FB: Liberty League

[Bartman]

I was just spending a little free time checking out the boards of some of the powerhouse leagues. I am still amazed that Mt Union and MHB bring in 225 players to camp every year.  I know that they expect a huge dropout rate from the first year class, but still.....

Wow, I forgot they bring in that many. I get 100-110 on the varsity , and even that is pushing it with 5 deep at most positions. Even with a JV team , with the few games they play these days it is frustrating not to get into a game.  I don't think I would stick around....maybe Mount Union has a great Rugby team once they sort things out.

[ITH radio]

Helps to have a relatively low barrier of entry - admissions isn't super competitive and cost is about 40% (or more) less than most private colleges back east, so a year there won't ding your wallet as bad and credits will transfer if needed.

Plus UMU has many other strong sports programs, e.g., Track which won a D3 NC last spring, so even if FB doesn't work out for some, kids could end up elsewhere in athletics, just not football.

They've sent a lot of kids through the coaching ranks too, so even if playing time is limited, it's probably one of the best places to learn Xs and Os, especially when LK ran the show.

[Oline89]

We've had this discussion before...why would 100+ student athletes choose to attend Mount Union with the intent of playing college football knowing that their chances of meaningful on field playing time is low? The answer of course is everyone loves a winner. It must be extremely frustrating to the other teams in the Ohio Athletic Conference. I do see that MTU plays a full JV schedule. Maybe a MTU poster will enlighten us on the rate of transfer/dropout, first year to sophomore year, you know after a kid sees himself buried 8 deep in the depth chart. 

Sorry for bringing this up again, but man I feel for those kids that just have no chance of ever seeing the field.  They were obviously top ranked high school players, just to be on the radar for Mount or MHB.  I guess saying that you had a chance to be on a national championship team, even though you were 8 deep on the depth chart is worth it?

[Mr. Ypsi]

We've had this discussion before...why would 100+ student athletes choose to attend Mount Union with the intent of playing college football knowing that their chances of meaningful on field playing time is low? The answer of course is everyone loves a winner. It must be extremely frustrating to the other teams in the Ohio Athletic Conference. I do see that MTU plays a full JV schedule. Maybe a MTU poster will enlighten us on the rate of transfer/dropout, first year to sophomore year, you know after a kid sees himself buried 8 deep in the depth chart. 

Sorry for bringing this up again, but man I feel for those kids that just have no chance of ever seeing the field.  They were obviously top ranked high school players, just to be on the radar for Mount or MHB.  I guess saying that you had a chance to be on a national championship team, even though you were 8 deep on the depth chart is worth it?

Also, you may be forgetting what being a 17 or 18 year-old is like.  Few if any of them think that THEY will be 8th string!  Whatever the objective odds, they all think they are the exception and will be a star.  Which is not all bad - if they didn't have that attitude, they probably wouldn't have been recruited!

So, yes, I also feel for them.  But getting kicked in the gonads by reality is a big part of growing up.

[Bartman]

We've had this discussion before...why would 100+ student athletes choose to attend Mount Union with the intent of playing college football knowing that their chances of meaningful on field playing time is low? The answer of course is everyone loves a winner. It must be extremely frustrating to the other teams in the Ohio Athletic Conference. I do see that MTU plays a full JV schedule. Maybe a MTU poster will enlighten us on the rate of transfer/dropout, first year to sophomore year, you know after a kid sees himself buried 8 deep in the depth chart. 

Sorry for bringing this up again, but man I feel for those kids that just have no chance of ever seeing the field.  They were obviously top ranked high school players, just to be on the radar for Mount or MHB.  I guess saying that you had a chance to be on a national championship team, even though you were 8 deep on the depth chart is worth it?

Also, you may be forgetting what being a 17 or 18 year-old is like.  Few if any of them think that THEY will be 8th string!  Whatever the objective odds, they all think they are the exception and will be a star.  Which is not all bad - if they didn't have that attitude, they probably wouldn't have been recruited!

So, yes, I also feel for them.  But getting kicked in the gonads by reality is a big part of growing up.

,
       This is a tradeoff for Mount Union,  great football talent (through a D3 football survivor contest) versus  the graduation rate impact,  since I would think that many of the surplus football players not only leave the team, but leave the school. UMU has a 59% 6 year graduation rate( per US News) which can put stress on the financials of a college. The net benefit of the brand recognition for football surely attracts more general population students, and UMU has probably modelled the student population decline , but it is a bit of a roller coaster.

[AUPepBand]

I was just spending a little free time checking out the boards of some of the powerhouse leagues. I am still amazed that Mt Union and MHB bring in 225 players to camp every year.  I know that they expect a huge dropout rate from the first year class, but still.....

Wow, I forgot they bring in that many. I get 100-110 on the varsity , and even that is pushing it with 5 deep at most positions. Even with a JV team , with the few games they play these days it is frustrating not to get into a game.  I don't think I would stick around....maybe Mount Union has a great Rugby team once they sort things out.

Alfred has been bringing in 80+ freshmen each year with 7 jayvee games on the slate, plus a handful of transfers, a few of which over the past few years have come from UMU! (Guessing they don't have glass science at UMU.) 

On Saxon Warriors!

[Bartman]

I was just spending a little free time checking out the boards of some of the powerhouse leagues. I am still amazed that Mt Union and MHB bring in 225 players to camp every year.  I know that they expect a huge dropout rate from the first year class, but still.....

Wow, I forgot they bring in that many. I get 100-110 on the varsity , and even that is pushing it with 5 deep at most positions. Even with a JV team , with the few games they play these days it is frustrating not to get into a game.  I don't think I would stick around....maybe Mount Union has a great Rugby team once they sort things out.

Alfred has been bringing in 80+ freshmen each year with 7 jayvee games on the slate, plus a handful of transfers, a few of which over the past few years have come from UMU! (Guessing they don't have glass science at UMU.) 

On Saxon Warriors!

hey Pep,
    Totally jealous of the JV schedule at Alfred. A great commitment to the boys. A still think Hobart should schedule the Saxons. Good luck slaying the mighty Golden Eagles this year!

[AUPepBand]

Bartman: Jayvees open with The Pumpkinheads at Yunevich Stadium at 1 p.m. Sunday, Sept. 2!! See you there?

Gosh, just looked at the AU jayvee schedule. This is going to be FUN! Six home games and the only road trip is to Fisher on Sept. 9. Only problem is that sometimes they get cancelled, depending on depth and injury situation with opponents. But on the schedule after Hobart and Fisher are Buffalo State, Onondaga CC, Erie CC, Morrisville State and Milford Academy.

[dlippiel]

It's certainly great, in dlip's opinion to have a JV program that the overall football program and school is committed to. It gets guys playing time and allows for some real gamers to shine and show they are ready to move up...or that they have the potential to move up. However with that said Union still had it's JV program running while the varsity was in a free fall for whatever that is worth.

[Oline89]

It's certainly great, in dlip's opinion to have a JV program that the overall football program and school is committed to. It gets guys playing time and allows for some real gamers to shine and show they are ready to move up...or that they have the potential to move up. However with that said Union still had it's JV program running while the varsity was in a free fall for whatever that is worth.

Having a strong JV schedule is really important to keep the Frosh and Sophs going.  Hard to be the look squad for the varsity for 16 weeks straight, its always nice to bonk noggins with another colored helmet once in a while!!

[jknezek]

It's certainly great, in dlip's opinion to have a JV program that the overall football program and school is committed to. It gets guys playing time and allows for some real gamers to shine and show they are ready to move up...or that they have the potential to move up. However with that said Union still had it's JV program running while the varsity was in a free fall for whatever that is worth.

Having a strong JV schedule is really important to keep the Frosh and Sophs going.  Hard to be the look squad for the varsity for 16 weeks straight, its always nice to bonk noggins with another colored helmet once in a while!!

That's certainly one way to do it. The other way is to only recruit what you need. For example, W&L had 85 in camp, 25 first years. Last year they had 19 first years and this season there were 18 sophomores. W&L's retention of football players coming back to play from first year to senior year hovers between 65 and 85 percent. So if you recruit only what you need, they see time, they aren't buried 8 deep, and they stick around. If you insist on having 50 or 60 first years, and you want more than the 10 or so to come back that are good enough to see some time in first year, shelling out for a jv team makes sense.

It's just different strategies based on what the school needs. For these schools that need first years to fill beds and put quotas on coaches... well, you need to spend a bit to keep them motivated once they arrive or they all quit and a significant number of them transfer or just drop out. It's less than you gain from the extra tuition, so it probably works out. For schools that don't need to do this? You don't need the expense of a jv team, but you can fill your school without all those "extra" players anyway.

Lots of ways higher education works. Sometimes it is to the benefit of the students, most of the time it is designed to benefit the school.

[Oline89]

It's certainly great, in dlip's opinion to have a JV program that the overall football program and school is committed to. It gets guys playing time and allows for some real gamers to shine and show they are ready to move up...or that they have the potential to move up. However with that said Union still had it's JV program running while the varsity was in a free fall for whatever that is worth.

Having a strong JV schedule is really important to keep the Frosh and Sophs going.  Hard to be the look squad for the varsity for 16 weeks straight, its always nice to bonk noggins with another colored helmet once in a while!!

That's certainly one way to do it. The other way is to only recruit what you need. For example, W&L had 85 in camp, 25 first years. Last year they had 19 first years and this season there were 18 sophomores. W&L's retention of football players coming back to play from first year to senior year hovers between 65 and 85 percent. So if you recruit only what you need, they see time, they aren't buried 8 deep, and they stick around. If you insist on having 50 or 60 first years, and you want more than the 10 or so to come back that are good enough to see some time in first year, shelling out for a jv team makes sense.

It's just different strategies based on what the school needs. For these schools that need first years to fill beds and put quotas on coaches... well, you need to spend a bit to keep them motivated once they arrive or they all quit and a significant number of them transfer or just drop out. It's less than you gain from the extra tuition, so it probably works out. For schools that don't need to do this? You don't need the expense of a jv team, but you can fill your school without all those "extra" players anyway.

Lots of ways higher education works. Sometimes it is to the benefit of the students, most of the time it is designed to benefit the school.

In general I completely agree with your statements, as you may have  seen from my previous posts, I am skeptical about the benefit to the individual player, the team and the school to bringing in 100 new freshman.  That being said, even with a roster of 85, only 40 or so kids are going to play any substantial amount of time (remember the NFL roster is only 53).  I have always felt that if you are going to commit your entire off season to getting in shape, get to campus 3 weeks before the regular students, and bust your butt through the summer heat of preseason camp, then you have earned the right to play in an actual football game. 

[jknezek]

In general I completely agree with your statements, as you may have  seen from my previous posts, I am skeptical about the benefit to the individual player, the team and the school to bringing in 100 new freshman.  That being said, even with a roster of 85, only 40 or so kids are going to play any substantial amount of time (remember the NFL roster is only 53).  I have always felt that if you are going to commit your entire off season to getting in shape, get to campus 3 weeks before the regular students, and bust your butt through the summer heat of preseason camp, then you have earned the right to play in an actual football game.

I think you are correct in your "substantial amount of time". But in a roster of around 80, it's rare that too many players see no time throughout the season. Garbage time pops up on one end of the score or the other, W&L's special teams are generally chock full of first years and sophomores, and injuries take a toll. But I generally agree. On the other hand, I think a lot of first years are ok mostly sitting that first year so long as they see a path to playing time. Being 4th on a depth chart with one or maybe two upperclassmen in front of you can be motivating. There is light in that tunnel. Being 8th on a depth chart with a few upperclassmen, a handful of sophs, and maybe a few first years ahead of you is a very dark tunnel to stare down.

As for the NFL having 53, that is a money thing and it is ridiculous. It also doesn't really compare very well to college as players are around more than 4-5 years and rookies aren't like most first years where they aren't physically mature and physically ready to compete as well as mentally unready. Teams are constantly pulling from their 10 man practice squad, so you can really say they have 63 players available. Further, it's a rare team that doesn't have a rolodex of players that are currently unsigned, and you always hear of teams pulling a guy "off the street" as the season progresses. They aren't really. Those unsigned players are tipped that they are on shortlists for multiple teams and to stay in shape as a call is likely. If the owners weren't so cheap, NFL rosters would be much bigger. I wonder what the actual number of players the NFL teams call to their rosters in total over the season on average? I'm guessing it is closer to 70 than 53.

[Oline89]

In general I completely agree with your statements, as you may have  seen from my previous posts, I am skeptical about the benefit to the individual player, the team and the school to bringing in 100 new freshman.  That being said, even with a roster of 85, only 40 or so kids are going to play any substantial amount of time (remember the NFL roster is only 53).  I have always felt that if you are going to commit your entire off season to getting in shape, get to campus 3 weeks before the regular students, and bust your butt through the summer heat of preseason camp, then you have earned the right to play in an actual football game.

I think you are correct in your "substantial amount of time". But in a roster of around 80, it's rare that too many players see no time throughout the season. Garbage time pops up on one end of the score or the other, W&L's special teams are generally chock full of first years and sophomores, and injuries take a toll. But I generally agree. On the other hand, I think a lot of first years are ok mostly sitting that first year so long as they see a path to playing time. Being 4th on a depth chart with one or maybe two upperclassmen in front of you can be motivating. There is light in that tunnel. Being 8th on a depth chart with a few upperclassmen, a handful of sophs, and maybe a few first years ahead of you is a very dark tunnel to stare down.

As for the NFL having 53, that is a money thing and it is ridiculous. It also doesn't really compare very well to college as players are around more than 5 years and rookies aren't like most first years where they aren't physically mature and physically ready to compete as well as mentally unready. Teams are constantly pulling from their 10 man practice squad, so you can really say they have 63 players available. Further, it's a rare team that doesn't have a rolodex of players that are currently unsigned, and you always hear of teams pulling a guy "off the street" as the season progresses. They aren't really. Those unsigned players are tipped that they are on shortlists for multiple teams and to stay in shape as a call is likely. If the owners weren't so cheap, NFL rosters would be much bigger. I wonder what the actual number of players the NFL teams call to their rosters in total over the season on average? I'm guessing it is closer to 70 than 53.

Totally agree with everything you said, I just became a W&L fan.  Hopefully our Statesmen will see you in the playoffs! 

[jknezek]

In general I completely agree with your statements, as you may have  seen from my previous posts, I am skeptical about the benefit to the individual player, the team and the school to bringing in 100 new freshman.  That being said, even with a roster of 85, only 40 or so kids are going to play any substantial amount of time (remember the NFL roster is only 53).  I have always felt that if you are going to commit your entire off season to getting in shape, get to campus 3 weeks before the regular students, and bust your butt through the summer heat of preseason camp, then you have earned the right to play in an actual football game.

I think you are correct in your "substantial amount of time". But in a roster of around 80, it's rare that too many players see no time throughout the season. Garbage time pops up on one end of the score or the other, W&L's special teams are generally chock full of first years and sophomores, and injuries take a toll. But I generally agree. On the other hand, I think a lot of first years are ok mostly sitting that first year so long as they see a path to playing time. Being 4th on a depth chart with one or maybe two upperclassmen in front of you can be motivating. There is light in that tunnel. Being 8th on a depth chart with a few upperclassmen, a handful of sophs, and maybe a few first years ahead of you is a very dark tunnel to stare down.

As for the NFL having 53, that is a money thing and it is ridiculous. It also doesn't really compare very well to college as players are around more than 5 years and rookies aren't like most first years where they aren't physically mature and physically ready to compete as well as mentally unready. Teams are constantly pulling from their 10 man practice squad, so you can really say they have 63 players available. Further, it's a rare team that doesn't have a rolodex of players that are currently unsigned, and you always hear of teams pulling a guy "off the street" as the season progresses. They aren't really. Those unsigned players are tipped that they are on shortlists for multiple teams and to stay in shape as a call is likely. If the owners weren't so cheap, NFL rosters would be much bigger. I wonder what the actual number of players the NFL teams call to their rosters in total over the season on average? I'm guessing it is closer to 70 than 53.

Totally agree with everything you said, I just became a W&L fan.  Hopefully our Statesmen will see you in the playoffs!

We did that once. It didn't go particularly well from my boys, though we've taken bigger playoff licks. Good luck this season. I don't generally root against conference teams in OOC games, but something about Shenandoah sets me off. So give them a kicking for me...