FB: New England Small College Athletic Conference

[PistachioX]

...but I agree with Nescac1 that it has to be more about the volume of low-band recruits that would be required by football, in order to compete nationally.

[Jonny Utah]

...but I agree with Nescac1 that it has to be more about the volume of low-band recruits that would be required by football, in order to compete nationally.

And lets be real here for a second.  How many teams actually do compete nationally for a division 3 title each year?  1?  2?

[Jonny Utah]

The same Prep School feeder programs you site for hocley, are all over the football rosters.  I'm not buying that.

My point has more to do with the fact that there is no pressure for nescac colleges to be the best in football, and if there were, yes, the volume of tips in the admissions process might have to change, or at least the pressure to change would be there.

I'm not so sure the nescac would do so bad nationally.  About as good as anyone else anyway.

[Jonny Utah]

The rosters for virtually every NESCAC and Ivy athletic team are full of Prep, ISL and Catholic School graduates - that's nothing new.  Many of these athletes are transferring to exclusive day schools and repeating Junior year, in lieu of doing a PG year.  This is to beef up transcripts for admissions and to get bigger and stronger for recruiting purposes.  It's a little whacked IMO... but it's very, very common in NE high school sports - and a newer twist on the old PG/boarding thing. So yes - the Prep School factor is a consideration in this process; but it is not isolated to hockey - or the biffy sports like crew, tennis, squash, swimming, etc.  Look at the rosters for helmet sports like football, lax, soccer.  Alums from these schools are everywhere.

With all due respect, dlip... the kids who elect to go the Juniors route tend to be D1 wanna-bees who are not good enough athletically to get a scholly, and/or who are not accepted to top tier academic schools (including the Prep/ISL schools)because they don't have the grades. 

They tend to choose the Juniors route as a way to mature and groom - both for the classroom and on the ice... because that is their best and last option for eventually getting that D1 scholly...or for getting into a more academically competitive school.  I would not classify these guys as strong academic candidates.

I wonder if this recent backlash with BB&N and Lawrence Academy is changing some of this trend?  It's almost like the ISL schools are in their own mini NCAA world now with sanctions of their own.

[02 Warhawk]

Ok, thanks for the feedback everyone. +K all around.

So, if I'm understanding this correctly, you all seem to agree that what's preventing the NESCAC to compete nationally is that the conference doesn't want to jeopardize its schools' admissions reputation. Meaning they don't want to "lower its standards" just to let someone in who's good a football so they can compete at the national stage.

Even though the NESCAC seems to be more than competitive at basketball and baseball on a national level with the student body they have. I wonder why they think they have to lower its standards just to be good, nationally, in football. When they already proved it can be done in baseball and basketball (men's and women's).

[Jonny Utah]

Ok, thanks for the feedback everyone. +K all around.

So, if I'm understanding this correctly, you all seem to agree that what's preventing the NESCAC to compete nationally is that the conference doesn't want to jeopardize its schools' admissions reputation. Meaning they don't want to "lower its standards" just to let someone in who's good a football so they can compete at the national stage.

Even though the NESCAC seems to be more than competitive at basketball and baseball on a national level with the student body they have. I wonder why they think they have to lower its standards just to be good, nationally, in football. When they already proved it can be done in baseball and basketball (men's and women's).

I think the volume argument holds up with your point here as well.  In many spotsl, nescac schools will have an advantage over UWW or Mt. Union because they can get players from California, Texas, Florida, or New York.  These are nationally ranked liberal arts schools, and all your basketball teams need is one or two recruits from San Fransicso or Seattle area to be the best in the country.  Admissions will tell the basketball coach they can have 2-4 players who fall under the schools bar for academic standards (Tips).  Football will need more than that, and you can see this at any football school at any division (USC, Texas, Florida, Boston College, Michigan).  All these schools have to drop their admission standards for their football players.

Look at the best d3football programs (UWW and Mt. Union).  They have huge rosters.  They can simply let more students into the school than the nescac schools can, and they will get lucky with some players who might have been overlooked in high school.  I believe this is one of the reasons why they are so good. 

[02 Warhawk]

Ok, thanks for the feedback everyone. +K all around.

So, if I'm understanding this correctly, you all seem to agree that what's preventing the NESCAC to compete nationally is that the conference doesn't want to jeopardize its schools' admissions reputation. Meaning they don't want to "lower its standards" just to let someone in who's good a football so they can compete at the national stage.

Even though the NESCAC seems to be more than competitive at basketball and baseball on a national level with the student body they have. I wonder why they think they have to lower its standards just to be good, nationally, in football. When they already proved it can be done in baseball and basketball (men's and women's).

I think the volume argument holds up with your point here as well.  In many spotsl, nescac schools will have an advantage over UWW or Mt. Union because they can get players from California, Texas, Florida, or New York.  These are nationally ranked liberal arts schools, and all your basketball teams need is one or two recruits from San Fransicso or Seattle area to be the best in the country.  Admissions will tell the basketball coach they can have 2-4 players who fall under the schools bar for academic standards (Tips).  Football will need more than that, and you can see this at any football school at any division (USC, Texas, Florida, Boston College, Michigan).  All these schools have to drop their admission standards for their football players.

Look at the best d3football programs (UWW and Mt. Union).  They have huge rosters.  They can simply let more students into the school than the nescac schools can, and they will get lucky with some players who might have been overlooked in high school.  I believe this is one of the reasons why they are so good.

Yea, good point. Plus it's surprising to see how small of a school Mount Union is, compared to how LARGE it's football roster is. The OAC (Mount Union) doesn't have a cap on its roster size, where the WIAC (Whitewater) has a limit of 100 students...which is still large, but nothing compared to OAC schools.

Whitewater has about 4-5 times the enrollment Mt. Union has, but Mount's football program is still about 2-3 times larger. I swear a third of Mount Union's student body must play football...that's why they have like 6 JV teams. (Of course I'm exaggerating, but you get the point).

[watercow]

I agree with the "volume" thesis--that's precisely what distinguishes football from other "helmet" NESCAC sports within the context of the NCAA post-season play debate. Moreover, as Williams demonstrates annually, NESCAC schools don't need football to compete for--and win--the Directors' Cup. Candidly, Williams has hit on the formula--dominate "Buffy-like" sports (particularly on the women's' side) that typically attract (or self-select for) student athletes that don't impose any costs on the admission front. If you look at all the academic all-america lists, it's probably the case that NESCAC schools attract top (student-athlete) applicants that otherwise would go to Ivy (or Ivy-like) schools for an overall net admission gain (from a student admissions credentials standpoint). From a PR perspective, it's difficult to top the Directors' Cup and, paradoxically, by repeatedly winning it (with many other NESCAC schools also competing well), NESCAC schools' own performance likely undercuts an argument that they need post-season play in football. Seriously, this isn't rocket-science.

[frank uible]

Williams doesn't need football, regular season or post-season, since in the Williams context football or the quality of its performance does not aggrandize institutional Williams, but wouldn't a more than 8 game schedule and the possibility of post-season play offer a superior experience for Williams football players? And shouldn't the students' experiences be what it is all about at Williams?

[watercow]

Williams doesn't need football, regular season or post-season, since in the Williams context football or the quality of its performance does not aggrandize institutional Williams, but wouldn't a more than 8 game schedule and the possibility of post-season play offer a superior experience for Williams football players? And shouldn't the students' experiences be what it is all about at Williams?

Frank: Fair points, all. Whether it would be a "superior" experience I'll leave to others. And even if the student experience is central, yours is a normative position. I assumed we were discussing as an empirical matter why NESCAC prohibits post-season play for football. And the "why" pivots, I argue, on the incentives for NESCAC presidents (or at least my guess about them).

[amh63]

The discussion of football and post season play in the "CAC" is always an interesting/complex and often emotional one for me who tried to give a simple answer and was caught by Frank U......again.  The responses were all good ones and several hit close to home.  On the question of scheduling....the conference is hindered presently by the allowed time to start football practices. In basketball, where conf. teams have done very well nationally, practice starts two weeks later than many D3 schools.   The point of team size with respect to admission is also difficult among the conference schools.  Remember, the conf. prezs reduced the size of teams....traveling squads...to 75 a number of years ago.  Amherst, Williams , Trinity, and others carried teams over 90 plus, while a number of schools could not compete in size...and the 75 number was selected.  Even now, Hamilton can not field teams over 50.  Conn. College does not have a football team.  There is a small Quaker college in PA. of high acad. rep. and big endowment that dropped its football team a decade ago.  American football was decided not necessary for their student experience. 
Frank is right on in the "experience" matter.  Football going into the post season is NOT needed for the student life wrt campus experience..not at Amherst....believe me.  I enjoyed watching football at Amherst.  Some of my friends were players.  Eight games then were enough...beating Williams was most rewarding.  My three children all attended Amherst.  My daughter enjoyed her experience when Amherst was dominant in football.  My two sons attended when the football teams were terrible.  One son's best friend was a football player...a star in prep school...whose father was in my class and a football player.  His friend quit the team because of his bad experience playing on a bad team.   My daughter supports Amherst now, as I do.  My sons do not.  IMHO, good football teams at Amherst is really for the alums.  It brings in BIG financial returns to the college.  Good college games bring on good college experience and in the future, big checks to Amherst.  After the football season in which Amherst did not win a game, Amherst got a new coach, many Tips and winning seasons.  Teams that beat Williams are good for fund raising!
Oh I forgot, it is to be noted that in the conference, all the coaches in all the sports are restricted in their recruiting. In football, the coaches can not go off campus to recruit.....the same I believe in the other sports.

[quicksilver]

The NESCAC did have to reel back Middlebury on the lax admission standards for hockey players when it went on a roll in the mid- to late 1990s with 5 straight NCAA championship and then 3 more in the early 2005s. It hasn't been the same for Middlebury since the NESCAC started looking on a collective basis at recruit academic stats (Middlebury hasn't won the NESCAC regular season championship in many years). Still, that doesn't explain why the NESCAC presidents are convinced that they are incapable of self-policing in the same way on the football context.

[dlippiel]

The NESCAC did have to reel back Middlebury on the lax admission standards for hockey players when it went on a roll in the mid- to late 1990s with 5 straight NCAA championship and then 3 more in the early 2005s. It hasn't been the same for Middlebury since the NESCAC started looking on a collective basis at recruit academic stats (Middlebury hasn't won the NESCAC regular season championship in many years). Still, that doesn't explain why the NESCAC presidents are convinced that they are incapable of self-policing in the same way on the football context.

Man, those were some excellent Middlebury hockey teams, goodness!

[frank uible]

dlip: For some strange, indefinable reason I agree wholeheartedly with your motto.

[river]

. . . , but wouldn't a more than 8 game schedule and the possibility of post-season play offer a superior experience for Williams football players? And shouldn't the students' experiences be what it is all about at Williams?

. . . .  From a PR perspective, it's difficult to top the Directors' Cup and, paradoxically, by repeatedly winning it (with many other NESCAC schools also competing well), NESCAC schools' own performance likely undercuts an argument that they need post-season play in football. Seriously, this isn't rocket-science.

. . . .
I'm not so sure the nescac would do so bad nationally.  About as good as anyone else anyway.

Given what appears to be a lack of interest by college administrators in conference teams playing games outside the NESCAC or in the post-season, the limitations on squad size, the pressures against lowering the academic bar for football players, and the emphasis on "Buffy-like sports," the NESCAC football champion, if allowed to play in the post-season, would probably not make it very far and would probably be soundly trounced in the first round especially if it had to play a team from one of the stronger regions -- such as the north, south, or west.      Perhaps to reduce injury to their TIPS numbers, NESCAC schools should drop down to club football status, a level at which they appear to reside anyway.  Financially great, unlikely to detract from winning the Directors' Cup, unlikely to increase pressures from alumni for admission of undeserving football players, and good for athletes because it's not at what level you win or lose but how you play the game.