MBB: NESCAC

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

NESCAC, primarily the presidents, choose to be later. They want student-athletes to have their academic schedules affected less, so they have shorter practice windows and don't compete in full schedules in many sports (especially football [8 games] which is also ineligible for any post-season participation).

[D3HoopJunkie]

Thanks Dave

That's a very admirable stance for all NESCAC institutions to take part in. No wonder why their schools have such a rich history of academic success. Not to mention the amount of success in athletics as well which in my mind go hand in hand. Speaking on basketball (especially in this day and age of one and done athletes) the academic side of being a student athlete tends to be forgotten. Truly the sad reality. I realize the D1 level is quite different but for most D2 and D3 basketball players it is the college degree that each individual will receive upon graduation that will allow them to get a job and contribute to society. The term "student athlete" is something I truly believe in and there is a reason why "student" is the first word in that phrase.

The season is so close!!! Enjoy everyone and best of luck to the NESCAC

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

The reason I love Division III so much... because it truly is about the STUDENT-athlete.

By the way, I also think the NESCAC's shorter basketball pre-season isn't a bad idea for many reasons... and one I wouldn't be surprised to see basketball on the whole move towards (shorter pre-season) for a variety of reasons, including allowing the coach more time to interact with the students at the start of the academic year... but that is a very large topic that I am working on presenting soon enough.

[nescac1]

There doesn't seem to be a lot of downside to the shorter pre-season, honestly.  The players across D3 play hoops informally throughout the offseason in all events, so it doesn't really affect conditioning or skill development.  I do think the first weekend of the season, NESCAC teams are at a slight disadvantage because they are still getting organized, in terms of understanding the coach's system, relative to peers.  But after a few weeks, it all levels out.  And NESCAC teams' success (since 2003, the NESCAC has collectively averaged about one Final Four appearance per year, including three titles and four second-place finishes) suggests that the conference isn't really being hurt by the late start.  Perhaps formal practice is a bit overrated when the season is SO long to begin with??

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Well I would counter that with a few thoughts:

- no team I know comes in to preseason actually in good condition by game standard. They may do things in the offseason and leading up, but they aren't really prepared. There is an argument that teams need time to get going in this category.
- I think the women's side of the NESCAC has debunked the idea that a shorter preseason may hurt them at the start of the season (hurt being a relative term). I remember quite a few NESCAC teams including Amherst and Williams in the last few years who have played five games against pretty decent competition in the first ten to fourteen days while their male counterparts barely play two or three. They come out of that undefeatead while Williams has famously not been able to do that even when highly touted. I think that is a falicy that can be quickly debunked if teams maybe weren't playing what are perceived (by team or outsiders depending on the situation) easy teams. There are many trains of thoughts to how to start a season and schedule out of conference, but many programs have proven that tougher games to start can actually be a much bigger advantage than starting light and easy. (Williams women played seven games in the first 15 days of the season two years ago and came out 7-0 and included three or four 19+ winning teams that season).

And I think the NESCAC has proven to the rest of the country that the late start does have no ill affect in the long term - maybe even allows the players to be a bit more rested. The Centennial has a bit of a similar start and they show no bad signs usually, either.

Basketball has the longest pre-season of any sports, hands down. More practices, more practice dates, etc. There are some good reason for the extra dates on paper, but not in reality and I think coaches may be looking to give up some of those dates if it means being able to see other benefits elsewhere.

[nescac1]

Dave, your first two points seem to contradict one another -- if players aren't really prepared, condition-wise, wouldn't that be expected to hurt them vs. teams who have had twice as long (at that point in the season) to get into shape?  And I continue to think it's less an issue of conditioning (although that could play a role) than just sheer disjointedness ... some of those early-season games featuring NESCAC teams playing after only two weeks of practice are UGLY to watch.  Middlebury has also really struggled with some early season games at times that I think it would have fared better in had they been played a month later.  Amherst, too, while usually winning, has had some trouble getting going in the first weekend of the season vs. typically far inferior opponents. 

In all events, I agree that it is not a material disadvantage in the long-term and there are some advantages to having two weeks less of practice, in terms of the mental and physical toll of a long season, come March.  Then again, the WIAC schools play that brutal conference schedule in typically (albeit not last year) the best conference in the country, and despite all those hard-fought regular season battles plus tough/long conference tourney, no one performs better in March.  So in the end, who knows whether having fresher legs vs. being more prepared / battle-tested is the better approach!!   

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

I don't think they contradict themselves because I also think there is only so much time needed to be in top condition. When I played soccer, I had ten days prior to the first game, I believe, of two-a-days and we didn't have two-a-days every day (it might have been two weeks of practice - I am forgetting now). Despite what I did in the off-season, especially the summer leading up, I was never in peak condition when I arrived at pre-season. It took a few days to a week to get up to full speed... but there was also a point near the end of pre-season that the conditioning was set and there wasn't much else we could do that we weren't going to do all season anyway (you know, run!).

Four weeks of practice accounts for more practice time than any other sport in the NCAA. It is insane. Most coaches will tell you that by the end, it is no longer effective and they are just waiting to play. And yes, you can ask these coaches why don't they voluntarily cut down their practice allotment, but you know the answer to that... especially if they have to face administrators after a bad start to the season that may have no relevance to their practice schedule.

I have not spoken to a coach, yet, who says they wouldn't give up a week to ten days of the pre-season to get an opportunity to meet and set things up in September knowing they don't really need that time in October in the grand scheme of things.

And by the way, no basketball looks good at the beginning of the season no matter how much time teams have practiced. I have seen four-week teams look just as bad as two week teams. When you haven't gotten in the swing of the season and really played, yet... whether you practiced two, three, or four weeks doesn't matter. That is the only downfall about the Hoopsville Classic - we aren't seeing the teams in peak performance. It is still good, but imagine that tournament in mid-January? So, yes I understand you think NESCAC basketball isn't pretty at the start of the season... but no basketball is pretty then, period.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

I should add if I wasn't clear... most coaches I talk with don't think they need four weeks to get a team into top conditional shape. Playing the game, executing, etc., that is a different conversation. That is why I don't think I am contradicting anything. No player and team comes into pre-season in top shape... however, they don't need four weeks and pretty much 28-30 practices to get in shape.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

It also gives the NESCAC coaches a convenient excuse for scheduling weak in November.

[warriorcat]

The later start date has also given some NESCAC athletes an opportunity to play a fall and a winter sport, albeit there are only a few who have done so in recent years. 

[Pat Coleman]

The later start date has also given some NESCAC athletes an opportunity to play a fall and a winter sport, albeit there are only a few who have done so in recent years.

Not unheard of in other Division III environs as well, although certainly made easier by a football schedule that never extends beyond Week 11 of the D-III football season and the basketball preseason starting later.

I don't follow the other fall sports enough to know -- are there a lot of soccer or field hockey two-sport athletes in the NESCAC, with those sports likely to send teams deep into the fall postseason?

[quicksilver]

. . .
I don't follow the other fall sports enough to know -- are there a lot of soccer or field hockey two-sport athletes in the NESCAC, with those sports likely to send teams deep into the fall postseason?

There is a lot of overlap between field hockey and ice hockey in the NESCAC and some between soccer and ice hockey (men and women's). On occasion, there have been football-hockey players but no current football-hockey players . . .

[P'bearfan]

There doesn't seem to be a lot of downside to the shorter pre-season, honestly.  The players across D3 play hoops informally throughout the offseason in all events, so it doesn't really affect conditioning or skill development.  I do think the first weekend of the season, NESCAC teams are at a slight disadvantage because they are still getting organized, in terms of understanding the coach's system, relative to peers.  But after a few weeks, it all levels out. 

While I agree that things level out after a few weeks, the shorter pre-season can definitely impact the early games.  Last year Bowdoin had a very young team with many FY's playing significant minutes.  Their first game of the season was against WCSU  - and Bowdoin looked like a team that only had 2 weeks of practice with several FY's in the rotation.  Great effort from everyone but it was rough - especially on defense where FY's not only have to adapt to a new system but now have to defend opponents who are generally, bigger, faster and more skilled than they have seen before.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

There seems to be a bit of overlap... field hockey playing ice hockey... that is true in the spring as well where ice hockey is playing lacrosse (both final four women's lacrosse programs featured that the last few years). And a lot of those programs feature deep seasons and even national championships.

[nescac1]

So, it's mid-September: any word on impact frosh or surprise break-out upperclassmen from NESCAC campuses?