Division III football rivalries

[Jonny Utah]

I think these schools would almost be ok if the NCAA told them that they either join the playoff system, or call themsleves "club" teams.  I bet the nescac would have not problem simply being "club" teams.  The only difference is that they would want to borrow the ECAC refs.....

[BTEXPRESS]

Everyone is stuck on the playoffs, I am more concerned about playing every team in the conference which does not happen now. Another way to look at it ,is that every other Division III Football team plays 10 regular season games without playoffs. That is 40 regular games over a 4 year period while the NESCAC teams play 32, that is 8 less regular season games, almost an entire season of games is lost.

[tmerton]

I am a former NESCAC football player and when I was playing I would have loved an opportunity to play an out of conference opponent and/or compete in the DIII playoffs.

However, I don't understand why anyone outside of the NESCAC bubble would care? We have our little 8 game schedule and our little rivalries that we care so much about. And you have your own rivalries and your playoffs that mean so much to you.

Why is it elitist that NESCAC football doesn't go to the playoffs? Does it really bother any of you that much?

If it bothers anyone is would be NESCAC football players. They work just as hard if not harder than their classmates who play basketball, baseball, hockey, etc. Those athletes have the chance to participate in the NCAA playoffs. However, football players at NESCAC schools do not even have the opportunity to see how they stack up againt the rest of the country.

With that said, I can say that many of my former teammates thought that 8 games was more than enough. For those who don't want football to consume more than 3 months of their year the NESCAC is a great place to play football.

This is not a knock on the Mt. Union's of the DIII world who practice and play games for up to 5 months. It is simply an alternative way to view intercollegiate football.

I agree.  I do think it's too bad that football in the NESCAC gets the poor stepchild treatment by the school presidents in comparison to the other varsity sports, but ultimately it's a matter for the schools.  Given the hostility to football that is so pervasive in some corners of their campuses, I suspect the way they're doing it now is probably the only way they can play football without one or more members pulling a Swarthmore and dropping the sport altogether.  From a football perspective (i.e., from the perspective of those in NESCAC who support playing football), I think what they're doing is anything but elitist.

[BTEXPRESS]

tmerton, Excellent points. It does kind of put things into perspective.

[K-Mack]

Now that we have thoroughly flogged Nescac, can we move to some subordinate concern on our agenda like attacking world starvation?

Lets kick them a few times first to make sure they are down and out.

Don't know why I just stumbled upon this again, but it cracked me up this time around.

(Also adds "pulling a Swarthmore" to lexicon)

Also, BT, good points ... but this debate has been going on since forever, practically, not just July

[Knightstalker]

I think these schools would almost be ok if the NCAA told them that they either join the playoff system, or call themsleves "club" teams.  I bet the nescac would have not problem simply being "club" teams.  The only difference is that they would want to borrow the ECAC refs.....

Nah, they won't need to "borrow refs" it would only be club football.  Just pull a couple of dads from the stands to be refs.

[Ralph Turner]

I think these schools would almost be ok if the NCAA told them that they either join the playoff system, or call themsleves "club" teams.  I bet the nescac would have not problem simply being "club" teams.  The only difference is that they would want to borrow the ECAC refs.....

Nah, they won't need to "borrow refs" it would only be club football.  Just pull a couple of dads from the stands to be refs.

A genuine question, how many NESCAC alumni are referees at the D-1A (aka F. B. S.) level or in the NFL?

I would not be surprised if they could get a full crew easily.


How come, everytime I type the acronym, FBS, a different meaning comes to mind?

[redswarm81]

The point is that [NESCAC] 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 (implied by NESCAC's own actions) refuting their case.

Point taken.

Everyone recognizes that NESCAC is behaving hypocritically by permitting NCAA playoff participation in all sports except football, when its argument opposing football playoffs is based on a sense of academic purity that is consistent with Division III's "Prime Directive," i.e. placing academics ahead of athletics.

Most believe that the proper way to eliminate the hypocrisy is for NESCAC to enter the DIII football playoffs.  A tiny minority of us -- me -- believes that the proper way to eliminate the hypocrisy is for NESCAC to withdraw all teams in all sports from extended NCAA playoffs.  (I could see a reasonable exception for such sports as swimming or track and field, where the national championship is not decided by a multi-week playoff, but rather by a two day event held over a single weekend.)

[redswarm81]

I am a former NESCAC football player and when I was playing I would have loved an opportunity to play an out of conference opponent and/or compete in the DIII playoffs.

However, I don't understand why anyone outside of the NESCAC bubble would care? We have our little 8 game schedule and our little rivalries that we care so much about. And you have your own rivalries and your playoffs that mean so much to you.

Why is it elitist that NESCAC football doesn't go to the playoffs? Does it really bother any of you that much?

If it bothers anyone is would be NESCAC football players. They work just as hard if not harder than their classmates who play basketball, baseball, hockey, etc. Those athletes have the chance to participate in the NCAA playoffs. However, football players at NESCAC schools do not even have the opportunity to see how they stack up againt the rest of the country.

With that said, I can say that many of my former teammates thought that 8 games was more than enough. For those who don't want football to consume more than 3 months of their year the NESCAC is a great place to play football.

This is not a knock on the Mt. Unions of the DIII world who practice and play games for up to 5 months. It is simply an alternative way to view intercollegiate football.

For a long time it bothered me because the NESCAC's isolation kept us from getting to 32 teams. But it also bothers me because the NESCAC may well be good and become title contenders within a few years after coming out of isolation. Why wouldn't we want increased competitiveness?

To your last question Pat, I think the NESCAC has a compelling and apropos response, i.e. that a 5 week playoff extending into final exams places too high an emphasis on athletics relative to academics for 80 or more student athletes and managers and trainers.

Trin8-0, NESCAC does have its defenders--er, . . . defender (and at least one devil's advocate, in Jonny Utah) on this and other boards.  I too have long puzzled at the controversy--at the animosity, even.  One of my pet theories is that there's an element of envy involved.  With the longstanding Williams-Amherst rivalry, the "Little Three," Trinity-Wesleyan, and Colby-Bates-Bowdoin, NESCAC has some of the fiercest and most competitive rivalries anywhere, in any sport, on any level.   MAYBE the Pac-10 can claim to have as many rivalries, but not as many of them are as competitive as the NESCAC rivalries are, year in and year out, . . . for centuries.

[redswarm81]

I just noticed (or maybe I just remembered, what with Alzheimer's setting in) that RPI has not just one, but TWO teams against which it has played over 100 games, Union and WPI, as chronicled by the sports historians at augenblick.org. 

I wonder how many other teams have 100+ game series v. more than one other team.

Round up the usual suspects: NESCAC?

[K-Mack]

I am a former NESCAC football player and when I was playing I would have loved an opportunity to play an out of conference opponent and/or compete in the DIII playoffs.

However, I don't understand why anyone outside of the NESCAC bubble would care? We have our little 8 game schedule and our little rivalries that we care so much about. And you have your own rivalries and your playoffs that mean so much to you.

Why is it elitist that NESCAC football doesn't go to the playoffs? Does it really bother any of you that much?

If it bothers anyone is would be NESCAC football players. They work just as hard if not harder than their classmates who play basketball, baseball, hockey, etc. Those athletes have the chance to participate in the NCAA playoffs. However, football players at NESCAC schools do not even have the opportunity to see how they stack up againt the rest of the country.

With that said, I can say that many of my former teammates thought that 8 games was more than enough. For those who don't want football to consume more than 3 months of their year the NESCAC is a great place to play football.

This is not a knock on the Mt. Unions of the DIII world who practice and play games for up to 5 months. It is simply an alternative way to view intercollegiate football.

For a long time it bothered me because the NESCAC's isolation kept us from getting to 32 teams. But it also bothers me because the NESCAC may well be good and become title contenders within a few years after coming out of isolation. Why wouldn't we want increased competitiveness?

To your last question Pat, I think the NESCAC has a compelling and apropos response, i.e. that a 5 week playoff extending into final exams places too high an emphasis on athletics relative to academics for 80 or more student athletes and managers and trainers.

Trin8-0, NESCAC does have its defenders--er, . . . defender (and at least one devil's advocate, in Johnny Utah) on this and other boards.  I too have long puzzled at the controversy--at the animosity, even.  One of my pet theories is that there's an element of envy involved.  With the longstanding Williams-Amherst rivalry, the "Little Three," Trinity-Wesleyan, and Colby-Bates-Bowdoin, NESCAC has some of the fiercest and most competitive rivalries anywhere, in any sport, on any level.   MAYBE the Pac-10 can claim to have as many rivalries, but not as many of them are as competitive as the NESCAC rivalries are, year in and year out, . . . for centuries.

Envy? Meh.

It smacks of elitism, that "we're too busy to play with you guys," that "our tradition is too important to be bothered" and "our studies are so much more important than yours that we can only handle 8 weeks." That's why people react they way they do initially.

Once you get past the arrogance factor and give it some thought, I think people look at what NESCAC teams do in basketball and other sports and would like to take a crack at them in football, and if the reasoning wasn't so suspect and hypocrisy so obvious, people wouldn't be so eager to discuss it.

The notion that the length of the postseason, which is 5 weeks in only the rarest of circumstances,  would reduce the focus on academics is kind of silly once you chip beyond the surface of the argument. First off, the focus on academics is whatever you put on it. In environments that thrive on being academically challenging, if student-athletes can manage the challenge of academics and athletics for 8-10 weeks, they can do it for 13-15, finals week or not. Then you consider these are already some of our nation's most qualified students, and it's not clear what the administration is protecting them from. There is no doubt these students could handle whatever challenges are thrown their way.

It seems from afar that it's not really about academics at all. It's about tradition, it's about we've always done it this way so that's how we're going to continue to do it.

That said, if the NESCAC is happy, then there's no reason why everyone else shouldn't be happy. They're not ruining the fun by skipping it, they're missing out. If the NESCAC doesn't miss being in the playoffs, the playoffs don't really miss the NESCAC. I feel for the kids who would benefit from the experience and the opportunity to test themselves against the best, which is what competitors thrive on.

Not that I really feel like joining this discussion for the 10th year in a row ...

[PA_wesleyfan]

 Don't most spring sports playoffs run through finals???  Kind of defeats that argument doesn't it?

[redswarm81]

I think the NESCAC has a compelling and apropos response, i.e. that a 5 week playoff extending into final exams places too high an emphasis on athletics relative to academics for 80 or more student athletes and managers and trainers.

Trin8-0, NESCAC does have its defenders--er, . . . defender (and at least one devil's advocate, in Johnny Utah) on this and other boards.  I too have long puzzled at the controversy--at the animosity, even.  One of my pet theories is that there's an element of envy involved.  With the longstanding Williams-Amherst rivalry, the "Little Three," Trinity-Wesleyan, and Colby-Bates-Bowdoin, NESCAC has some of the fiercest and most competitive rivalries anywhere, in any sport, on any level.   MAYBE the Pac-10 can claim to have as many rivalries, but not as many of them are as competitive as the NESCAC rivalries are, year in and year out, . . . for centuries.

Envy? Meh.

It smacks of elitism, that "we're too busy to play with you guys," that "our tradition is too important to be bothered" and "our studies are so much more important than yours that we can only handle 8 weeks." That's why people react they way they do initially.

I understand--many respond with animosity, as I say.  But why is it any conference's duty to offer its teams for interconference play?

Which is worse: Meh, or Feh?   

Once you get past the arrogance factor (your opinion, to which you're entitled) and give it some thought, I think people look at what NESCAC teams do in basketball and other sports and would like to take a crack at them in football, and if the reasoning wasn't so suspect and hypocrisy so obvious, people wouldn't be so eager to discuss it.

As I've said countless times, I agree it's hypocritical to permit NCAA playoff participation all sports except football.  Where I disagree with the majority is how to remedy the hypocrisy.  My solution would be to withdraw all NESCAC teams from multi-week NCAA playoffs.  My solution is the only one that is consistent with the NESCAC schools' (arrogant, elite, to some) attitude that academics are a higher priority than athletics.

The notion that the length of the postseason, which is 5 weeks in only the rarest of circumstances,  would reduce the focus on academics is kind of silly once you chip beyond the surface of the argument. (Your opinion, to which you're entitled.)  First off, the focus on academics is whatever you put on it.  In environments that thrive on being academically challenging, if student-athletes can manage the challenge of academics and athletics for 8-10 weeks, they can do it for 13-15, finals week or not.

And tell me, whose authority is it to declare that principle?  NESCAC schools seem to believe that they ought not endorse 13 - 15 weeks of continuous athletic competition for 80+ student-athletes at a time.  You wouldn't deny them the authority to enforce that policy, would you?

The point that many either overlook or fail to recognize is that managing the challenge of academics and athletics involves both the student-athlete and the school administration.  The issue isn't one of simply how much time that the student has available for academics, but how much time the administration-sponsored activity takes away from academics.  Many students thrive in rigorous academic environments while playing Madden09 and Halo for 6 hours a day, but the administration isn't scheduling PS3 practices, regular season games, and tournaments, and it isn't paying faculty members to coach PS3 players.  However, in the case of football, each NESCAC school is supplying expensive facilities and paid faculty to coach 80+ student-athletes for 11 weeks or so.  I think any administration that says such a commitment is as far as its willing to go in providing a sanctioned distraction from academics ought to be praised at least as much as it is criticized.

I recognize that my opinion is a tiny minority--outside the NESCAC.  As your (typically terrific) ATN column on the subject revealed, the NESCAC student-athletes don't disagree with my position as often as Post Patternizers do.

It seems from afar that it's not really about academics at all. It's about tradition, it's about we've always done it this way so that's how we're going to continue to do it.

Were I a NESCAC school administrator, I'd point out that I don't administer my school from afar.

That said, if the NESCAC is happy,¹ then there's no reason why everyone else shouldn't be happy.² They're not ruining the fun by skipping it, they're missing out. If the NESCAC doesn't miss being in the playoffs, the playoffs don't really miss the NESCAC. I feel for the kids who would benefit from the experience and the opportunity to test themselves against the best, which is what competitors thrive on. (Why?  Those kids can get in anywhere--they've obviously made their choices.)

Not that I really feel like joining this discussion for the 10th year in a row ...

^{1, 2} Points well taken.

And yet you're not happy, you're sad.  You're sad for those kids who--according to Trin8-0 and your ATN column-quoted players--are happy.      

[Trin9-0]

Personally I've always wanted to see the NESCAC extend the schedule to 10 games (playing all conference teams along with one out of conference game) and be playoff eligible.

Unfortunately, I don't ever see it happening. Is it hypocritical that other sports are NCAA playoff eligible? Yes, will any of the NESCAC presidents take action on it? Not a chance.

They have other priorities to worry about (primarily fundraising) and expanding the football program would probably be very low on their list IF they even wanted to change it. The message of expanding athletics runs counter to everything NESCAC schools claim to represent and there would be a backlash to any member school president who tried to change the current set-up.

In my estimation it would take a strong campaign from alums/current players to protest the unfairness. However, that is unlikely because not all alums/current players want an extended season and/or playoff eligibility.

As I said, I'm all for 10 games + playoffs, but I know other alums/current players who don't so we will likely be stuck with 8 games for the foreseeable future.

[K-Mack]

And yet you're not happy, you're sad.  You're sad for those kids who--according to Trin8-0 and your ATN column-quoted players--are happy.      

I'm not sad, if you thought I said that, you're incorrect.

Please don't inject emotions in this on my behalf. It's an issue I've long been intrigued by but I am not particularly emotional about. In the above, I was speaking more generally and not even really for myself, since you seemed to be searching for someone to engage you on this well-worn topic, and I am a sucker.

I did say I feel for the kids who want to compete and don't get the chance to, and having gone up there and spoken to a few on this subject (not all on the record) and reported other NESCAC stories by phone, it's fair to say the competitor in all of them would like to play on. On the flipside, some recognize the tradition of ending the season with the same team each year and the emphasis that puts on that particular game.

Philosophically, you could ask why sports fans are obsessed with the finality of the playoffs, although that sort of runs to why we like sports at all, because there are dramatic highs and lows and an absolute outcome, a finality that we get in few other arenas in life. With regard to how that impacts the NESCAC, Chuck Priore, in the article you subtly referenced above, recalled his season with Union when they lost in the Stagg Bowl and feeling dejected about the whole thing where he can feel great joy about the 8-0 seasons at Trinity, and apparently no wonder over how that team would have fared.

Personally, as I said the first time, if the players commit to play football at NESCAC schools knowing playoffs aren't part of the plan and they are happy with that, I wouldn't have any reason to be unhappy for them. They're not ruining my experience by not participating, the playoffs are and will be plenty of fun with or without NESCAC teams.

However, if you talked to head coaches and players after every week of the playoffs like I do, and you see the joy they get out if it, and you listened to them talk about the educational experiences of traveling to different regions and experiencing different (American) cultures and climates and dialects, and the bonding experiences they get from being on the road together, taking on a challenge that is apt to either end abruptly or carry on for another week, you might agree with me that it's not the fans who are missing out.

Our desire to see how a NESCAC team would stack up is a minor curiosity at best.

The playoffs do fine without the NESCAC and the NESCAC does fine without the playoffs. The hypocrisy we agree on. We seem to agree that if the NESCAC is happy doing what the NESCAC does, no one is worse for the wear.

My personal thoughts:
-- I happen to be a believer that education often happens outside the classroom and academic realm, and the playoffs are a one-time experience that -- if you believe in the mission of athletics -- is an extension of that education, rather than "a sanctioned distraction" from it.

It's hammered home every postseason ... the joy of the Division III playoffs are the experience, and the reward is not so much winning as it is earning another week to continue that journey, that one-time bonding experience and to get additional opportunities to travel and to push yourself to your own extremes, individually and team-wise.

-- I don't buy that the nation's most talented students can't handle the challenge, nor do I buy that competing for a playoff spot changes the focus on academics or the relationship between it and athletics. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, Pomona-Pitzer, Wash. U., Chicago, Carleton and all the other schools that get mentioned in the same breath as NESCAC schools are able to compete for playoff spots and maintain their standing. I've never heard of mass flunkings by athletes at Carnegie Mellon or Washington & Lee or whatever other nationally-known schools have made the postseason. I'm guessing that it's not hurting the NESCAC basketball teams, cross country teams, crews and what have you.

Realistically you're probably looking at 2 extra weeks a year most years for one of the 10 teams -- the other nine proceed with business as usual.

-- If you ask people who have played for, worked at and attended NESCAC schools, they seem to be divided over whether it's more about keeping academics in proper perspective and devoting the proper time to study during the weeks leading up to finals, or whether it's more about making a statement, standing out, maintaining tradition and frankly, being like the Ivy League.

Personally, I have no stake in it. If the NESCAC and their players are happy, then I am happy for them.

I can certainly see why having eight games and eight games only can be exhilarating. I played nine and ten game seasons and never made the playoffs and still cherish every minute of it, and most of the best memories aren't from game action at all.