ECACs

[Bombers798891]

Some of the comments here sound like they are coming from a bunch of babies.(Talking about you Bombers)  While it may be a disappointment that a team doesn't make the NCAA tournament, the ability to play an additional game is an honor for the players, and also, in the grand scheme of things it's 1 additional time to lace up your shoes and also an additional time for a team to play together. 

Well, hey, thanks for the unprompted personal attack.

As has been stated numerous times, what fans think of the game and what players think of the game can, and probably are, two different things. Players may be super pumped to go, and that's great for them. Fans generally don't appear to be, for any number of reasons, and that's okay too.

It wasn't a personal attack, it was a friendly jab.  Take those little panties and unbunch them.   Thanks -Management

[lewdogg11]

An AD in a D1 school doesn't have that ability if the school is bound by a conference affiliation in a particular Bowl Game (PAC-12 #3 vs. SEC #4, for instance).  The idea here is that you: 1) picked your conference and the competition inside it knowingly; and 2) scheduled your OOC opponents.  So, you've played in your wheelhouse for 10-12 games already that year.  You also wouldn't have the option to pick and choose your competition in the NCAA Tournament like that.  The whole intent of Bowl Games is to create compelling matchups to create a level of interest that will get fan bases excited enough to show up and spend money at a distinct location (that's basically the notion the ECAC has suggested in their answers to us Sunday).  What would be a more compelling matchup?

#1 North (Say, Hobart) vs. #6 North (Say, Western Connecticut)

Or

#1 North (Hobart) vs. #1 South (Rowan or DelVal)?

The first game could technically be scheduled any day based on location and school profile (Union scheduled WestConn).  The second game likely will never happen unless it were in the postseason.  Honestly, I'd like to see that second game.  The first game I wouldn't get very excited about if it were played in that scenario.  I think this can continue down the line for all six games with some level of excitement throughout, with Friday being the #4 and #3 matchups, Saturday showcasing the #5 and #2 matchups, and Sunday showcasing the #6 and #1 matchups to balance the weekend.

(EDIT: LD points out something we've discussed for years concerning why in a pool of 240 teams, we have seen such consistent dynasties in D3 over the years.  It's not just recruiting -- it's practice and level of play that continue to help those teams keep their locks on #1-#5 nationally.  Aside from Wesley, the East lacks any real cream rising to the top right now -- we have plenty of middle strength and depth, but nothing up top to get excited about.  If you want to get better as a region, you have to see teams step out of comfort zones and embrace strong opponents to help these teams kick it up a notch the next season.  This is coming from the guy who has been the biggest East Region cheerleader of the past decade on these boards -- some might be surprised about how down I am on the East right now.)

You know you are going to get the lash back here of, what good does it do a team to beat up on an inferior opponent?  As far as i'm concerned, that's just as valuable.  Aside from execution and repetition, it also can give the team some fire that they either have a chip on their shoulder that they were wronged by the NCAA, or maybe the realization that if they work a little harder and show up for every game they play, maybe they can make that next step.  The ECACs are not the evil some people make them out to be.

Understood, but my philosophy here is to assign teams to play teams that, at least on paper, are near them based on season performance.  It gives a good measure of who that team is at the end of the season and helps give coaches an assessment of what they're missing or whether or not their competition is strong enough in the regular season.  The 1 vs. 6 matchups just have never felt good because #1 can often be that team that felt slighted and is looking across at some school just excited to be included in the ECAC bunch.  You set up 1 vs. 1, and it automatically forces teams to shake off the hangover and get somewhat pumped about that next few days.  That's my thought, at least.

I get what you're saying, but who are you to decide how good a team is?  Maybe a New England team thinks they ARE as good as the NJAC, E8, or LL teams that just missed the playoffs.  The only way to know is on the field.  I don't think you should cherry pick matchups like that solely based on perception.  At the end of the day, it's all Division 3 football, not Divisions 3a, 3b, and 3c.

[Frank Rossi]

No, no, not perception.  They rank the teams currently from 1-6 in each subregion and matchup, to the extent possible, 1/6, 2/5, 3/4 in that subregion (no crossover except in one rare occasion for one game).  They're already serving this ranking function; my argument is to realign the matchups using those rankings.  The criteria are much like the NCAA Selection Committee's criteria.

[Boxer7806]

Here are the results from crossover ECAC games between East and Northeast region teams, going back to the start of the current set up in 2002. The results were pretty ugly for the Northeast Region early on. While the games have been closer in recent years, the Northeast teams have just two wins (Framingham over RPI last year; Springfield over Alfred in 2012) and one if you drop Liberty League member Springfield.

2014
Framingham State 42, RPI 36 OT
St. John Fisher 28, Western Connecticut 14

2013
None

2012
St. John Fisher 63, Castleton 7
Springfield 31, Alfred 8

2011
Alfred 41, Bridgewater State 10

2010
None

2009
None

2008
St. John Fisher 17, Husson 7

2007
None

2006
None

2005
Alfred 63, Maine Maritime 20

2004
Alfred 36, Norwich 17
Ithaca 36, Mass-Dartmouth 19

2003
Hobart 34, Norwich 18

2002
Hartwick 69, Curry 14
RPI 55, Worcester State 29
Cortland State 30, Westfield State 7

Good point here, also you said these teams are taking time to schedule tougher OOC games. 3 teams from the NEFC/MASAC that have been fairly regular participants in the ECAC games AND scheduled worthy OOC opponents are WNEC (Springfield, Union), Framingham St (Cortland, Rowan) and Bridgewater St (Willy P, Kean) in recent years, are also all atop their conferences. WNEC is the clear favorite in the NEFC and the winner of the MASCAC is going to come down to the Bridgewater vs Framingham game on November 7th.

Now not all of these opponents are created equal (Willy P and as of right now Union) but its a step in the right direction and its has paid dividends to play teams from stronger leagues, even if it is their cellar dwellers because lets face it, its a hell of a lot better competition then playing the cellar dwellers in the ECFC/NEFC/MASCAC.

[Jonny Utah]

My two cents on the ECAC's

-  It's just a football game.  Let's not make this too complicated.  You either want to play in it or you don't. The rankings should mean less than travel costs/issues. The NE teams need to realize that they might end up playing a good E8 team that didn't make the playoffs.  In 2015 though, it shouldn't be a blowout.

-  I have no problem with upstate teams just playing upstate teams they hadn't played in the regular season.  No reason to go from Ithaca to Bangor, Maine when you can just go to Troy or Canton.

- I don't mind the neutral site because chances are I live closer to that neutral site, and maybe more of the student body will too (if the games are during break).  I would go to New Britain for an Ithaca game over Ithaca, especially an ECAC game.

-  Speaking of New Britain, that place is blah-ville.  Why not have it someplace where there is something to do, like NYC or Boston, or even Philly.  Then the teams can stay overnight before and at least have some sort of experience out of the game/trip.

-  Move the Stagg Bowl to Florida.

That is all.

[jknezek]

-  Speaking of New Britain, that place is blah-ville.  Why not have it someplace where there is something to do, like NYC or Boston, or even Philly.  Then the teams can stay overnight before and at least have some sort of experience out of the game/trip.

Because these places are really expensive to stay over night and you still need a facility to host. CCSU might have been central enough and the only volunteer? I don't know, but if you want to stay in or really close to one of the I95 cities you can triple your hotel and meal budget...

[Jonny Utah]

-  Speaking of New Britain, that place is blah-ville.  Why not have it someplace where there is something to do, like NYC or Boston, or even Philly.  Then the teams can stay overnight before and at least have some sort of experience out of the game/trip.

Because these places are really expensive to stay over night and you still need a facility to host. CCSU might have been central enough and the only volunteer? I don't know, but if you want to stay in or really close to one of the I95 cities you can triple your hotel and meal budget...

There are hotels 30 minutes from downtown Boston that will cost as much as a New Britain Hotel, as for the hosting, I'm not sure.  I guess its time for places to step up.  Although I agree that not many people will go to Curry College to see an SJF/Westfield State football game.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Don't forget practice facilities and enough locker rooms. Just because a place like Boston or NYC is bigger doesn't mean it has more locations that can be used. Also, the host has to have the ability to accommodate the teams. Per basketball in my region: Stevenson is far better situated to host a massive basketball tournament than Goucher because of locker rooms.

Back to moving it to a big city, we have seen time and time again that D3 "events" get swallowed up in big cities. Why head to a big city if you are just a blip on the radar. Salem has worked time and time again because the game(s) isn't a blip on the radar.

All and all, I see this move from the ECAC as an attempt to keep Division III interested in staying on board. I agree with Frank, though, that this is the wrong target. Basketball, volleyball, and other sports that have seen steep declines in post-season teams and hosting interest are the real problem - not football. Furthermore, most of the schools that have been interested in those other sports post-season play don't necessarily have football and thus this move doesn't mean a thing to them. There are bigger fish to fry in the ECAC and this seems like smoke and mirrors. Furthermore, I know of some southern schools who are trying to wield some influence and I think they believe they have some with the ECAC - this move doesn't exactly make me believe they either have that influence or the ECAC is paying attention. It is going to be a very interesting year for the ECAC. There are strong indications from those close to it that it could be the ECAC's last as we know it (with Division III involved) unless they do more than this with football.

[Frank Rossi]

The ECAC Bowl Declaration Form has been amended, and I have to say that the details don't really thrill me:

Participation Incentives

Each participating institution will receive the following:

-Transportation to and from competition (Contact information will be provided on Selection Monday and will be booked by individual institutions)

-Post Game Meal

-Commemorative Championship T-shirt for team and coaching staff

-U-ADE sport specific formula packet + official wristband for each student-athlete

-Student-Athlete participation gift

Squad Size

The ECAC will adhere to NCAA policies regarding team sport travel guidelines.
Travel Party: 61
Max Team Size: 58


Committment of Declaration

By submitting this form, if you are selected to participate you are agreeing to the following:

-Institution agrees be available to play on any of the three dates at any of the given times listed above under Championship Dates/Times

-Institution agrees to sell a minimum of 300 tickets at $10 per ticket

-Institution agrees to provide proper staffing for their own will-call table at ticket booth

-Institution is responsible for own lodging arrangements (where applicable) and agrees to stay at Host Hotel (information to be provided on Selection Monday)

(Edited out remaining administrative requirements)

So, hotel stays (probably around $3,500 per team) and pre-game meals on the road are not covered.  In addition, a $3,000 revenue guarantee is being forced, as well as some will-call staffing.  What are your thought on these new details?

[Jonny Utah]

The ECAC Bowl Declaration Form has been amended, and I have to say that the details don't really thrill me:

Participation Incentives

Each participating institution will receive the following:

-Transportation to and from competition (Contact information will be provided on Selection Monday and will be booked by individual institutions)

-Post Game Meal

-Commemorative Championship T-shirt for team and coaching staff

-U-ADE sport specific formula packet + official wristband for each student-athlete

-Student-Athlete participation gift

Squad Size

The ECAC will adhere to NCAA policies regarding team sport travel guidelines.
Travel Party: 61
Max Team Size: 58


Committment of Declaration

By submitting this form, if you are selected to participate you are agreeing to the following:

-Institution agrees be available to play on any of the three dates at any of the given times listed above under Championship Dates/Times

-Institution agrees to sell a minimum of 300 tickets at $10 per ticket

-Institution agrees to provide proper staffing for their own will-call table at ticket booth

-Institution is responsible for own lodging arrangements (where applicable) and agrees to stay at Host Hotel (information to be provided on Selection Monday)

(Edited out remaining administrative requirements)

So, hotel stays (probably around $3,500 per team) and pre-game meals on the road are not covered.  In addition, a $3,000 revenue guarantee is being forced, as well as some will-call staffing.  What are your thought on these new details?

Well what is the big change from the old ECAC bid process?

[AUPepBand]

Don't forget practice facilities and enough locker rooms. Just because a place like Boston or NYC is bigger doesn't mean it has more locations that can be used. Also, the host has to have the ability to accommodate the teams. Per basketball in my region: Stevenson is far better situated to host a massive basketball tournament than Goucher because of locker rooms.

Back to moving it to a big city, we have seen time and time again that D3 "events" get swallowed up in big cities. Why head to a big city if you are just a blip on the radar. Salem has worked time and time again because the game(s) isn't a blip on the radar.

All and all, I see this move from the ECAC as an attempt to keep Division III interested in staying on board. I agree with Frank, though, that this is the wrong target. Basketball, volleyball, and other sports that have seen steep declines in post-season teams and hosting interest are the real problem - not football. Furthermore, most of the schools that have been interested in those other sports post-season play don't necessarily have football and thus this move doesn't mean a thing to them. There are bigger fish to fry in the ECAC and this seems like smoke and mirrors. Furthermore, I know of some southern schools who are trying to wield some influence and I think they believe they have some with the ECAC - this move doesn't exactly make me believe they either have that influence or the ECAC is paying attention. It is going to be a very interesting year for the ECAC. There are strong indications from those close to it that it could be the ECAC's last as we know it (with Division III involved) unless they do more than this with football.

Alfred football has always welcomed an ECAC football bowl game, preferably hosting, of course. But traveling was always a good experience as well because Alfred alums are most everywhere.

Alfred men's basketball in 2015, however, just missing an NCAA bid when host St. John Fisher pulled away down the stretch in the E8 title game, was one of only a few Upstate NY (northern) teams to declare for the ECAC tournament. AU, if it agreed to participate, would need to travel to southern Pennsylvania and play against Southern teams. Had there been enough Upstate teams declared, AU would likely have hosted, having finished at 19-8.

The Saxons (18-8) had traveled to Huntingdon, PA in 2014 and played Juniata (15-10) in the ECAC Southwest Quarterfinals. And, Pep (guessing here) is thinking the Saxons likely voted that they'd gladly host an ECAC tournament but did not care to travel to southern Pennsylvania again, with mid-term exams looming.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

AU is an exception... basketball has seen two "regions" combined into one the last two years because there weren't enough teams, field hockey has seen schools ranked #7 in the tournament host because others weren't interested (or able), and men's volleyball saw only four teams last year and the top seed didn't want to host.

[Frank Rossi]

The ECAC Bowl Declaration Form has been amended, and I have to say that the details don't really thrill me:

Participation Incentives

Each participating institution will receive the following:

-Transportation to and from competition (Contact information will be provided on Selection Monday and will be booked by individual institutions)

-Post Game Meal

-Commemorative Championship T-shirt for team and coaching staff

-U-ADE sport specific formula packet + official wristband for each student-athlete

-Student-Athlete participation gift

Squad Size

The ECAC will adhere to NCAA policies regarding team sport travel guidelines.
Travel Party: 61
Max Team Size: 58


Committment of Declaration

By submitting this form, if you are selected to participate you are agreeing to the following:

-Institution agrees be available to play on any of the three dates at any of the given times listed above under Championship Dates/Times

-Institution agrees to sell a minimum of 300 tickets at $10 per ticket

-Institution agrees to provide proper staffing for their own will-call table at ticket booth

-Institution is responsible for own lodging arrangements (where applicable) and agrees to stay at Host Hotel (information to be provided on Selection Monday)

(Edited out remaining administrative requirements)

So, hotel stays (probably around $3,500 per team) and pre-game meals on the road are not covered.  In addition, a $3,000 revenue guarantee is being forced, as well as some will-call staffing.  What are your thought on these new details?

Well what is the big change from the old ECAC bid process?

Gate guarantee at a far away location ($3,000 guarantee per school), meals on the road costing a premium, guaranteed hotel stay for most teams, still some administrative costs for will-call operations.  Gameday administration costs are likely less than the $7,000 risk schools that need to stay at a hotel would face.  Gate split in the old method would likely cover some admin expenses and some share of the travel expenses because crowds would be larger at home venues.

[Jonny Utah]

The ECAC Bowl Declaration Form has been amended, and I have to say that the details don't really thrill me:

Participation Incentives

Each participating institution will receive the following:

-Transportation to and from competition (Contact information will be provided on Selection Monday and will be booked by individual institutions)

-Post Game Meal

-Commemorative Championship T-shirt for team and coaching staff

-U-ADE sport specific formula packet + official wristband for each student-athlete

-Student-Athlete participation gift

Squad Size

The ECAC will adhere to NCAA policies regarding team sport travel guidelines.
Travel Party: 61
Max Team Size: 58


Committment of Declaration

By submitting this form, if you are selected to participate you are agreeing to the following:

-Institution agrees be available to play on any of the three dates at any of the given times listed above under Championship Dates/Times

-Institution agrees to sell a minimum of 300 tickets at $10 per ticket

-Institution agrees to provide proper staffing for their own will-call table at ticket booth

-Institution is responsible for own lodging arrangements (where applicable) and agrees to stay at Host Hotel (information to be provided on Selection Monday)

(Edited out remaining administrative requirements)

So, hotel stays (probably around $3,500 per team) and pre-game meals on the road are not covered.  In addition, a $3,000 revenue guarantee is being forced, as well as some will-call staffing.  What are your thought on these new details?

Well what is the big change from the old ECAC bid process?

Gate guarantee at a far away location ($3,000 guarantee per school), meals on the road costing a premium, guaranteed hotel stay for most teams, still some administrative costs for will-call operations.  Gameday administration costs are likely less than the $7,000 risk schools that need to stay at a hotel would face.  Gate split in the old method would likely cover some admin expenses and some share of the travel expenses because crowds would be larger at home venues.

I think if you threw in a couple of Paul Bunyon hats for the kids, the new deal looks pretty good.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

FYI - one thing to consider... these football schools are getting two month warning on a budget expenditure they didn't consider when they were putting their budgets together in late spring through June. That doesn't usually sit well with athletic departments and schools. Had they all gotten a year's advance warning, they could all plan accordingly. Two months? That might result in some schools skipping out this year strictly because they don't have it in the budget for all those added expenditures.

Another thing... while transportation is now being covered... I would argue the $3,000 guarantee of ticket purchases washes that out. Sure, schools could sell their allotment and make some money back (or cover what they paid out of pocket), but we all know schools who like to give away tickets to their students as a way to get them to the game(s) they wouldn't go to otherwise.