FB: New England Small College Athletic Conference

[All NESCAC]

Seems to me the question really comes down to this.  Most would agree in recent years Williams has been giving football less flexibility in the admissions department, while Amherst has been receiving more.  Are the respective results on the field (W's and L's) solely the byproduct of this trend?  Is Coach Kelton, therefore, getting unfairly tarnished by the brush, or are the coaches' the real difference???

Coaching always makes a difference.  Even with a more stringent Admissions Office there is no reason Williams Football should not be at a minimum 6-2 every year given the ability of the College to attract student athletes.  What sport lends itself to more Coaching strategy than football?   

[PolarCat]

So the Curmudgeon said to nescac1 "Get off my lawn, you damn kid!"

Clearly, there are folks connected with Williams (and vocal folks at that) who feel passionate about Kelton staying, regardless of his record.  So who are we to quibble?  After all, NESCAC football is a zero sum game, and if the Ephs continue to rack up the L's, that means more W's for the rest of us.  Works for me.

But I hope this forum doesn't turn into a place where folks get routinely admonished for sharing their opinion, no matter how much others may disagree with it.

[amh63]

Was going to sit on the sidelines in further discussions on Football at Williams wrt to the HFC.
However, the implied threads of Admission standards between Amherst and Williams has crept in again.
Associating here that the recent success of Amherst is due to lowering of standards is false.  Period.
That the wins on the playing field is due somehow to getting more and better talented student because of admissions is a path that needs to be proven and imo not worthy to be taken on this board.
In the CAC, coaching is the critical element....all aspects from scouting, recruiting, on the field adjustments and off the field adjustments like player injuries, etc.
On this board, I know I am "preaching to the choir"...even the opposite wrt to the majority of the posters.
In the case of the present HFC at Williams, I will make the following comments.
I do not know the particulars of why he was hired when Whalen left.  None of my business...do not care about his creds.  He had a terrific first season at the helm..8-0.
Do not know if the present AD had any hand in his selection.  Do think if there is a change in the future, she will be part of it...when she returns from sabbatical leave.
Williams in their football promo...refer to the NESN broadcast...during the Amherst game and earlier in the new facilities, I was struck on how much the HFC was featured.  Yes, I believe Williams is deeply invested in the present HFC.  Regardless of his win-loss record, it will take another losing season, with the AD present, to get Williams to decide what they want in a football program going forward.
At Amherst, in the past decade, coaching changes were made in WBB, men's soccer, men's lacrosse, turning around stagnant proud programs. 
In closing...the head coach is critical! 

[All NESCAC]

Was going to sit on the sidelines in further discussions on Football at Williams wrt to the HFC.
However, the implied threads of Admission standards between Amherst and Williams has crept in again.
Associating here that the recent success of Amherst is due to lowering of standards is false.  Period.
That the wins on the playing field is due somehow to getting more and better talented student because of admissions is a path that needs to be proven and imo not worthy to be taken on this board.
In the CAC, coaching is the critical element....all aspects from scouting, recruiting, on the field adjustments and off the field adjustments like player injuries, etc.
On this board, I know I am "preaching to the choir"...even the opposite wrt to the majority of the posters.
In the case of the present HFC at Williams, I will make the following comments.
I do not know the particulars of why he was hired when Whalen left.  None of my business...do not care about his creds.  He had a terrific first season at the helm..8-0.
Do not know if the present AD had any hand in his selection.  Do think if there is a change in the future, she will be part of it...when she returns from sabbatical leave.
Williams in their football promo...refer to the NESN broadcast...during the Amherst game and earlier in the new facilities, I was struck on how much the HFC was featured.  Yes, I believe Williams is deeply invested in the present HFC.  Regardless of his win-loss record, it will take another losing season, with the AD present, to get Williams to decide what they want in a football program going forward.
At Amherst, in the past decade, coaching changes were made in WBB, men's soccer, men's lacrosse, turning around stagnant proud programs. 
In closing...the head coach is critical!

AMh63...spot on as they say over at the soccer board.  In agreement.  I was also very curious how much the Williams HFC was highlighted in the NESN Broadcast Commercial during the Williams/Amherst Game....seemed to me they were "propping him up" to diffuse his record and likely loss to Amherst.  Let's just say the Williams Alumni are getting very tired of the L's.  You don't have to win the NESCAC championship every year, but there's no reason you can't be in the running and competitive each and every season, and the Eph's really haven't been the last few years and the trend is not sitting well.

[AmherstStudent05]

Amh63 beat me to it.  I see no indication that Amherst has lowered its admissions standards for football players in recent years.  I believe our constraints are essentially identical to those of Williams -- as has been the case for many years -- but I am of course open to the possibility that my understanding has become out of date.

[gridiron]

Differences in flexibility with respect to admissions is uncomfortable for some to consider.  We can choose to leave it off this board if that is the preference, but to suggest it is the same between schools is ignoring reality.

[AmherstStudent05]

I, for one, think it should certainly be fair game for this board (though I would be VERY hesitant to cite specific student-athletes as examples).  I am also sure that there are differences between schools.

I happen to know, with a strong degree of reliability, that at least when I was in school, admission/recruiting restrictions were very closely calibrated between Amherst and Williams for football.  Maybe that has changed (though I am pretty sure at least that the 14 tip restriction still applies), but, as I said, I just have seen no evidence of it.

[gridiron]

Amherststudent05--I completely agree with your premise of being fair game without specific player situations being cited.  One data point for consideration is from an independent college consulting professional (one who gets paid to help advise high school students and parents on how to approach the college search process, etc.).  Happened to be with her a couple of weeks back at an Ivy school, and she indicated from what she sees there are three NESCAC schools that demonstrate greater flexibility than the others with specific "high value" student athletes.  One of them is Amherst.  Interestingly, she indicated that the roles have reversed between Amherst and Williams in that regard, as Williams used to demonstrate greater flexibility until a few years ago.  However, not surprisingly, she said it is all predicated on how much the coach likes the player.  The coach must REALLY, REALLY like the player to have exceptions made and of course those admissions departments must be willing to play ball.

If only one or two exceptions are made each year for football (my guess only), there would be little or no impact upon overall admissions statistics.  I suppose over a four year period four to eight potential "studs" could have a positive impact on a program.

[PolarCat]

And just getting the kid IN the door doesn't mean he will be able to STAY in the school for 4 years.  It's my understanding that a number of high-impact players have had to transfer out of NESCAC or sit out for a year because they couldn't cut it academically.  So while it's tempting to think that the Admissions Department at College X will be accommodating, I can't see the faculty following suit, and handing out easy grades to jocks.

(Actually, quite the opposite.  Both my kids report an "anti-jock" element at their schools, more pronounced in Brunswick than Lewiston).

Can a coach pull strings to get that star wide receiver (or power forward, or long stick defenseman, or fockey goalie or coxswain) admitted?  Sure.  But I doubt very much that the kid will stay there long if he's dumb as a post.  IMHO this whole concept of star athletes being measurably less intelligent than the school population may be true in the SEC or Big 10, but not in the Ivies or the CAC.

Of course, someone who earns their living telling parents he can help get their kids into Dartmouth or Amherst may have a financial interest in telling you otherwise.  But I don't buy it.

[Dave19]

You have it backwards-- the best salesman/recruiter  in the league is Devanney at Trinity who makes a ton of promises. The best Football coach is Mills, hands down not even close. Who else would you want running the Amherst program?

Not sure I agree with the second part of this. Great coach, but "hands down" indicates no one else is in the conversation, and I think there are a couple of coaches that should be.

As for the first part, can you elaborate on that? 

[gridiron]

While re-reading some of the posts, it occurs to me one point should be re-emphasized.  I do not believe ANY of the schools would admit students too far out of their respective bands.  We aren't talking about the types of students potentially admitted to football factory-type schools elsewhere around the country.  The academic rigors are too great, and the risks too high for failure.  Sometimes just a little more leeway in a particular direction than one would normally expect is what I believe sometimes occurs. 

[jumpshot]

The evidence is clear in recent years---from gridiron's comment on independent college consulting testimony, to amHerst's emphasis on major rather than a larger number and minor sports, to greater number of transfers, to repeated public statements by admission and senior officials focused on intention to win national championships, to consistent comments by amHerst alumni to their close friends, to differences in the relative value of tips, to specific variances in admission of the same candidates, to rapid turnaround of previously neglected teams, even to behavior of coaches and players, etc. ---the lj's  (and others)have indeed an elasticity to their standards in football and other prominent sports.

So what ...each school is free to do whatever they want in their own best interests ...especially in view of light governance by NESCAC and inconsistent oversight the presidents, each with their own agenda and competitive pressures ....

Let the games continue. After all, it's Division III. In the meantime, no one should expect certain NESCAC schools to nobly preserve a level playing field...

[PolarCat]

I still think the whole argument is over-blown.  I'd be amazed if MIT  bend their admissions standards one iota for their football recruits, and the Engineers did pretty darn well this year.  MIT proved that you can be a rocket scientist and a winning DIII QB at the same time.

I'd be willing to bet the kid who got the most Admissions help at __________ (fill in the blank: Amherst, Williams, Wes, wherever) is still brighter than 90% of the HS seniors in his graduating year.

[AmherstStudent05]

jumpshot,

If you don't mind, I would really like to keep the focus on recruiting/admissions policies for FOOTBALL.  That is the conversation we are having here (or, at least, were).

Most of your comments seemingly have little or nothing to do with our football program.  For instance, I assure you that it is not the stated goal of anyone in the administration for Coach Mills to deliver us a football national championship.  Also, if you have numbers about Coach Mills's greater reliance on transfers in recent years (which, by the way, I am not sure is necessarily indicative of anything), I would love to see them.  Since I have been following Amherst (2001), our football program seems to bring in about 1 transfer a year.  I am not sure that anything has changed over recent years (in fact, what was unusual this year is that Williams went the transfer route to fill a need at QB, which seems out of character for their program).

Similarly, one reason why I wanted more clarity about the claim that Williams and Amherst have diverging admissions standards for football was that during my time I understood that there was a remarkable degree of consistency and compliance with the Amherst and Williams football programs.  While I have heard stories/complaints (running both ways, mind you) about divergences in recruiting/admissions practices in other sports at Williams and Amherst, these "issues" -- real or imagined -- never seemed to surface with our respective football programs. 

Again, maybe times have changed, but I see no evidence of it.  I certainly see no evidence of Coach Mills getting more slack from admissions in recent years.

[gridiron]

Again, maybe times have changed, but I see no evidence of it.  I certainly see no evidence of Coach Mills getting more slack from admissions in recent years.

Short of calling out specific player situations, in your view, what would constitute evidence?