FB: New England Small College Athletic Conference

[pg04]

Hello everyone...I'm sure you get this question at least once a year, but I'm curious as to why the conference doesn't branch out and play non-conference games or participate in the tournament? Is it a money issue? Are all athletics in the NESCAC follow the same guidelines?

I'm just being curious....hope everyone has a good season.

Thanks

I will let someone else be more specific on this but in general, It's academic reasons that they only play each other and don't participate in the tournament.  I think they feel that their studies would be interrupted if it were extended any.  There have been plenty of debates on this board about this topic. 

In all other sports they participate in playoffs.  Notably in Basketball where their teams fare very well. 

[frank uible]

NESCAC works its wonders in mysterious ways.

[Doid23]

  Notably in Basketball where their teams fare very well. 

Lacrosse as well, Tufts 2010 National Champions, Middlebury, Williams traditionally strong, now Bowdoin coming as well. And don't forget Squash.

[Yarsan]

NESCAC swimming not only has its own 3 day conference championship, but the best individual swimmers go on to the NCAA division III championships.

"On the men's side, Kenyon won its 31st straight national title. Amherst finished fifth, Middlebury in seventh, and Williams in ninth. Tufts tied for 18th, and Connecticut College tied for 39th."

http://www.nescac.com/sports/swimdive/2009-10/NCAA/NCAA-dayfour

[pg04]

The Moral of the story, the NESCAC is very good at a lot of the sports they compete in national championships for  .  It's possible they could be just as good in Football... I wish we had the chance to find out!

[frank uible]

The smart money says the quality of NESCAC football is middle of the pack in d3.

[02 Warhawk]

So it sounds like the NESCAC would rather have their football students on campus studying, and not miss any classes, rather than traveling for games?

It seems like the general consensus on this board wishes they would branch out a little, just to see how they would stack up against the rest of the DIII world? Am I picking up what you guys are putting down?

[lewdogg11]

So it sounds like the NESCAC would rather have their football students on campus studying, and not miss any classes, rather than traveling for games?

It seems like the general consensus on this board wishes they would branch out a little, just to see how they would stack up against the rest of the DIII world? Am I picking up what you guys are putting down?

Are you talking to us?

[nescac1]

There is a bit more going on than what is being discussed.  NESCAC schools in general, with certain schools (the Little 3 schools) in particular, have been taking big steps to curtail football admissions over the past decade.  There is a belief (and I think it is a reality-based one) that while NESCAC schools can compete, despite admissions standards, nationally in most sports, that wouldn't be possible in football.  You can easily find, for example, a  few star basketball or soccer or tennis players each year with 1300 plus SAT's.  Finding 15-20 star footall players with those kind of credentials is an entirely different enterprise.  Several NESCAC schools (certainly Williams and Amherst) have cut out low band recruits entirely (so no more athletes with sub-1200 SAT's, essentially, at those schools, and very, very few below 1300).  And all NESCAC schools have capped football rosters at 75 per team.  And recall that these are all very small schools to being with, unlike some D-3 powers which have 8-10,000 students (not all, mind you, but some prominent ones).  Plus, NESCAC schools have all sorts of practice restrictions (across sports) that are generally more onerous than their counterparts (for example basketball practice doesn't start until well after every other school, but much easier to arrange for offseason practice informally in hoops than in basketball).   All of those factors combined explain how NESCAC schools, under current admissions regime, would no way, no how be able to compete nationally in football, yet still do very well in other sports.

Now, as to whether they SHOULD anyway and give it a shot to see how things turn out, that is a different story entirely.  But I seriously doubt that, even if they were eligible, they'd be able to perform the same way they manage in other sports, against schools with vastly different admissions standards, student body sizes, roster limits, practice schedules (another hugely important factors in football that is less of an issue in other sports, where reduced NESCAC practice tiems are less of a big deal) and so on. 

[amh63]

Late to the "party talk", but here are my initial inputs.  The conference and the "little three" schools value football greatly, IMO, as reflected in facility improvements by at least three schools in the past few years.  Several of the schools have the oldest football fields in the country that are still being used (i.e. Wes. and Amherst).  The football traditions are strong and part of the fabric of the schools.  Many of the schools still bring in Division 1 level players...Ivy League caliber players.  They get such players for many reasons, the primary one being the ability of the students to play several varsity sports.  Having multi-sport students makes it harder for the football players in a long football "season".  In the case of football, I would have the posters think about the Ivies.  Though they have a longer season, the Ivies do not participate in the post season in football....though they dress over 90 players (not traveling squad size).  In the case of baseball, there is also a difference of philosophy.  Years ago, I knew several baseball players at Amherst and had friendships with their parents.  A number of players in the conference have played in the Majors...so there is talent among the schools.  Being aware that Trinity College went far in the NCAA several years ago, the situation that I want to point out follows
    The post season in baseball overlaps with graduation, etc.  I asked the parents of players how their sons were going to handle graduation with the post-season games.  The parents in general let their sons make the decision.  In most cases, the seniors split to go to graduation events vice missing games.   This included star players.

[lewdogg11]

I understand the NESCAC guys defending this.  I do.  I get it.  You know it's not something that will probably change, like ever, and you've embraced it.  That is cool and I respect it.

But let's not get crazy and try blaming this on academics, or playing multiple sports, or tough admissions, or that football players aren't smart enough to get them in, or a roster limit...Try telling that to RPI, or to MIT, or to even Harvard, or Yale, or Princeton, or Brown, etc etc etc.  They don't complain about fielding a team due to Admissions standards.  Good football players aren't all dumb believe it or not.  And let's face it, most likely, 1 and only 1 NESCAC team would play in the playoffs each year.  So extending the season a few weeks would affect 1 team, not the entire NESCAC as some seem to implicate.

Playing in the postseason is an honor and a privilege and it should build respect and pride.  I understand that the players, and most alumni and fans at these schools do not have anything to do with the situation and really have no say in the matter.  But to give 'reasons' other than 'it's a ridiculous precedent that will never change' is a waste of everyone's time.

It is what it is.

[nescac1]

Uhhh, I don't think you carefully read what I wrote LewDogg.  There is a dramatic difference between academic, admissions, recruiting, practice, roster size, and many other factors between NESCAC schools, as regards football, and virtually every school that contends for D-III titles.  No one is saying football players are dumb.  But just as there is a difference at the football program at, say, Yale and at Ohio State, there is similary a very different football program at Mount Union or Wisconson-Whitewater and at any other NESCAC school.  A top notch Ivy league basketball team can compete, in certain years, at a very, very high level (see Cornell).  A top notch Ivy league football team would be absolutely decimated by USC or Ohio State.  The point is, football is different, in terms of roster size, admissions consensions, and a wide variety of other factors from every other sport.  To say it's just a ridiculous precedent with no meaning or rationale or thought behind it is, itself, an utterly ridiculous statement.  There are reasons for the ban.  There are fine arguments for and against, and I'm not taking a side either way.  But to dismiss the band as irrational and groundless is silly. 

[lewdogg11]

Uhhh, I don't think you carefully read what I wrote LewDogg.  There is a dramatic difference between academic, admissions, recruiting, practice, roster size, and many other factors between NESCAC schools, as regards football, and virtually every school that contends for D-III titles.  No one is saying football players are dumb.  But just as there is a difference at the football program at, say, Yale and at Ohio State, there is similary a very different football program at Mount Union or Wisconson-Whitewater and at any other NESCAC school.  A top notch Ivy league basketball team can compete, in certain years, at a very, very high level (see Cornell).  A top notch Ivy league football team would be absolutely decimated by USC or Ohio State.  The point is, football is different, in terms of roster size, admissions consensions, and a wide variety of other factors from every other sport.  To say it's just a ridiculous precedent with no meaning or rationale or thought behind it is, itself, an utterly ridiculous statement.  There are reasons for the ban.  There are fine arguments for and against, and I'm not taking a side either way.  But to dismiss the band as irrational and groundless is silly.  

It IS irrational.  Case closed.  Could a NESCAC team win the National Championship?  Maybe, maybe not.  Could they win a game or 2 in the playoffs?  Probably.  And there is no shame in that.  

Listening to your arguments is like saying...'Nah, those teams have more talent on paper, so why would we even bother going up against them?'  It's kind of a loser mentality...'If we can't win, why play?'  

How about an attitude of 'Who says we can't win?'

Your comments are excuses for someone who has accepted a precedent and nothing more.

I just think the NESCAC should become their own division in football, and not be affiliated with DIII, and that will be the end of the argument.

[nescac1]

LewDogg, you are wrong.  You can disagree with the policy.  I am on the fence myself, I would have loved to see how the Williams juggernaut from the mid-90's stacked up nationally (not that Williams will ever be able to get that type of talent again), but it was not to be.  But believe me when I tell you that many, MANY people in NESCAC feel there is WAY too much athletic emphasis at the schools already (any sort of NCAA participation could easily have gone by the wayside a few years back, the current policy could easily, alas, change in the future), and that football requires by far the most admissions concessions already, and that if the schools start competing nationally, there will be more pressure to recruit to a higher standards of player based on increased expectations of being nationally competitive.  And not just to recruit, but to fundmentally alter the programs, length of the season, etc. in other ways as well.  It's not some crazy, irrational philosophy, even if it's one that is totally fair to disagree with. 

[lewdogg11]

I think maybe you're a bit delusional about competing on a national level vs. recruiting.  It's d3, players and students are going to recruit themselves.  Programs are going to recruit locally.  No one in d3 has the budget to recruit all over the country.    It just doesn't happen.  And as people have mentioned plenty of times, if that is your logic, the NESCAC should be consistent throughout all sports.  Not just the sport of heathens.