Division III football rivalries

[Knightstalker]

Possibly this is the NESCAC' way of saying they are better than the Ivies.

[frank uible]

Nescac was formed in 1971. Before that date all Nescac-to-be colleges played non-Nescac-to-be colleges, including (for some Nescac-to-be colleges) Ivies, and for a few years after that date some and possibly all Nescac colleges played non-Nescac colleges.

[redswarm81]

redswarm,

I admire your consistency of principle (I'm not being sarcastic - I really do).  In your last paragraph you say that withdrawing ALL sports from the playoffs would be more consistent with 'academics over athletics'.  I don't really agree, but I recognize your viewpoint, and admire your consistent stance.

But at that point, why worry about d3 standards and principles (or even membership) - why not (to suggest the alternative term) just speak of NESCAC standards and principles?  It is not nonsense to say NESCAC "isn't really" participating in d3 football; forget the 'really' part - NESCAC is NOT participating in d3 football since they play no other d3 football teams!  They are members of d3, and following all attendant rules, but they are participating only in NESCAC football.  There is nothing wrong with that (it can even be argued, as you have, that it is admirable), but it is what it is.

And I suspect you might get some flak from Williams about ceasing post-season competition in all sports - I get the impression they are rather fond of their seemingly permanent ownership of the Presidents Cup!

• If NESCAC schools awarded athletic scholarships to their football players, they would not be participating in d3 football.
• If NESCAC schools played an 11 game regular season, they would not be participating in d3 football.
• If NESCAC schools started football practice earlier than August (whenever)^th, they would not be participating in d3 football.

However, NESCAC schools do no such things.  NESCAC schools, each one a member of NCAA Division III, play eight game schedules against the other NESCAC schools.  Of course NESCAC schools are participating in d3 football.

I confess to being definitionally challenged, Doc.  NCAA Division III is what it says in its definition, because . . . well, because . . . that's its definition.  I said similar things to the US Supreme Court when they defined "commerce among the several states" as "growing and consuming wheat entirely within the bounds of your own private property" (Wickard v. Filburn), and again when they defined "public use" as "private development" (Kelo v. New London).

You are crafting a fine distinction between NESCAC schools being "members of d3 and following all attendant rules;" and NESCAC schools "participating" in d3.  I don't have good enough vision to see any substantive distinction.   But then again, I don't see how universities can claim to encourage the free exchange of ideas while simultaneously enforcing onerously restrictive campus speech codes.

This part of my argument isn't principle, Doc--it's tautology.  I do make many arguments in defense of NESCAC based on principle, though, and I appreciate your astuteness in recognizing it.

[redswarm81]

Basically the NESCAC schools are acting like hypocritical spoiled children.  They want to play with everyone else and bragg about how great their programs are and how they are so much superior to everyone else.  Then football season comes around and like the spoiled child they say, It's my ball and I am going home and not playing with you anymore.    nyah, nyah, nyah.

Let's stipulate that the motivation you ascribe to NESCAC schools is correct.  They want to brag about their great programs and about how superior they are.  That begs the question why wouldn't they want to brag about how great their football program is?

Whether we stipulate or not, it seems obvious to me that the way to remove hypocrisy from the NESCAC schools is to withdraw from all postseason playoffs, not to add football playoffs.  That is, if the hypocrisy is at all related to their academic prestige.

Edit:  I can understand my proposed solution to hypocrisy being a minority solution, but I can't understand why not a single person in the country seems to agree with me, even if he doesn't support the proposal.  I would more easily understand the argument "yes, that would eliminate the hypocrisy, but a little hypocrisy is permissible, especially in those sports with few players and short playoffs, since it provides a potentially more meaningful and exciting collegiate experience."

[Ralph Turner]

I like the way that the Index service, Lazindex, describes his dealing with the NESCAC.

"D3 Disconnected"

Please scroll to the very bottom of the page.

[Mr. Ypsi]

"This part of my argument isn't principle, Doc--it's tautology."  Mainly, it is irrelevant!  No one (at least certainly not me) has accused you of violating any d3 rules.  So far as I know, I am not violating any laws of France, but that doesn't mean I am 'participating' in French culture!  If I attend a poker tournament and sit at the table playing solitaire, I'm probably not violating any rules, but am I 'participating'?  I would suggest that NESCAC never playing football against any d3 teams means they are playing solitaire.

[ADL70]

Who has the picture of the deceased equine?

[Pat Coleman]

Check the MIAA MBB board.

[redswarm81]

"This part of my argument isn't principle, Doc--it's tautology."  Mainly, it is irrelevant!  No one (at least certainly not me) has accused you of violating any d3 rules.  So far as I know, I am not violating any laws of France, but that doesn't mean I am 'participating' in French culture!  If I attend a poker tournament and sit at the table playing solitaire, I'm probably not violating any rules, but am I 'participating'?  I would suggest that NESCAC never playing football against any d3 teams means they are playing solitaire.

Wow, those are some pretty tenuous analogies, Doc.

If you were seated at the poker tournament table and not playing poker, I'd think you were not abiding by the rules of the tournament.  But poker tournament is probably a particularly difficult analogy, since it's the NCAA post-season tournament that is the root of most anti-NESCAC sentiment, it seems to me.

You're not under the jurisdiction of French law--you're in the US.  But NESCAC schools are d3 members (under the jurisdiction of d3 "law"), playing football against other d3 members, adhering to d3 football requirements related to length of schedule, permissible preseason practices, and athletic scholarships.  As I say, I don't see how that's not participating in d3 football, since the definition of d3 football includes nothing about required participation in post season tournaments, or even about conference membership and interconference scheduling.

I think you need to define a new term, because "NCAA Division III" has a definition, and NESCAC follows/participates/abides by that definition.

I'm not NESCAC, Doc.  Even if I were violating d3 rules, NESCAC shouldn't suffer any consequences.     I'm just an admirer of NESCAC's consistent adherence to principle in its approach to intercollegiate football.

I often wonder if other teams and conferences envy NESCAC's wealth of fantastic rivalries.  On this score, I think K-Mack has a good take.  Amherst-Williams is the nation's best college rivalry, but I also think you'll not find better rivalries than Colby-Bates-Bowdoin or Trinity-Wesleyan, either.  Right there, you're talking about three of the top rivalries in the country, involving seven teams, all in a single conference.

[Mr. Ypsi]

redswarm,

When they start threatening the deceased equine, I'm outta here!  Send me a PM if you wish to continue, but if you can't grasp the meaning of participation, we seem to be at a stalemate.

BTW, I have property within 25 miles of both Bates and Bowdoin, so I am not unfamiliar with the rivalry.  But for intensity of rivalries you may wish to check the Monon Bell thread, or the board with the dead horse for Calvin-Hope (among numerous others).  Try to be a tad less NESCAC-centric.

[smedindy]

Why would the OAC envy the NESCAC rivalries? Why would the MIAC or WIAC or IIAC? Those are pretty stout rivalries. Why would Wabash / DePauw care a HOOT about the pure NESCAC? How about Hardin Simmons and UMHB? Do they care? Does Linfield / PLU/ Whitworth care about it? How about the SCIAC? Is that in their mind when they're knocking each other around.

Heck, the MIAA had a big ol' clusterflop this year. Many  of those schools have played each other for eons. Are they JEALOUS of the NESCAC, or is Albion more concerned with beating Hope and Alma?

If the NESCAC cared about the purity of D3 sports they'd get off their high horse and play some games against other conferences. Playoffs are another thing, but not deigning to schedule other conferences smack of elitism that I think is counter to the ideal that the NCAA is for student / athletes.

[smedindy]

Oh, and ask Wheaton, Illinois Wesleyan, and North Central  if they cared about the NESCAC's purity while they were knocking heads for the CCIW title and the playoffs. I think they cared not. But I do think the athletes cared about getting to game 11, and in the classroom they also cared and continued to care about their studies.

[redswarm81]

redswarm,

When they start threatening the deceased equine, I'm outta here!  Send me a PM if you wish to continue, but if you can't grasp the meaning of participation, we seem to be at a stalemate.

BTW, I have property within 25 miles of both Bates and Bowdoin, so I am not unfamiliar with the rivalry.  But for intensity of rivalries you may wish to check the Monon Bell thread, or the board with the dead horse for Calvin-Hope (among numerous others).  Try to be a tad less NESCAC-centric.

You can go away Doc, but you don't have to go away mad.   

I grasp the meaning of participation.  I don't grasp the meaning of  participation in d3 football that is somehow different from d3 members playing football against each other.

I admire the NESCAC for its plethora of rivalries.  Don't you?  I'm aware of other individual rivalries that are as good, and hell, my own RPI-Union Battle for the Dutchman's Shoes deserves mention in any discussion of top ten rivalries.  But I don't think I could scare up three rivalries in the Liberty League, let alone three rivalries as high quality as the three NESCAC rivalries I mentioned.  I wish there were three or more such rivalries in every conference.  Don't you?

In this MTV generation, by the time any printed sentence gets halfway through the verb, audience attention wanders.  I can't help that.  I'm glad you stick with sentences all the way to the object, and even dependent clauses.

[K-Mack]

I actually read Mr. Ypsi's post and he said it's one thing to spurn the playoffs but something else entirely to play no non-conference games.

Some reading before spewing rhetoric might help you, redswarm.

So much for playing the academic card!

[I suspect the UAA may have some other issues with his post as well.]

(also had the UAA thought)

[K-Mack]

[I suspect the UAA may have some other issues with his post as well.]

I think that U.S. News and World Report has come down on the side of NESCAC v. UAA.

Although that's the standard that the general public, myself included, often seems to go by, there are those within the academic community who believe that -- gasp! -- the magazine's rankings are not the final word on quality of institution.

Particularly with regard to some of the factors in the rankings regarding prestige and some of the methodology US News & World Report uses.

However, only if you are really interested in such matters should you further divert this thread from Division III rivalries.

I believe there's a Future of Division III board under General Division III issues which might be a better home for this type of blather. And I mean that in a nice way.