consider the fact that Wheaton lost @Albion while scoring 21 pts (zero in the second half), netting only 15 first downs, giving up 8 sacks, accumulating just 248 yds offense (108 rush, 140 pass). They played without Mark Hiben, Nolan Randle, Charlie Velling, and Garret Meador. Every one of those players is back and each of them has contributed significantly in at least 1 of the 3 wins since. Hiben is one of the best WR in the country and each of these guys is a first team ALL CCIW performer (Substitute Roberts for Meador if you want, result is the same). The proof is in the numbers. Averaging 561 yds per game, 48 pts per game, almost 29 1st downs a game, and haven't given up 8 sacks combined since that week 2 debacle.

I don't know how good Elmhurst is on defense, but it doesn't appear they are appreciably better than Carthage. I definitely know if the game is close Scottie Williams will be running wild. So Wheaton has to use some of their new found kerosene on offense to build an early lead on Elmhurst (ala NCC) so that running SW is less of an option. If this is a close game in the 4th, it may be that the last team with the ball wins.

[NCF]

Many have been trying to reconcile the Wheaton that lost @ Albion with the Thunder team that has steamrolled everyone since. Is it a different Wheaton team or just weaker opponents? Since Albion subsequently lost to Benedictine (whom Wheaton dismantled in week 1 does that give credence to "The CCIW is weaker..." argument? Consider the fact that Wheaton lost @Albion while scoring 21 pts (zero in the second half), netting only 15 first downs, giving up 8 sacks, accumulating just 248 yds offense (108 rush, 140 pass). They played without Mark Hiben, Nolan Randle, Charlie Velling, and Garret Meador. Every one of those players is back and each of them has contributed significantly in at least 1 of the 3 wins since. Hiben is one of the best WR in the country and each of these guys is a first team ALL CCIW performer (Substitute Roberts for Meador if you want, result is the same). The proof is in the numbers. Averaging 561 yds per game, 48 pts per game, almost 29 1st downs a game, and haven't given up 8 sacks combined since that week 2 debacle.

I don't know how good Elmhurst is on defense, but it doesn't appear they are appreciably better than Carthage. I definitely know if the game is close Scottie Williams will be running wild. So Wheaton has to use some of their new found kerosene on offense to build an early lead on Elmhurst (ala NCC) so that running SW is less of an option. If this is a close game in the 4th, it may be that the last team with the ball wins.

NC is not the same team now than they wew against UWL. I don't think we'll know the "real" IWU, NC or Wheaton until after they play each other. IMHO the conference has to start scheduling stronger non-conf. opponents. Beating up on teams with non winning records does not help the CCIW's image or prepare a team for the post season.

[79jaybird]

Usee- In past years, Wheaton has feasted on Elmhurst turnovers built up a big lead by halftime, and then cruised in the second half.  The games have been much closer at Langhorst than McCully.

What I see happening Saturday is a close game for 1-2 quarters.  Scotty will get some yards, however I see Wheaton's Defense being strong, perhaps making some adjustments to limit the Williams' damage, forcing EC to look at other offensive means.  Elmhurst doesn't have the depth or ability to become be able to compete when the running game is limited (see NC game).  Wheaton's offense is going to put up some points and will win the game by 10-14 points. 

Ghostbuster- I feel for Augie as Elmhurst was in this boat many times before. In fact, when I was at EC we lost 3-4 games a year by stealing defeat from the jaws of victory.  Sign of a young team making mistakes at the wrong time.

[USee]

Many have been trying to reconcile the Wheaton that lost @ Albion with the Thunder team that has steamrolled everyone since. Is it a different Wheaton team or just weaker opponents? Since Albion subsequently lost to Benedictine (whom Wheaton dismantled in week 1 does that give credence to "The CCIW is weaker..." argument? Consider the fact that Wheaton lost @Albion while scoring 21 pts (zero in the second half), netting only 15 first downs, giving up 8 sacks, accumulating just 248 yds offense (108 rush, 140 pass). They played without Mark Hiben, Nolan Randle, Charlie Velling, and Garret Meador. Every one of those players is back and each of them has contributed significantly in at least 1 of the 3 wins since. Hiben is one of the best WR in the country and each of these guys is a first team ALL CCIW performer (Substitute Roberts for Meador if you want, result is the same). The proof is in the numbers. Averaging 561 yds per game, 48 pts per game, almost 29 1st downs a game, and haven't given up 8 sacks combined since that week 2 debacle.

I don't know how good Elmhurst is on defense, but it doesn't appear they are appreciably better than Carthage. I definitely know if the game is close Scottie Williams will be running wild. So Wheaton has to use some of their new found kerosene on offense to build an early lead on Elmhurst (ala NCC) so that running SW is less of an option. If this is a close game in the 4th, it may be that the last team with the ball wins.

NC is not the same team now than they wew against UWL. I don't think we'll know the "real" IWU, NC or Wheaton until after they play each other. IMHO the conference has to start scheduling stronger non-conf. opponents. Beating up on teams with non winning records does not help the CCIW's image or prepare a team for the post season.

Losing to teams like UWL and Albion is much more detrimental to preparing you for the post season as it ensures that the loser of the NCC/Wheaton game won't make it to the playoffs.

[79jaybird]

On that note, do you think perhaps the CCIW (may) gets only 1 team into the dance this year, the AQ/champion?