NESCAC

[Mr.Right]

That is right I forgot they ended up getting the 9th game but they wanted postseason which was shot down

[1970s NESCAC Player]

That is right I forgot they ended up getting the 9th game but they wanted postseason which was shot down

And I'm sure you are correct that post-season football for NESCAC is unlikely ever to happen.  As it is, winning the NESCAC, Little Three or CBB championship will have to suffice.

[1970s NESCAC Player]

Just noticed that this thread hit 300 pages today, and likely will go over 4500 posts this week.  Impressive!

[1970s NESCAC Player]

Just to clarify I think we have two different thoughts going regarding NESCAC.  I agree completely that it is unlikely that NESCAC will ease its parameters on the preseason, season, post-season, etc.  I don't expect any significant change in that regard despite my lament.  We can debate whether those restrictions really appease faculties versus how much they have to do with maintaining the unique standing and aura of the member schools as a whole.  The paradox I was suggesting is that, notwithstanding those parameters, athletics are a big deal at these schools, and I would argue a bigger deal than at many similar non-NESCAC institutions.  I've long been aware of Williams' usual top standing regarding the Learfield Cup or whatever it is called, and I've seen other schools very recently highlighting their strong ranking in that same regard.

I believe your identification of a paradox is accurate, and I'm sure that paradox makes the NESCAC members quite comfortable too!

[truenorth]

This is an interesting recent discussion regarding the academics vs. athletics "paradox" within the NESCAC schools.  Several thoughts come to my mind. 

First there is empirical evidence to suggest that college athletes perform as well or better than their non-athlete peers in the career world following college.  Even many of the pure-minded LAC professors have to be aware of the importance of a fruitful, remunerative career for college students following their family's $250K 4-year investment.

Second the implied "gap" in academic achievement between non-athletes and recruited athletes at NESCAC schools is relatively narrow.  That gap is much wider at the Ivies.  One of my sons played soccer at Bowdoin, was a very strong student, and probably didn't need a tip even though it was indicated it would be available to him if needed.

My other son played soccer for Brown, which is frankly what got him in.  He was also the number one recruit at Bowdoin, but would have been a "C band"...meaning he would have needed the coach's tip and a number of strong recommendations.  We were ready to encourage him to reach out to an Olympic medalist who is a friend of ours for a recommendation letter.  All this despite the fact that he was a very strong student.

Today's NESCAC schools (and UAA schools, Claremont schools upper midwest LAC schools, etc.) place a strong emphasis on building a diverse community of students each year.  They talk about the importance of looking beyond just the metrics of GPA and board scores to the intellectual curiosity, passions and community involvement of applicants...and this includes athletic achievement.

[Brother Flounder]

This is an interesting recent discussion regarding the academics vs. athletics "paradox" within the NESCAC schools.  Several thoughts come to my mind. 

First there is empirical evidence to suggest that college athletes perform as well or better than their non-athlete peers in the career world following college.  Even many of the pure-minded LAC professors have to be aware of the importance of a fruitful, remunerative career for college students following their family's $250K 4-year investment.

Second the implied "gap" in academic achievement between non-athletes and recruited athletes at NESCAC schools is relatively narrow.  That gap is much wider at the Ivies.  One of my sons played soccer at Bowdoin, was a very strong student, and probably didn't need a tip even though it was indicated it would be available to him if needed.

My other son played soccer for Brown, which is frankly what got him in.  He was also the number one recruit at Bowdoin, but would have been a "C band"...meaning he would have needed the coach's tip and a number of strong recommendations.  We were ready to encourage him to reach out to an Olympic medalist who is a friend of ours for a recommendation letter.  All this despite the fact that he was a very strong student.

Today's NESCAC schools (and UAA schools, Claremont schools upper midwest LAC schools, etc.) place a strong emphasis on building a diverse community of students each year.  They talk about the importance of looking beyond just the metrics of GPA and board scores to the intellectual curiosity, passions and community involvement of applicants...and this includes athletic achievement.

I have found the same to be true.... It was harder to get into upper-echelon NESCAC schools than Ivie's for student athletes.  The Ivies rely on a formula that gives them a greater range for student athletes.

[Mr.Right]

Taking a double look at Williams schedule shows an addition of a match v Curry on the same day the Mt.St Vincent game was scheduled. I wonder if the abrupt coaching change at Mt.St.Vincent resulted in them dropping that game if indeed that did happen. Decent upgrade for Williams if this is the case as Curry is an average team but will have a very weak schedule of their own so that will drag the OWP and OOWP way down. If in fact Mt.St.Vincent dropped Williams in June that is absurd. Your reputation will dry up fast as a coach and AD if you are dropping teams 2-3 months before the season starts. It is near impossible to get another game that close to the season starting with every team's schedule all locked up. I do not know if that is what happened but it is my best guess. No clue if Mt.St.Vincent dropped Tufts also?

[Clotpoll]

This is an interesting recent discussion regarding the academics vs. athletics "paradox" within the NESCAC schools.  Several thoughts come to my mind. 

First there is empirical evidence to suggest that college athletes perform as well or better than their non-athlete peers in the career world following college.  Even many of the pure-minded LAC professors have to be aware of the importance of a fruitful, remunerative career for college students following their family's $250K 4-year investment.

Second the implied "gap" in academic achievement between non-athletes and recruited athletes at NESCAC schools is relatively narrow.  That gap is much wider at the Ivies.  One of my sons played soccer at Bowdoin, was a very strong student, and probably didn't need a tip even though it was indicated it would be available to him if needed.

My other son played soccer for Brown, which is frankly what got him in.  He was also the number one recruit at Bowdoin, but would have been a "C band"...meaning he would have needed the coach's tip and a number of strong recommendations.  We were ready to encourage him to reach out to an Olympic medalist who is a friend of ours for a recommendation letter.  All this despite the fact that he was a very strong student.

Today's NESCAC schools (and UAA schools, Claremont schools upper midwest LAC schools, etc.) place a strong emphasis on building a diverse community of students each year.  They talk about the importance of looking beyond just the metrics of GPA and board scores to the intellectual curiosity, passions and community involvement of applicants...and this includes athletic achievement.

My daughter was a four-year laxer & top contributor in a big time d3 program. Very good student, bio major...but definitely not med school material. Got a good job three weeks after graduation...just because the boss saw 'lacrosse' on the resume. Got a better job a year later- in a field where she had zero experience/expertise- because the person charged with the hire saw 'lacrosse' on her resume. Friends of hers with 4.0s- but no sports- are still living in mom's basement two years later.

[truenorth]

College lacrosse on the resume often leads to great connections and great career opportunities.  For example, there is no shortage of college lax players in the investment banking world.  And the pipeline persists because they generally perform well in pressurized job situations... 

The same is generally true among college soccer alums.  As one example, my Bowdoin alum son has two teammates who are very bright and climbing the ladder quickly at Oppenheimer & Co. in NYC.

[Flying Weasel]

Taking a double look at Williams schedule shows an addition of a match v Curry on the same day the Mt.St Vincent game was scheduled. I wonder if the abrupt coaching change at Mt.St.Vincent resulted in them dropping that game if indeed that did happen. Decent upgrade for Williams if this is the case as Curry is an average team but will have a very weak schedule of their own so that will drag the OWP and OOWP way down. If in fact Mt.St.Vincent dropped Williams in June that is absurd. Your reputation will dry up fast as a coach and AD if you are dropping teams 2-3 months before the season starts. It is near impossible to get another game that close to the season starting with every team's schedule all locked up. I do not know if that is what happened but it is my best guess. No clue if Mt.St.Vincent dropped Tufts also?

Yeah, this is really strange.  Mount St. Vincent's schedule was released on July 18th and it does not include Messiah even though Messiah's schedule continues to show a game at Mount St. Vincent on Saturday 9/16. That date is open on MSV's scheudle, but falls between a Thursday (9/14) match and a Monday (9/18) match, the latter against Montclair State, the new coach's alma mater. And those games come after a bizarre 3 games in 3 days, Sunday-Monday-Tuesday (9/10-9/11-9/12).

Williams and Tufts continue to show on MSV's schedule, but Williams' schedule does not include MSV while Tuft's does.  With the Williams game included, it would mean 3 games in four days, playing at Purchase on Saturday (10/7), at Williams on Sunday (10/8) and at Tufts on Tuesday (10/10).

Games listed on both MSV's schedule and their opponents' schedule include Plattsburgh State, Montclair State, Tufts and TCNJ--incredible for a program of such little stature.  And who knows what the deal is with the Messiah and Williams games.

[Mr.Right]

I have confirmed that Mt.St Vincent actually dropped the game v Williams back in June. Luckily, Williams was able to get another game in its place but it goes without saying how absurd it is for a school to drop a game 2-3 months before the season starts.

[amh63]

For what it's worth, the D3 preseason rankings is out....see the noted board.  Tufts is ranked no.1 with Amherst ranked 10.  No other Nescac team in the top 25.
Amherst's first game is on the 5 th of Sept.  The first day of the academic year for Amherst!

[OldNed]

Following up on the thoughtful predictions made by Blooter and Mr. Right in the middle of December, I took a quick peek at the returning offensive power of NESCAC teams.  I looked only at goal scoring for the sake of simplicity and, in so doing, ignored the presence or absence of the players setting the table for the goal scorers. Nevertheless, the numbers provide support for the narratives offered by Blooter and Mr. Right.

Percentage of 2016 Goals Scored by 2017 Returners

1.  Colby 100%
2.  Bowdoin 97%
3.  Wesleyan 86%
4.  Bates 77%
5.  Hamilton 70%
6.  Conn 64%
7.  Williams 59%
8.  Amherst 50%
9.  Trinity 44%
9.  Tufts 44%
11. Middlebury 42%

Raw Number of 2016 Goals Scored by 2017 Returners

1.  Bowdoin 30
2.  Amherst 27
3.  Conn 23
4.  Hamilton 19
5.  Wesleyan 18
6.  Bates 17
7.  Tufts  15
8.  Williams 13
8.  Middlebury 13
10. Colby 12
11. Trinity 7

Looking at these numbers in isolation (at one's peril!), it is tempting to conclude that Amherst and Bowdoin will sail to the top of the table and that Tufts and Middlebury might find themselves behind Conn College and Hamilton unless they find or develop some goal scorers.  Of course, the defensive capabilities of these teams will also have a big impact on the eventual standings as well.

Ommadawn,
question for you about Bowdoin and their returning goal scorers.  From a quick look at their 2016 stats, it appears they are losing 2 goal scorers from last year- Charlier with 1 goal and Dias Costa with 5 goals.  Do I have that correct, or am I missing something?

[Ommadawn]

Following up on the thoughtful predictions made by Blooter and Mr. Right in the middle of December, I took a quick peek at the returning offensive power of NESCAC teams.  I looked only at goal scoring for the sake of simplicity and, in so doing, ignored the presence or absence of the players setting the table for the goal scorers. Nevertheless, the numbers provide support for the narratives offered by Blooter and Mr. Right.

Percentage of 2016 Goals Scored by 2017 Returners

1.  Colby 100%
2.  Bowdoin 97%
3.  Wesleyan 86%
4.  Bates 77%
5.  Hamilton 70%
6.  Conn 64%
7.  Williams 59%
8.  Amherst 50%
9.  Trinity 44%
9.  Tufts 44%
11. Middlebury 42%

Raw Number of 2016 Goals Scored by 2017 Returners

1.  Bowdoin 30
2.  Amherst 27
3.  Conn 23
4.  Hamilton 19
5.  Wesleyan 18
6.  Bates 17
7.  Tufts  15
8.  Williams 13
8.  Middlebury 13
10. Colby 12
11. Trinity 7

Looking at these numbers in isolation (at one's peril!), it is tempting to conclude that Amherst and Bowdoin will sail to the top of the table and that Tufts and Middlebury might find themselves behind Conn College and Hamilton unless they find or develop some goal scorers.  Of course, the defensive capabilities of these teams will also have a big impact on the eventual standings as well.

Ommadawn,
question for you about Bowdoin and their returning goal scorers.  From a quick look at their 2016 stats, it appears they are losing 2 goal scorers from last year- Charlier with 1 goal and Dias Costa with 5 goals.  Do I have that correct, or am I missing something?

My bad, OldNed!  Sorry for the error.  Assuming there are no other errors (a big assumption  ), Bowdoin drops to #3 on the upper list and #2 on the lower list.  Things still look promising for the Polar Bears, though!

[OldNed]

No worries, Omadawn.  I'm not trying to nitpick or anything like that.  I was looking at the Bowdoin roster/stats as my son's team will be playing them this year and I was trying to get an idea of who the better players are and that's when I noticed the discrepancy.  I'm going to assume your other figures are correct, and you're right that things are looking good for Bowdoin this year-  Massey has them rated #7 in their preseason rankings.