Division III football rivalries

[Jonny Utah]

Gang,

I realize that the NESCAC may not participate in the playoffs, ostensibly for "academic elitism" reasons, but my question there is........WHY NOT???

In my view, the UAA is an academically VERY strong conference, and its champions have participated in the playoffs each of the last two seasons, without diminishing either school's academic prestige.  Given that, why would the NESCAC schools believe that participating in the Division III playoffs is somehow beneath their stations as academic institutions?

As for rivalries, I personally am partial to the annual Case v. Carnegie-Mellon grudge match.  Cleveland vs. Pittsburgh in the so-called "Academic Bowl."

Im going to say theres 3 reasons in this order.

1) History. (They have never done it and like that.  They even used to list the standings in alphabetical order!)

2) The Ivy leagues don't do it. That's who they want to compare themselves too.

3) Puts too much of an emphasis on a sport, in terms of a long season (in terms of the entire first semester being dedicated to one sport)

[smedindy]

Do they participate in volleyball and cross country championships?

[DagarmanSpartan]

I might buy the "semester" reason, IF (and only if):

the NESCAC doesn't participate in the playoffs in ANY Fall sport (and if they do, then they show just hypocritical they are by considering football a bigger distraction than other sports, despite the fact that those other sports' playoffs would undboutedly eat up nearly as much of the Fall Semester as the football playoffs would).

Otherwise, I'd say that they'd have a hard time making that case.

As for the Ivy League and Tradition reasons, those are plausible.

But even there, I think that the Ivy League looks a bit foolish for not participating in the post-season in Football, while participating in the post-season in just about every other sport (the Ivy League champ gets an automatic bid to the Big Dance, for example).

[repete]

Paging redswarm ... a pitch is nearing your wheelhouse.

[Jonny Utah]

I might buy the "semester" reason, IF (and only if):

the NESCAC doesn't participate in the playoffs in ANY Fall sport (and if they do, then they show just hypocritical they are by considering football a bigger distraction than other sports, despite the fact that those other sports' playoffs would undboutedly eat up nearly as much of the Fall Semester as the football playoffs would).

Otherwise, I'd say that they'd have a hard time making that case.

As for the Ivy League and Tradition reasons, those are plausible.

But even there, I think that the Ivy League looks a bit foolish for not participating in the post-season in Football, while participating in the post-season in just about every other sport (the Ivy League champ gets an automatic bid to the Big Dance, for example).

I think they also like to think of football as kind of an "activity" that is just for fun.  No champions, no playoffs, just a bunch of guys from each school playing in 8 contests each year against each other.

One other reason I think is that if some of these schools started going to the football playoffs, many alumni will place HUGE amounts of pressure on the football team being the best in the country.  The school does not want such an emphasis on winning national championships.  They want students there that play football, not football players that take classes.

[smedindy]

And how is that different from the pressure on Williams and Amherst to do well in basketball?

[Jonny Utah]

And how is that different from the pressure on Williams and Amherst to do well in basketball?

I dont think the alumni cares as much about basketball.  They get 10,000-15,000 fans for that final football game against each other.

Plus, now you have to find 80+ football players to have national championhsip team.  Thats almost 10% of the male population.  Basketball you need 10 guys, 15 max.  They dont want that.

They also dont want to compete with other nescac schools that may be able to get in more athletes on a larger scale than them. 

[smedindy]

Amherst has 77 players on its football roster. So does Williams. So they are getting the numbers to compete. That argument doesn't wash.

Wabash and DePauw get 11,000 plus at Wabash, plus many more around the country at viewing parties. And frankly, the academics at Wabash and DePauw are comparable to Williams and Amherst. The reputations and perceptions of the New England schools are long standing, but the fact is that many small liberal arts colleges change the lives of their students just as much.

[Jonny Utah]

Amherst has 77 players on its football roster. So does Williams. So they are getting the numbers to compete. That argument doesn't wash.

Wabash and DePauw get 11,000 plus at Wabash, plus many more around the country at viewing parties. And frankly, the academics at Wabash and DePauw are comparable to Williams and Amherst. The reputations and perceptions of the New England schools are long standing, but the fact is that many small liberal arts colleges change the lives of their students just as much.

I guess Im trying to say that Williams and Amherst will need 80+ championship players (not including the 50+ that are recruited and dont pan out that Im sure MUC has) to compete at the next level.  One of the reasons I think MUC is so good is that they get so many players (300 right?), that they basically get a bunch of high school players that got overlooked.  Now these players end up doing very well at the d3 level.

I think Williams and Amherst would do ok now nationally, but far from playoff caliber.

And Williams and Amherst people want to be #1 on those top american college lists (they are #1 and #2), not #49 and #51 like Wabash and DePauw are. (Im not knocking them, I went to Ithaca).  I think they probably feel that championship football teams might lower that ranking?  Im not saying its right, but thats what those people would probably tell you.  (Its what coaches and others from there tell me)

[smedindy]

Of course, those lists are now subject to scrutiny and actual revolt from many college presidents. Having a college football team doesn't hurt or help their cause.

Having a team in the MIAC competing against St. John's hasn't hurt Carleton's rankings. Competing in the ODAC still means Washington & Lee is a top 15 school.

Having a DIVISION 1 athletic program hasn't hurt Davidson. Davidson competes in a conference with such academic heavyweights Western Carolina and UNC - Greensboro (not in football, but still, hoops is big time business at Davidson).

Comparing anyone in D-3 to MUC is just ludicrous as well.

[Jonny Utah]

Of course, those lists are now subject to scrutiny and actual revolt from many college presidents. Having a college football team doesn't hurt or help their cause.

Having a team in the MIAC competing against St. John's hasn't hurt Carleton's rankings. Competing in the ODAC still means Washington & Lee is a top 15 school.

Having a DIVISION 1 athletic program hasn't hurt Davidson. Davidson competes in a conference with such academic heavyweights Western Carolina and UNC - Greensboro (not in football, but still, hoops is big time business at Davidson).

Comparing anyone in D-3 to MUC is just ludicrous as well.

You are right about your first three points but I have a feeling that Williams alumni would not tolerate it's football team being like Carleton's football team.  I know nothing about Carleton football, but I do know that Williams football is a very storied program, and its alumni is pushy.  Maybe Carleton doesnt care about dropping admissions standards to let in football players?  I dont know.  But it would have to be done at a school like Williams.  And again, I think the presidents feel that there is enough of that already.

And you can't compart basketball to football in this either.  You could bring up Princeton basketball, etc etc.

And I wasnt comparing anyone in d3 to MUC, but MUC is doing what it takes to be a national champion, and thats having 300 football players to choose from.  By joining the playoffs, Williams might be pressured to have even more football players in the school.

[smedindy]

See, I don't think so. I don't think Carleton drops its admissions requirements. I think its a myth that some schools drop admissions requirements for football players. Some may, many do not.

I bring up Davidson because it's D-1 scholarship hoops. Princeton is non-scholarship. Davidson has been to the NCAA tourney. Heck, Lefty Driesell used to coach at Davidson!

MUC has only 200+ players on its initial roster, not 300+. (Not that it's a huge difference, really). Other schools have a whole boatload, too, but they're using football to try to boost male enrollment. But some schools don't need to play that card.

The point is that they can make all of the arguments they want about not playing other schools except their conference, or not being in the playoffs, and there are counter arguments refuting their case.

[repete]

My brother played at Carleton and they didn't drop standards then ... but that was pre-MIAC. I'd be surprised if they do, though.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Stanford's Rose Bowl wins, and Cal-Berkeley's flirtation with the national title game this year, don't seem to have turned them into Podunk U's (even at US Snooze).

If that really is the concern of Williams, et. al., it is fantasy elitism, not reality.

[DagarmanSpartan]

I go back to the UAA, a conference with every bit as much academic prestige as the NESCAC.

Here the US News national rankings of the UAA members:

University of Chicago #9
Wash U.-St. Louis #12
Emory U. #17
Carnegie-Mellon #22
Brandeis #31
New York University #34
University of Rochester #35
Case Western Reserve U. #41

Of those, the #12 ranked university in the country, the #22 ranked university in the country, and the #41 ranked university in the country have played in the Division III playoffs as UAA champions........WITHOUT diminishing their academic prestige.

Like the previous poster said.  If they're not participating because of "elitism," then it's fantasy elitism.

There are plenty of schools that are just as elite that DO participate, with no adverse effect on their elitism.