FB: New England Small College Athletic Conference

[NCF]

NCF...to answer your question on post season play is the same as why not a 9- game season.  It is that the conference Presidents CAN!  To many voting heads who are indifferent to sports in general and football in particular.  Shucks..even Conn College that does not have a football team...being a former all women college gets a vote on the matter.  Academic schedules and money are reasons.  However, IMO the tide is changing as fast as new presidents arrive on the scene.  There has been at least 5 new president in the past 5 years with more underway.  New facilities have and are being built that support athletics as the school heads realize that money is easier to gather in if their sport teams prosper.  The Cardinals is a case in point.  I believe that soon when the next vote is taken for a 9 game season...allowing for a full head to head schedule...a change will occur.  Assuming that a majority can do the deed.  Post season play is much to hard to overcome.  It took two periods of 2-3 years each before post season Team sports got approval, I believe.

Thanks for the info. Hopefully the new presidents will at least get the first step in and go to a 9 game season. Maybe they will even go for the play-offs a few years down the road. It would be nice to see how they fare outside of their conference.

[nescac1]

Nice article on Eph senior Jeff Brewington:

http://www.dotnews.com/2013/pop-warner-eagles-alum-excels-williams-college

[quicksilver]

NCF...to answer your question on post season play is the same as why not a 9- game season.  It is that the conference Presidents CAN!  To many voting heads who are indifferent to sports in general and football in particular.  Shucks..even Conn College that does not have a football team...being a former all women college gets a vote on the matter.  Academic schedules and money are reasons.  However, IMO the tide is changing as fast as new presidents arrive on the scene.  There has been at least 5 new president in the past 5 years with more underway.  New facilities have and are being built that support athletics as the school heads realize that money is easier to gather in if their sport teams prosper.  The Cardinals is a case in point.  I believe that soon when the next vote is taken for a 9 game season...allowing for a full head to head schedule...a change will occur.  Assuming that a majority can do the deed.  Post season play is much to hard to overcome.  It took two periods of 2-3 years each before post season Team sports got approval, I believe.

Alas, amh63, I believe it requires a 3/4s vote of the president. Or at least that is what this provision of the agreement among the NESCAC schools appears to say:

b. Revision or Amendment of the Agreement
Revision or amendment of the agreement, including terms of conference membership, shall only be by
a three-quarters vote of the Presidents of all participating institutions, and where not unanimous shall
require a full year's consideration.

[amh63]

Quicksilver...thanks for the research.  Hope the new Prez of Conn. who comes on board in Jan., I believe,  .from Brown...music major and local Old Lyme girl..., will abstain if she is indifferent on the matter .  The one year delay is a killer if there is not an unanimous vote.
I will put my neck out by listing the school presidents who will support a change to a 9 game schedule...
Here goes...Amherst, Trinity, Williams, Tufts, Weselyan, Middlebury, Bates, Colby...not sure about Bowdoin and Hamilton and Connecticut.  New prez's in the past five years to date....Amherst, Williams, Tufts, Bates, Conn...with Colby and Trinity looking?.  If the count is faulty, it is assuming that the present prez's will vote in favor while the search committees do their job..and a vote is taken this year on the matter.
Posters feel free to correct my post in any areas.

[gridiron]

I've been all over going to a nine-schedule for some time now.  Is there some reason to believe the topic is even on an agenda to be discussed by the presidents?  Or is this simply wishful thinking?

[quicksilver]

Quicksilver...thanks for the research.  Hope the new Prez of Conn. who comes on board in Jan., I believe,  .from Brown...music major and local Old Lyme girl..., will abstain if she is indifferent on the matter .  The one year delay is a killer if there is not an unanimous vote.
I will put my neck out by listing the school presidents who will support a change to a 9 game schedule...
Here goes...Amherst, Trinity, Williams, Tufts, Weselyan, Middlebury, Bates, Colby...not sure about Bowdoin and Hamilton and Connecticut.  New prez's in the past five years to date....Amherst, Williams, Tufts, Bates, Conn...with Colby and Trinity looking?.  If the count is faulty, it is assuming that the present prez's will vote in favor while the search committees do their job..and a vote is taken this year on the matter.
Posters feel free to correct my post in any areas.

A new president has been picked for Colby but the current one does not leave until June 30, 2014. The new Colby president is currently an administrator at the University of Chicago. He is a Hamilton grad but I do not see much evidence of an interest in athletics in his background.

[Nescacparent]

It seems to me that before a ninth game can be considered, raising the roster limit by 10-15 players must happen. The rosters are very slim at the present maximum number of players. Add another game, add more injuries occurring in the 8th game leaving rosters further depleted for the ninth game.

[quicksilver]

It seems to me that before a ninth game can be considered, raising the roster limit by 10-15 players must happen. The rosters are very slim at the present maximum number of players. Add another game, add more injuries occurring in the 8th game leaving rosters further depleted for the ninth game.

I'm guessing that proposing such a change would ensure that there will not be a 9th game since the 75-person cap was designed to ensure a more even-handed  distribution of talent among the NESCAC schools and since a higher cap to 85 or 90 would involve a greater institutional commitment to football on the recruiting front, etc.

[gridiron]

I agree with Quicksilver.  Roster limits are not really an issue and would thwart any attempt at adding a ninth game (talk about a "no-brainer" in a ten team league).  No other conference in the nation plays an antiquated eight game schedule. 

"It has always been that way," is what is really going on.  Inertia is a terrible excuse.  A catalyst of some sort is required to initiate change.  Would take a groundswell of alum, former players, parents, etc. to put pressure on the administrations.

[amh63]

Gridiron...timing in many things as you know is often the key to success.  After this past season when three teams had 7-1 seasons, and two never met on the field, one would think that the topic maybe on the agenda.  Coaches to the ADs to the Presidents...as many who have thought about it before, see that this maybe the year.  Hence, my watch of the changes in the College Presidents.  None of the posters here, except Frank U., have been around since the last time a vote was taken, I believe, and few if anyone knows how such a vote went by schools.  Quicksilver posted that a 75 percent vote in favor of a change can lead to a 9 game schedule.
I can only talk wrt to Amherst.  Our new president enjoys football..her brothers coached teams, and she delayed a decision on the Amherst job to go to a football game at Wisconsin, in part to show support.  I believe her support for a change is stronger than recent past Presidents.
Besides, it is a topic for this board during the Winter

[Jonny Utah]

I think they should make the season extra long and add some bye weeks in there.  Keeps the boys fit and mentally alert for classes, and those bye weeks they can spend studying.  Hell, doesn't Williams have a month winter study where students basically take one class and can spend the rest of the time doing whatever they want?

[amh63]

Jonny"Utes"....nice .   Can do you one better.  Amherst has a long break between semesters and there is No credit course requirement.  Schedule wise..your idea impacts Middlebury most in that they have a "three" semester system...I believe.  In our conference, a large number of students get to play several sports...it is one of the key reasons that talented recruits come vice going to the Ivies and other non- scholarship D1 schools.

[Jonny Utah]

Jonny"Utes"....nice .   Can do you one better.  Amherst has a long break between semesters and there is No credit course requirement.  Schedule wise..your idea impacts Middlebury most in that they have a "three" semester system...I believe.  In our conference, a large number of students get to play several sports...it is one of the key reasons that talented recruits come vice going to the Ivies and other non- scholarship D1 schools.

My best friend from HS went to Williams and I would go up and sometimes spend a few days with him during their "winter session".  It was really like one big party every night.  (Finding a good looking Williams girl was like finding a needle in a stack of needles though)

[gridiron]

Gridiron...timing in many things as you know is often the key to success.  After this past season when three teams had 7-1 seasons, and two never met on the field, one would think that the topic maybe on the agenda.  Coaches to the ADs to the Presidents...as many who have thought about it before, see that this maybe the year.  Hence, my watch of the changes in the College Presidents.  None of the posters here, except Frank U., have been around since the last time a vote was taken, I believe, and few if anyone knows how such a vote went by schools.  Quicksilver posted that a 75 percent vote in favor of a change can lead to a 9 game schedule.
I can only talk wrt to Amherst.  Our new president enjoys football..her brothers coached teams, and she delayed a decision on the Amherst job to go to a football game at Wisconsin, in part to show support.  I believe her support for a change is stronger than recent past Presidents.
Besides, it is a topic for this board during the Winter

Great to hear that you and perhaps others think there may actually be a chance the topic could be on the agenda.  I agree this past season was just about as good an example of what is wrong with the current schedule as one can get.  In addition to the three way tie at the top there were two winless teams which never played each other.

Hoping your reading of the tea leaves proves accurate.  Needs to at least make the agenda, whether the schedule is changed or not.  Discussion by those NOT on this board is way overdue.

[gridiron]

Occurs to me we may never know if the topic even gets discussed by officials.  Hopefully, someone out there in the know might be connected to the board.