FB: New England Small College Athletic Conference

[formerbant10]

All you Trinity guys really are CLUELESS! Now I see why you didn't go to Amherst or Williams and all the other NESCAC schools that don't have state school standards.

I am actually jealous of you guys because Trinity wants to win and knows what it has to do that is all.


Take the two bottom teams in NESCA Wes and Ham, there is not one kid that would actually have started on the Trinity team. Lets see the Trinity staff run that scheme with that personnel. The staff can work their tales off, but IT AIN"T GONNA HAPPEN!

1. Trinity clearly does not have "state school standards" Trinity is a top 25 College.  Not at the academic level of Amherst and Williams, but not a community college either as you seem to infer.

2.  You will continue to be jealous of Trinity and its winning ways until another team beats them.  That's fine, I'm sure all the football playing Bantams will gladly take on any challenge.  But I don't think a loss will have the Bants crying about it, they'd rather get back to work the next day and make sure it doesn't happen again.

3.  A big part of the staff working its "tales" (we at Trin like to use tail--but we're all idiots down here so what does it matter) is recruiting.  Williams and Amherst can recruit off national recognition better than any D3 schools around.  Trinity has relied on tireless work by the coaching staff to get the players it needed for such a system to work. 

Give credit when credit is due.

And no I didn't play football at Trin, but I did see those guys working their butts off all year to get to the top.  And I've seen how some players at the other schools "workout" during the summer, and that's where the biggest difference lies.

[Trin9-0]

Frog, nobody is arguing that you can't run without the horses. However, the 7-1 Trinity team had essentially the same personnel as it did during the previous 4-4 season. Very few freshman played that season and those who did were in reserve roles.

Clearly coaching isn't everything. The biggest difference, as formerbant stated, was the work put in by the players to improve and their ability to adapt and learn the coaching schemes.

You appear to be too old, too stuborn and too set in your ways to be convinced otherwise, but if you're still involved in coaching I would recomend trying to improve your own program rather than try and tear down those who are more successful. That's what a real competitor would do.

[F00TB@11F@N]

Bullfrog:  I agree with you about needing good talent to be successful....."you can't have a circus without the animals".....

However, I can't totally agree with your comment that "it's not scheme its all talent" in the case of the Bantams, and Coach Priory's offensive schemes.  

From what I hear his offense was very difficult to learn, but once learned, the players that were put into those situations could execute (not because they were always better) but rather because they were "coached" and "taught" how to do it.  For all intensive purposes, one could argue that this past season's Bantam OFFENSE was the "worst" talented offense that they've had in a few years.  Why?  They had 2 first team all nescac players on offense (one OL and one RB), and only 3 second team players (one qb/wr/rb one OL and one wr).  Amherst had 4 first team all nescac players, and williams had 3.  But neither team beat Trinity.  Although I would agree that your statement about talent is usually correct, I can't find any evidence that would prove it correct in this past season's outcome.  

The Bantams won games this past season with their worst offense in years...but still managed to rush for 1749 yards and throw for 1511, while averaging 34 points per game.  How can Trinity's offense be SO good, but only have 2 first team players?  The only thing that I can figure is the bants were simply coached better, motivated better, and challenged more than any other team they played.

Now I will say that the Bants had one of the better (not the best...class of 03'!) defenses in the past years, and if you said that defense wins championships I would totally agree.

Nescacfan05: Trinity led Williams 31-0 at half last season, and I'm sure that coach Priory called the dogs off well before that.  Trin v. Colby; Should be interesting to see who wins that one.  

[chessdoc]

call me stupid but is this debate that complicated. maybe they won because they worked harder, developed their players better, recruited better, worked more in the offseason, were more group motivated, no one win s anything is this world for no reasons, its simple to call someone a cheater, because then u can write off ur own issues. Bad message to send to brilliant young men.

[chessdoc]

lastly because the complaining hit a cord, its great to have someone around that achieved greatness, it raises the bar, hold it out to your kids as a goal and go beat the p-s out of them. even if u never do it will make everyone better for trying. congrats but i always raised my kids to join the guy wanting to beat or achieve and catch up not to take the easy way and join the number one guy. ps he never applied there.

[baseballd3]

anyone get drafted this year?

[F00TB@11F@N]

chessdoc:  no offense; but you put your kids in "losing" situations to make them better?  In some aspects of life that may be logical, but in football, it's like saying that Reggie Bush is going to be a better person in the long run because he's playing on the worst team in America....HA!  

Hear me out before you get upset: In sports and some aspects of business, there are good teams and there are bad teams.  Some times the good teams and good businesses are better because of their personnel (our previous discussion), and some times they are better because they are simply managed better.  Some times the bad teams and bad businesses are worse for the same reasons.  But we're talking about the difference between football programs within academic schools where some administrations care a lot for football and other do not.  I would guarantee that none of the schools in ME, VT, NY care all that much about their football programs.  So you get average equipment, average video technology, and average coaches.  When a school promotes a football program you tend to get better equipment, better video equipment, and better coaches.

SO from what you're saying YOU purposefully sent your son to one of those schools that cares very little about the football program because you have an agenda to make him a better person?  I can promise you that losing IS NOT FUN!!!  But playing for a BAD football program is even worse.  

You think that by joining a good team you're taking the easy way out?  Who's to say that your son would've been taken by Trinity's football program, and even played on it for that matter?

MY opininon is that you shouldn't challenge yourself by joining the losing team (remember poor resources); you should challenge yourself by trying to join the BEST team (would you really want to join a small marketing firm when you could join a fortune 500?) and making the first string because when you have done that you have essentially worked yourself into an elite position.  

Hey, being the MVP on a .500 team is respectable...but being a first stringer on an undefeated or championship team is something that is earned by beating out the best.

Again, I mean no offense, but maybe I just misunderstood your statement, and I would gladly like to hear your reply.

[chessdoc]

First off, I never suggested he would be take for football. His grades were good and his boards were over 1300 so he had a shot in the general population. I never inferred that joining a winner was not great, his high school was ok no question. This was purely meant that joining a program or any activity where u can be a tiny piece in a puzzle to achieve value is gratifying. We have been with the best and the worst, top and bottom , but my expiernce says that the challenge is in the hunt not standing on someone elses tradition. I do not know anyone at trinity, its a great place and im sure they will continue the tradition my point was only that competing is what matters, that where i think you grow. The only thing that bothers me at all is that u interpreted anything as a boast we are in no position to do that and i never touted anything. we are just happy to get a small chance.

[Trin9-0]

I have to agree with chessdoc. One of the things that I loved about Trinity during the recruiting process was that the coaching staff was committed to becoming the best. It was tough going through those 4-4 seasons while Williams was winning championships. However, to finally beat them en route to an undefeated season was that much more satisfying because we knocked off the best in order to become the best.

Nothing wrong with joining a winner and proving yourself against the best competition on your own team. But I would prefer the team accomplishment of taking down the top dog rather than being a member of the existing champ.

[Jonny Utah]

Im not going to go into this whole thing but some things need to straightned out.....

most of these kids arent "accepted" into any nescac school in november.  If a kid is looking at Williams, Tufts and Bowdoin, and hes talking to the coaches, each coach gets back to the kid whether or not he can get in. This is based on whether or not the coach wants the kid or not.  Lets say all three schools like one kid. If the kid is a marginal nescac potential student (below 1400 sat and 3.7 gpa) that kid has to be a tip.  Each nescac school has 10 or so football tips a year that they can get into the school below the average student. The coach sends that kids info to the admissions dept and admissions gets back to the coach whether or not he gets in.  The coach then calls the kid and tells him he is in that school if he applies early (November 19th).  The kid has to let the coach know right away whether or not hes going to that school.  Lets say the kid tells Williams hes not interested, he wants to go to Bowdoin.  The Williams coach then crosses him off the list and sends the next kids info to the admissions department.  That kid never actually "got into" Williams but for all intents and purposes he has. 

Now, there are other things that have happened as well. (some opinions at the end)

-Many nescac football coaches are assistant or head coaches at other sports at the school.  They can use tips from other sports to get football players in. (two sport players in high school)

-Dick Farley's kid, (or the Williams college president's kid for that matter) is going to get special treatment at Williams college.  Common sense right?

-Williams best players from their best teams were from eastern massachusetts and I dont think Trinitys national recruiting made them so good.

- I also dont think Trinitys players worked that much harder than other players and thats what made them so good.

-Trinity was better because they had better players and better coaches.

[bant551]

Isn't it funny how Bullfrog is seemingly arguing against himself?  Noone said that Trinity doesn't have certain recruiting advantages (some of it from being ranked lower, much of it from more thorough, nation-wide recruiting).  Noone is arguing that the Bants had arguably the most talent as well over the course of the past few seasons.  

However, people have made very straightforward points about the advantages that Williams and Amherst have in recruiting players who are looking at the NESCAC.  Bullfrog doesn't seem to want to address that.  Perhaps his "wisdom" supercedes my personal experience of having coach Farley tell me that I was making "the biggest mistake of my life" when I chose Trinity (you see, Bullfrog, that logically leads to the conclusion that almost every kid who gets into Williams and Trinity decides to go to Williams, a clear recruiting advantage).

But let us not allow logic and PERSONAL experience get in the way of age-related stubborness and success-related jealousy.

Someone brought up a good point: the first 7-1 co-championship team was largely made up of LEFTOVERS from the previous regime who were not different talent-wise from their predecessors.  That team did, however, play in Priore's scheme for 2 years before that season.  Hmmm.  Again, common sense and logical reasoning shouldn't factor into the equation.

But lets just look, to a man, if the 7-1 team was more talented than the previous 4-4 teams.  I know that (1) the center was the same all three years (holdover from the previous regime who started at a young age); (2) the two guards (including yours truly) were recruited by the previous regime.  One of them, a converted d-lineman, was physically superior to the 2 guards who started the year before.  The other guard (me), was no more athletic or bigger or stronger than the guys who started the year before.  (3) One tackle (holdover from previous regime) was a 3-year starter, so he was the same guy playing all three years; the other tackle, a SOPHMORE, was NOT PHYSICALLY superior to Carucci, who was a very, very strong man.  He was a good athlete, yes, but only a sophmore and not physically superior to his predecessor.

The QB was the same all three years.

The running backs consisted of (1) a holdover; and (2) Pierandre, who I think was a holdover.

I believe the starting D-Backs were pretty much the same (mostly holdovers), that might be one area where some of the younger Priore guys contributed most.

Defensive line: Blair (Priore guy), but then Rooney, senior, super-senior, and a sophmore DE who was a pretty decent player.  Ditto linebackers.

Simply stated, aside from the normal phenomenon of having a few underclassmen come in and meaningfully contribute -- a little or sometimes a lot -- the starters were not recruited by Priore.  The system, however, was finally taking root.

But again, I will listen to your mighty wisdom in lieu of making inferences based upon my personal experience, logical reasoning, THE FACTS, and all incidents of common sense.

[bant551]

And let me add that if you are a coach and that is your attitude, I feel mighty bad for your players.  They have been "Munsoned", left in the middle of nowhere, up a creek without a paddle.

[Knightstalker]

I have been reading all this and laughing most of the time.  This conversation and specifically bullfrog make me want to go out and buy the bumper sticker that says, "My kid can beat up your honor student."   

As far as talent, coaching and schemes go, you need all of them to win, but you can win with lesser talent with good coaching and schemes.  The NE Patriots, Denver Broncos, Detroit Pistons, San Antonio Spurs are all good examples of this.  Yes they have some very good players but not the all-star talent other teams have that don't win.  Look at the Yankees and Red Sox, both teams are loaded with all-stars and while good teams and will both win 90+ this season, both are not the best teams.

The NESCAC has great schools with several good athletic programs.  Right now Trinity has the best football program, who has the best basketball program?  I don't believe it is Trinity, from what I have seen it is either Williams or Amherst, how did they get so good?

I think maybe the NESCAC presidents need to pull their heads from the sand and realize that Higher Education in the US has changed and maybe they need to catch up with the times.  They might finally realize their "Selective Isolationism" (my term) needs to be addressed.  Some of the Ivies have been relaxing their "girdle" so to speak and it doesn't seem to hurt their status any.  Just the opinion of a poor state school alum.   

[bant551]

http://www.trincoll.edu/pub/news/sports_brochures/football/2002%20Season/teamcume.htm#TEAM.CMB

If the above-lined works, Bullfrog, I'd like you to take a look at the offensive and defensive statistical leaders from the 7-1 from Priore's 3rd season as coach (when the winning streak began).

Lets ignore the defensive stats for this conversation, because I know less about the defensive scheme (although looking at the statistical leaders, it doesn't appear that any of "Priore's guys" appear, and if so, not much).

As for the offensive stats, I do believe you see over 180 yards rushing per game.  As I wrote earlier, most of these guys were holderovers.  Top "Priore-guy" contributor on offense?  I'd have to say Soules, who returned punts and had 18 catches.  Davis also racked up some yards as well, but he was the team's 3rd-leading rusher.

There you have it, the statistics from the 7-1 season, both cumulative and individual.  I think statistics fall under the broader category of "Factual Evidence" when one is making an argument.

By your Mr. Miyagi-like "prudence" must not be disregarded in the light of mere FACTS! 

[Bullfrog]

First of all who said those guys from that 7-1 team were bad players? 

In fact they were very good and some were nasty such as that NG(Rooney).  Probably his Sr year he was the best I have seen in a long long time. However, most of those guys would have not played on this year and last years team with the exception of NG and possible RB and maybe one other. 

As the flood gates opens so does the level of talent.

All this to me says that the talent has been at TR forever as a result of there admissions policy and commitment to win.