FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[seinfeld]

Looks like Backer25 beat me to it, but the rumor I've heard is that Earlham is leaving the NCAC for the HCAC at the end of the 09-10 academic year. Can anyone confirm this?

If this does happen, DePauw makes the most sense to join. If not them, I would go after Washington & Jefferson. If neither of those work, we can always go back to nine schools, which it was before Wabash and Hiram joined. Would make for a more balanced football schedule if nothing else.

[wally_wabash]

I have exactly zero knowledge on this subject, but if this is something that is going to happen, there are some signals out there that make sense.  Most notably is that Earlham is absent from our NCAC/UAA scheduling agreement and have instead continued their series with Anderson, RHIT, and Manchester.  Earlham has kind of looked like a junior member of the HCAC for some time now...that move, if they wanted to make it, would seem to make sense. 

Slotting DePauw into that spot seems like a natural fit for everybody involved.  The academic profile fits, the league gets stronger in just about every sport that it sponsors on both the men's and women's sides.  And, let's face it, today cost is a bigger concern than it used to be and I can't imagine that competing in the NCAC wouldn't be a TON cheaper for DePauw than their current situation.  I guess we'll see how it plays out.  It's interesting conversation fodder for sure. 

[LGHistorian]

I remember having a conversation with a Wabash athletic rep back when the ICAC was in its early years and asking about Earlham.  He told me Earlham, at that time, looked at themselves as more of an Ohio school instead of Indiana due to their closeness to the IN-OH border and they didn't have much interest in the ICAC.  Since that time when an Indiana school withdraws it seemed that it was always replaced with an Ohio school.  Of course the ICAC evolved into the Heartland Conference.

Being an old-timer I have noticed the Heartland now bears a striking resemblance to the old NAIA "Hoosier-Buckeye" conference from the early 70's which had Anderson, Bluffton, Defiance, Earlham, Findlay, Hanover, Manchester, Taylor and Wilmington.

If it is true that Earlham is making that move it has all the appearance of "getting back to its roots" just as those Indiana schools did when the idea of the ICAC was born.  And it might not have happened at a better time for DePauw if they decide to make a change.  I really don't see any other reasonable fit for them if they leave the SCAC.  The HCAC is still much like it was when Wabash left and it was just beginning to trend that way when DePauw left.  I don't see DePauw coming back to something that was becoming unsuitable for them.

To quote that great baseball philosopher, Joaquin Andujar, "I can sum it up all in one word. You never know."

[D3_DPUFan]

So is Earlham leaving the NCAC?

[LGHistorian]

I just did a little nosing around the Earlham College website and found an interesting article about a possible conference switch.  The student body is upset about the rumored switch.  Some of the story smells a little like the situation at Colorado College. But it is a very enlightening article on the situation.  Here is the link http://ecword.org

[D3_DPUFan]

I just did a little nosing around the Earlham College website and found an interesting article about a possible conference switch.  The student body is upset about the rumored switch.  Some of the story smells a little like the situation at Colorado College. But it is a very enlightening article on the situation.

Thanks for the link...for Earlham's sake I hope it's not like the Colorado College situation...b*stards screwed over lots of folks...but it certainly seems like there's alot of behind the scenes stuff going on and that a move is in the offing for the Quakers...BTW, don't know if you read the article, but I thought the following paragraph was revealing:

Reasons for the switch involve the difference in competitive levels between the schools in the NCAC and HCAC. Bennett said that Earlham's goal is to win half of its games every season, and that the switch would help achieve that goal. 

[wally_wabash]

Excellent sleuthing, Historian.  There are a couple of articles that mention a potential, nay, a proposed switch in The Word's archives so this is quite a bit more real than I think most of us participating here realized a week ago.  Summarizing a bit of what I've read...

- The Earlham Athletics Committee has drafted a proposal that calls for Earlham leaving the NCAC and joining the HCAC.  It would seem that if Doug Bennett had his way, Earlham would make the jump yesterday.  Or sooner.  

- Earlham's students are peeved that they didn't get a say.  Rightly so, but if this is going to be a money decision, the wants of the students are probably going to get trumped (and it seems like the student body, at least the student athletes, do not favor a move).  

Quoting directly from the article linked by LGH:

These matters are sort of tricky, it's awkward to talk about them in public. In general, colleges do not talk about them in public...it's a dangerous analogy, but it's a little like marital infidelity. If you're going to be unfaithful, you want to do it in secret...

I understand the sentiment, but with all due respect Dr. Bennett, the lipstick on your collar has been discovered.  So now that it's out there....do it or don't do it, but please make a call.  There are a number of other institutions that are possibly going to be affected by this decision.  

[wally_wabash]

I just did a little nosing around the Earlham College website and found an interesting article about a possible conference switch.  The student body is upset about the rumored switch.  Some of the story smells a little like the situation at Colorado College. But it is a very enlightening article on the situation.

Thanks for the link...for Earlham's sake I hope it's not like the Colorado College situation...b*stards screwed over lots of folks...but it certainly seems like there's alot of behind the scenes stuff going on and that a move is in the offing for the Quakers...BTW, don't know if you read the article, but I thought the following paragraph was revealing:

Reasons for the switch involve the difference in competitive levels between the schools in the NCAC and HCAC. Bennett said that Earlham's goal is to win half of its games every season, and that the switch would help achieve that goal. 

I also raised an eyebrow to that bit of the article.  How do you sell that to recruits?  We're aiming for .500?  Really? 

[formerd3db]

LGHistorian and Wally:

Indeed, a troubling situation, if what is reported in the article as to how these discussions were conducted are true (and it would appear from what has been "semi" admitted, most of it is true).  I agree with you that the student-body and student-athletes should have been consulted on this, yet also agree that when it comes down to the final decision, $ will dictate the issue.  So that leaves the question as to what alternatives do the student-athletes have?  I think we all know the answer to that, which is two-fold; 1) each student-athlete will have to make their own personal decision and with regard to the field hockey players, if that sport is dropped, then I would expect that some of those women will transfer to another school if possible...and 2) what are the other student-athletes going to do - quit their respective sports?  I doubt it; rather they will just have to "play the cards they are dealt".  That's just the way it is today - too many other significant factors dictate decisions, the least of which is the permanent dictum or rule being "the powers that be" will always make the final decision.   It will be interesting to see what happens.  At least they aren't going to drop athletics totally, as that would be extremely tragic.

[D3_DPUFan]

I understand the sentiment, but with all due respect Dr. Bennett, the lipstick on your collar has been discovered.  So now that it's out there....do it or don't do it, but please make a call.  There are a number of other institutions that are possibly going to be affected by this decision. 

Exactly (see Colorado College)...

I also raised an eyebrow to that bit of the article.  How do you sell that to recruits?  We're aiming for .500?  Really? 

Yeah...can't imagine the coaching staff likes seeing that in print!

[Mr. Ypsi]

While they might initially be competitive in a 'weaker' conference, with that mindset, I'd imagine Earlham would quickly drift down to the bottom of ANY conference they joined.

[Ryan Tipps]

BTW, don't know if you read the article, but I thought the following paragraph was revealing:

Reasons for the switch involve the difference in competitive levels between the schools in the NCAC and HCAC. Bennett said that Earlham’s goal is to win half of its games every season, and that the switch would help achieve that goal. 

I also raised an eyebrow to that bit of the article.  How do you sell that to recruits?  We're aiming for .500?  Really? 

It's better than what the school is offering recruits now 

I'm not trying to justify Bennett's statement in the article (there's no doubt that it's not exactly reaching for the brass ring), but it is a pretty blanket statement that might be open-ended enough to not feel like it's targeting the athletes and the recruiting of just one sport.

I know that we're all thinking football, but Earlham is waaaay below .500 in lots of other sports. This school year alone:

Men's hoops: 3-22
Men's tennis: 4-10
Women's hoops: 3-21
Women's volleyball: 4-26
Women's field hockey: 6-11
Women's tennis: 4-10

Those are the overall team records. Their results are even more dismal when just in-conference games are tallied.

[ADL70]

And in football they're below .500 against the HCAC teams they've played lately.  Anderson, Manchester, and Rose Hulman are hardly the cream of the HCAC crop in football either.

[LGHistorian]

The two things about the article which prompted my reference to the CC situation was the fact that only 7 of the 14 committee members were present for a meeting where a possible "final" decision or vote is made and one of the weak reasons given for possible switching - more professors will be able to attend road games.

If I was directly involved in it that would have raised a red flag to me that the decision was being manipulated to support the admininistration's viewpoint.

And I loved the student response to the professors attending more games.  Something like "they won't walk 5 minutes across campus to attend home games"

The "win at least 50%" reminds me of one of the reasons given by the IHSAA when they went to class basketball in Indiana.  "We want to have more winners."
Since most of the IHSAA board are high school principals and superintendents I have never understood why they did not adopt the policy with academics.  Such as having valedictorians and salutatorians for each grade point level, 4 points, 3 points, 2 points ...

[wally_wabash]

I think it's a PR nightmare for Bennett and I think he knows it, but just to put myself in his shoes for a second...if I make the switch from the NCAC to the HCAC right now, students are going to be pissed, but a quarter of those students are gone in two weeks before anything has really changed, and half are gone after just a year.  In two years, half of my campus really only knows the HCAC and in four years, it's the way of life.  The money that I'm going to save over the course of the next decade in the HCAC is going to far outweigh 2-3 years of grumbling students. 

It's a bit callous (and I don't agree with that kind of a position), but there is some logic to it...particularly for a president who pretty clearly doesn't care to put much emphasis on athletics in the first place.