FB: Southern California Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[DutchFan2004]

i thought 80 sounded like a huge number, but I was told last night that we have 60 coming in.

When you think about that there is 77 available spots (punt, punt return, kick, kick return, FG/extra points, offense, and defense) to play on a team not counting special situations like nickel and dime defenses  80 does not even fill 2 teams if everyone fills one of those spots.  

[RFB]

I don't believe D-III has a roster cap, but some conferences limit the number of players on a roster.

Redlands always has 100 guys suited up for home games. 25 of them play. The other 75 stand on the sidelines and yell "Pass!" and hold their helmets up in the air on kickoffs.

OxyBob

This is true, but the number that plays is around 35. The luxury of having numbers like that is there is huge competition for special teams play. It's a good luxury to have as a program.

Those special teamers also are backups I would be willing to bet.  That gives them playing time and game speed experience.  That has to help with the development of younger players.  I think it also bonds a team closer together the more guys that are contributing. 

DF2004,

You're exactly right. My playing time at Redlands consisted of special teams and being the nickel back. I backed up a very talented safety during my time at Redlands but I still found a way onto the field and a way to contribute. When you're on all four special teams you're still playing significantly. I loved being a special teams demon.

IMHO that is what makes football such a great game.  No matter what position it is they all have to do their jobs to win. If you are the MVP of the team you don't win games unless all the others do their jobs.  The more players that play and get involved the better.  One player can not win the game for a team the great running back needs good blocks to gain the yards.  The QB needs the line to block to pass the ball and then the receivers have to catch the ball.  The defense needs to stop the other team.  The FG kicker needs a good snap, good hold, and then kick the ball straight all while the lines blocks.  The kicker needs a good long kick and a cover team to do their job and stop the return.  The punter needs the same thing.  To be a winning team it takes all working together to win.  You are right RFB in that role players are as much of a part of the team as the stars.  Without the guys willing to get dirty and do jobs that do not get a lot of recognition the team will not be successful.  Now a days it takes a lot of players to make a successful team.  There are injuries to consider as well.

Great post! You summed it up perfectly.

[Gray Fox]

Large squads are one of the main elements of D3 success.

[Fear the Poet]

i thought 80 sounded like a huge number, but I was told last night that we have 60 coming in.

Awesome! I've always said the key to Whittier growing as a program is coaching stability. Sounds like Coach Hammer is working hard and getting some good talent. I'm curious who will get the nod at QB. Whoever it is he will have some big shoes to fill.

its pretty exciting

upgrades in progress at Whittier:

1.new turf football field,new track,press box
2.upgraded soccer field
3.new scoreboard and upgraded baseball field
4.New tennis courts

things are looking up

as far as QB, Casteneda who was the back up last year has a shot. We also have two transfers coming in. One plays both Baseball and football and is 6' 3".  Not really sure at this point the talent level, but everyone seems hopeful.

should be really strong on the DL.

[Gray Fox]

Two weeks of intense football mixed in with the IE heat has a way of getting the numbers down.

That's what happens when you don't hydrate, hydrate, and then hydrate.

OxyBob

They have already taken your advice on the IIAC board, but they overdid it a bit.

[EastCoastStag]

Roster size is indeed indicative of success. Somewhat of a chicken and the egg situation. Strong players go to good programs with large rosters because they win (and hopefully have good academics....lets avoid our trashing of UWW's standards here).
So the question becomes, how does a program successfully build a roster of 80-100 kids? (I say 80-100 because more than that and you may have issues of hanger ons and subversive personalities, and less than 70 and you have issues staying healthy in practice and lack the number of people to field all necessary scout teams) Hammer comes from a very large program with Redlands-like numbers. He obviously has some ideas of how to build a large roster. Outside of pure strategy, things like key wins also help. Players are swayed by things  like the win over Oxy, especially when it is likely that more than one SCIAC program is recruiting these players. Also, facility improvements play a large roll.
My former school Kenyon felt the results of this when the team pulled off a 6-4, 6-1 run, combined with an elite facility that pretty much puts all other facilities in the NCAC (and also the SCIAC) to shame.
The facilities are somewhat out of the hands of the coaching staff.... so really, this leaves it up to salesmanship and strategy.
I would say that if a team can bring in 40 recruits a year and graduate 15 of them, you can build a solid roster of 80-100 players, and be able to compete.

A team must also hydrate, hydrate and hydrate....

And, although I am the only one who actually cares, hopefully CMS will continue to expand their roster size, despite academic and class size limitations.

[DutchFan2004]

Two weeks of intense football mixed in with the IE heat has a way of getting the numbers down.

That's what happens when you don't hydrate, hydrate, and then hydrate.

OxyBob

They have already taken your advice on the IIAC board, but they overdid it a bit.

We didn't take the advice,  We just got the water.  Not of our own choosing I may add.   

[DutchFan2004]

Roster size is indeed indicative of success. Somewhat of a chicken and the egg situation. Strong players go to good programs with large rosters because they win (and hopefully have good academics....lets avoid our trashing of UWW's standards here).
So the question becomes, how does a program successfully build a roster of 80-100 kids? (I say 80-100 because more than that and you may have issues of hanger ons and subversive personalities, and less than 70 and you have issues staying healthy in practice and lack the number of people to field all necessary scout teams) Hammer comes from a very large program with Redlands-like numbers. He obviously has some ideas of how to build a large roster. Outside of pure strategy, things like key wins also help. Players are swayed by things  like the win over Oxy, especially when it is likely that more than one SCIAC program is recruiting these players. Also, facility improvements play a large roll.
My former school Kenyon felt the results of this when the team pulled off a 6-4, 6-1 run, combined with an elite facility that pretty much puts all other facilities in the NCAC (and also the SCIAC) to shame.
The facilities are somewhat out of the hands of the coaching staff.... so really, this leaves it up to salesmanship and strategy.
I would say that if a team can bring in 40 recruits a year and graduate 15 of them, you can build a solid roster of 80-100 players, and be able to compete.

A team must also hydrate, hydrate and hydrate....

And, although I am the only one who actually cares, hopefully CMS will continue to expand their roster size, despite academic and class size limitations.

ECS I agree that the coaches do not have direct control over getting the facilities they want or need.  The do have control of the team.  If they can somehow produce a good team and get some W's I think then the fans, alums may open up the pocketbooks and donate to help the coach get what he needs.  No one likes to back a program in decline or even on the level.  I don't think it takes a Stagg Bowl victory but improvement and excitement.  Look at the job that has been done at University of Dubuque.  That program was the doormat of the IIAC and now is in the top tier and has challanged for the league title.  (that was for you Doolittle)  They are now getting a new field and success generates success.  They haven't won the title but now do challange all of the IIAC teams and are catching up.  The success of the conference as a whole is great.  I would rather have a battle week in and week out than have a bunch of games that don't test you.  The close games build a teams identity and they know that they can win any and all if they can over a good team.

[RFB]

Roster size is indeed indicative of success. Somewhat of a chicken and the egg situation. Strong players go to good programs with large rosters because they win (and hopefully have good academics....lets avoid our trashing of UWW's standards here).
So the question becomes, how does a program successfully build a roster of 80-100 kids? (I say 80-100 because more than that and you may have issues of hanger ons and subversive personalities, and less than 70 and you have issues staying healthy in practice and lack the number of people to field all necessary scout teams) Hammer comes from a very large program with Redlands-like numbers. He obviously has some ideas of how to build a large roster. Outside of pure strategy, things like key wins also help. Players are swayed by things  like the win over Oxy, especially when it is likely that more than one SCIAC program is recruiting these players. Also, facility improvements play a large roll.
My former school Kenyon felt the results of this when the team pulled off a 6-4, 6-1 run, combined with an elite facility that pretty much puts all other facilities in the NCAC (and also the SCIAC) to shame.
The facilities are somewhat out of the hands of the coaching staff.... so really, this leaves it up to salesmanship and strategy.
I would say that if a team can bring in 40 recruits a year and graduate 15 of them, you can build a solid roster of 80-100 players, and be able to compete.

A team must also hydrate, hydrate and hydrate....

And, although I am the only one who actually cares, hopefully CMS will continue to expand their roster size, despite academic and class size limitations.

Just checked out Kenyon's facilities. I doubt many DIII schools could match their overall facilities. I would be interested in hearing more opinions on other schools.

[D O.C.]

Jets utklassade regerande mästarna


(Arlanda kicked the crap out of Limhamn)

Yah, put idag lag bra Scurlock.

,

[stealth]

Directors Cup year end standings are out
http://nacda.cstv.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/nacda/sports/directorscup/auto_pdf/DIIIJune11Standings

RFB you get bragging rights in the SCIAC. 29th. Congrats.  Not even a close 2nd to Redlands for the rest of the SCIAC. 

Six out of the nine WIAC institutions finished 27th or better in the Directors' Cup this season and 2 in the top ten. UWW 6th.    It is what it is.

[Goal Line Stand]

Ya, ya, ya.  Nothing but a bunch of dumb jocks at UWW!  Old news.  But you got to admit, they sure can play!   

SCIAC....private schools, small enrollment, ability to be more selective with admissions.   

WIAC.....public schools, much larger enrollment, offers a college education to students with a wider range of intellectual abilities.

Sounds like a case of apples and oranges to me.   

[D O.C.]

with a wider range of intellectual abilities.

Now, what the heck could that mean?

[Goal Line Stand]

with a wider range of intellectual abilities.

Now, what the heck could that mean?

It means that you can get a college education without being in the top 10% of your high school class.

Thank God for me.   

[Ralph Turner]

Six out of the nine WIAC institutions finished 27th or better in the Directors' Cup this season and 2 in the top ten. UWW 6th.  It is what it is.

From the 2008 Princeton Review:

Admissions Selectivity Rating

This rating measures how competitive admissions are at the school. This rating is determined by several institutionally-reported factors, including: the class rank, average standardized test scores, and average high school GPA of entering freshmen; the percentage of students who hail from out-of-state; and the percentage of applicants accepted. By incorporating all these factors, our Admissions Selectivity Rating adjusts for "self-selecting" applicant pools. University of Chicago, for example, has a very high rating, even though it admits a surprisingly large proportion of its applicants. Chicago's applicant pool is self-selecting; that is, nearly all the school's applicants are exceptional students. This rating is given on a scale of 60-99. Please note that if a school has an Admissions Selectivity Rating of 60*, it means that the school did not report to us enough of the statistics that go into the rating in order for us to accurately measure its admissions selectivity.

SCIAC

Caltech 99
Pomona 99
Claremont 97
Mudd 97
Oxy 94
Pitzer 93
Redlands 88
La Verne 85
Whittier 84
Cal Lutheran 83

WIAC

La Crosse 81
Eau Claire 77
Stevens Point 75
Oshkosh 73
Stout 71
Platteville 66
Whitewater 66
River Falls 60*

It is what it is.

OxyBob

Oh, I see!  Cal Lutheran could leave the SCIAC, and go to WIAC, and raised the average the Princeton Review scores in both conferences!