FB: Southern California Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[DawgHeaven]

RFB, as fans of the Bulldogs, we should want Cal Tech to keep fielding athletic teams because our Basketball team needs a couple conference wins a year.  As far as Bryant playing DB, if Matt Groettegoed could not hack it in the league than their is no way Bryant can make that switch.
Bulldogs in '06

[RFB]

Bulldog,

I agree, Redlands basketball stinks. Bryant is a very good player, but making the transistion to the NFL is a very tough one. He might be able to catch on to the CFL, AFL, or maybe Europe. Good luck to him.

[Sagecock]

Chance of Bryant making it in the pros, at any level, is limited.  I don't know how good a safety he is (I know Air Force recruited him), but he plays pretty soft at linebacker.  Personal observation: saw him get completely shut down by Pomona's right tackle, a kid who had just that week returned from a 7-week long recovery from a tear in his knee.  I'm not knocking Bartesch (ended up being named first team) but if you can't dominate a D3 tackle who just came back from that long a lay-off, there's no chance of going pro. 

This speaks to a general problem I have with event like the Aztec Bowl.  While I love the general concept, I think that all to often it become a numbers-based vote rather then skill.  For every knowledgeble voter like Pat, there's someone who's only going to look at the physical tools.  For example, Wil Goff from Redlands a few years ago.  He was what, 6' 5", 275 D1 bounceback?  Not to say he wasn't good, but one of the best D3 players in the country would be a MAJOR stretch.  Anyone that does not flat-out dominate with physical size like that is simply not as good a player as someone who is say 6'. 240, but who dominates.  My beef is that Goff-type players will get chosen all the time over someone who might have had a better case for going, simply because they don't make the roster look as good on paper.  Just my opinion.

[RFB]

Sagecock,

One game does not make a player. Bryant is deserving of his awards and has earned his selection to the Aztec Bowl. The way you keep plugging your Pomona boys one would think that Pomona has been a top program in the SCIAC. There is no need to take away from players like Bryant and Goff, both were outstanding.

[Mr. Ypsi]

ST,

You make some good points, but here are my reasons.

1. Cal Tech stopped fielding competitive teams a very long time ago. I would be probably be accurate in saying that it has been multiple decades. I want the SCIAC as a conference to keep building its national profile. With Cal Tech in the mix, it hurts to attain that goal.

2. I understand wanting your students to experience athletics, it helps a person develop in a competitive arena. This could easily be attained within an intramural or club environment at Cal Tech.

So if the SCIAC wants to raise their athletic profile, they are always free to kick them out.

Have you ever considered that they might want them for their academic profile?  SOME schools DO think about academics!

[RFB]

The rest of the SCIAC schools are all outstanding academic universities. They do not need Cal Tech to establish their academic credentials.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Never said they did - but I doubt that CalTech LOWERS your academic average!

For those wondering why CalTech is still in the SCIAC, may I suggest that as a possibility?!

[Browneagle64]

Sagecoack---RFB made some good points regarding some recent players that made it to the Aztec bowl. Eventhough Goff was a bounceback(?) he did manage to get his job done in the trenches. As for Bryant, just because you think he didn't do well against a pomona linemen doesn't mean he shouldn't be selected to the bowl. Have you even considered that maybe his gameplan  required him to secure a certain area on the field? Maybe he was responsible for covering an area that contained the torn up linemen?  Chances are you might not know what the plan was.

The coaches in the league deemed him the defensive of player of the year for three years. Deal with it. Your coach at pomona probabily didn't have a choice to argue that bryant was deemed alright to do his best at that position. 

[RFB]

Last time I checked we were talking about Cal Tech athletics, not academics.

[Sagecock]

Browneagle and RFB:  I think you somewhat missed the point of what I was trying to say.  The Aztec Bowl is supposedly the best d3 players in the country.  I never said that Bryant and Goff weren't good players, they most certainly were, but if you're selecting what amounts to an All-Star team you should have all-stars, players who out-and-out dominate at their respective positions.   Neither Goff nor Bryant accomplished that.  You can point to game plans if you like eagle, and it's a perfectly valid argument, but even if the game plan involved him keeping the backside secure from cut-back, thus eliminating the backside pursuit tackles he was known for, it does not excuse getting controlled when the play was run directly at him.  Second, the coaches in the league certainly did vote him defensive player of year, and if you think that politics plays no role in that process I've got a bridge in brooklyn to sell to you.  And judging from the statistics they certainly played a role.  The point is, the defensive player of the year in SCIAC should be a player who not only dominated the opposition, but represents the crucial element of a teams defense, Bryant was neither of those things this year, in past years, he might very well have been, but this year?  No.

Comment on CalTech athletics:  those kids love the game, have the most fun out of probably anyone in SCAIC and develop interpersonal skills that many kids at their school sorely lack.  That being said there is something to be said for competitiveness.  Unless I'm mistaken, I don't think CalTech has won a single SCIAC athletic contest in about 10 years.  So basically, what do you value?  Letting kids who will never get a chance to play sports again compete and develop as people, or having a "stonger conference?"  (which while I see the argument for, I fail to see how allowing a team to remain at th bottom of the league hurts the conference, especially if everybody knows that they will always remain there, and therefore adjusts their perceptions of a team's record)

[Tom Brady]

Sagecock-  I really think you have a much different outlook on things than the rest of us.  First off, Bryant is OBVIOUSLY doing something right if he has been D POY for three straight years.  Political choice or not, he is still doing enough to make the other coaches vote for him.  No matter how much you think Pomona players "dominated" Bryant, his team was the SCIAC Champs, and that is enough on that.

Now reguarding the whole Cal Tech issue....they have won SCIAC games in the past 10 years.  I know they have won a few games in soccer and maybe some Water Polo or other "Non-Major" sports (I DO NOT mean to say those sports are not important, just not the major ones). 

#2 On the Cal Tech issue- I can guarentee those kids don't have the most fun out of athletes in the SCIAC.  I played in the SCIAC and didn't have a care in the world.  I partied my ass off and loved every second of it.  I was lucky I didn't have to go to class at Cal Tech cause my college days would have been very short. 

Hope all is well with the fans out there.  Been traveling a little too much.  Looking forward to the Stagg Bowl this Sat.  Now if I only wake up in time to see it, unlike last year when the office X-Mas party went a little longer than expected....like 10 hours too long

[Browneagle64]

Tom---- Don't party to early just yet man. Christmas and New Years are just around the corner. Anyways, i think your last post answered the debate that was brought up straight to the point. There is doubt about what you had to say so i agree with what you had to say.

As for the Cal tech----Just kill the issue. I am glad they do have sports. And yes, they have won games in soccer or water polo. You should see their parties that they throw after winning a game. FYI, their parties are really upscale and really sociable. They have waiters and bartenders serving you food and drinks.
So i am glad that they win games and have parties like this. At the least, this can teach them how to be sociable people.

[RFB]

As for the Cal tech----Just kill the issue.

I agree

[rbaikie]

Browneagle and RFB:  I think you somewhat missed the point of what I was trying to say.  The Aztec Bowl is supposedly the best d3 players in the country. 

Sagecock -

I think you are reaching a little. To say htat is like saying the Senior Bowl or the Hula Bowl is the best of D1A college football players.

First, it can't be all of the best for a couple of reasons - It is held the same day as the Stagg Bowl - making it impossible for players from the final four teams.

Second, players and coaches can make choices. I know of a number of players who may or may not been invited who opted for other opportunities. For example, Nate Jackson from Menlo College a couple of years ago - was slated to play in the Shrine Game - now a back up Tight End for Denver - not an Aztec Bowl participant. Neither is Bret Elliot of Linfield. Also, I don't know how closely the coachs' selections for the roster match with those eligible seniors that would be on all-region or all-american teams.

I think it would be better to say that the Aztec Bowl roster is representative of some of the best senior D3 players in the country. It may be semantics, but there are always personal opinions.

[RFB]

I think it would be better to say that the Aztec Bowl roster is representative of some of the best senior D3 players in the country.

rbaikie,

Nice post, this is spot on.