August 29th, 2006 12:00am
I admit that I didn't pay much attention to the new rule changes in college football this fall. After all, there are a few "tweaks" to the rules every year and most don't have a noticeable affect on the game.
But it's clear to me after following the first week of play that one change is going to have a major impact on the game. And that impact is mostly definitely negative.
What I'm talking about here is the new rule that on every change of possession the clock starts as soon as the referee marks the ball ready for play. On the surface, this may not seem like a big deal. But as The WVIAC Blog pointed out, the total number of plays in a game were down almost 13% in that conference from week one last year to week one this year. If you were following the progress of the contests on Saturday like I was, you noticed a major difference. I know there were at least two games I was listening to in which the entire first half lasted less than an hour!
Of course it stands to reason that if the number of plays in a game is down more than 10%, the scoring will also follow that trend. The big fourth quarter comebacks that can make the college game so exciting are now far less likely when the team with the lead finds it much easier to milk the clock. Maybe the only positive to come out of this is that more upsets may happen because fewer plays means the team with less talent has a better chance of staying in the game. But is that really what we want?
College football is more of an "event" than anything else. Most teams only play 10 or 11 games. Fans that would never consider traveling several hours for a basketball game will do it for football and make an entire weekend out of it because of alumni events, the bands, the tailgating, etc. Anything that detracts from that overall experience (and shortening the games certainly does) is a negative in my book.
The NCAA Football Rules Committee had to have been thinking only about major college football when this change was made. Football games in the BCS conferences had been pushing 3 hours and 30 minutes in length because most games are televised (many media timeouts) and because the advent of instant replay at that level is also increasing the length of games.
But what may be good for 60-some teams (and I'm not convinced that the I-A folks will like this change either once they start playing the games) is clearly going to be a major negative for the 100's of other schools that play college football.
We need to "turn back the clock" on this rule and make sure it amounts to just a bad one year experiment. I encourage you to join with me in the crusade to get things returned to normal by no later than the beginning of next season. If you come into contact with any administrators or coaches, let them know how you feel and tell them to pass on the word to the rules committee!
More Bad News
I hate to do this, because as anyone that has read my Northwest Region columns in the past can attest, negative writing is not my style. I feel as if I'm going to write this column, I should try to be an ambassador for the sport and give our site visitors something they can look forward to reading each week. But there is something else I have to get off my chest and I might as well do it now since it's still early in the season.
As you may or may not know, the operation of the game day scoreboard on this website is nothing fancy. What it usually amounts to is this: one or two people sitting at their computer listening to games or following the live score updates (this is an awesome feature by the way) that many schools now have on their websites. Occasionally, it also means making phone calls to press boxes to get the current score. It may not sound that difficult, but when you have 70 games going on during a day, it can get overwhelming to keep up at times.
This past Saturday Brandon Misener had to be out of town, so he asked me to fill in. If I'm at home I typically like to follow some games live on the internet anyway, so I don't mind updating the scores. I did it on several occasions last year and my wife Deb often fills in when Brandon and I are both away at games. This past Saturday there were just 18 games dispersed throughout the day so I even had time to take a break and mow my lawn!
But herein lies the problem I'm having: Of the 18 games last Saturday, in at least six of them it was impossible to keep the score updated. Why? Because unless you were physically at the stadium, apparently a private investigator was necessary to determine if a game was actually going on. No live stats, no links (or broken links) for streaming of radio broadcasts on the internet, heck I even ran into instances where either no one answered a press box phone or it was disconnected. In many cases I had the feeling I was trying to update junior high scores instead of college.
I'm not going to name names here because I suspect many of these schools (and more importantly their fans) realize they are deficient in this area. But it is now 2006, we are in the heart of the information age, and this is not junior high. If your school doesn't have at least one avenue to get the information out to the public during games, even if it's something as simple as a working phone in the press box, then some major changes need to be made in the athletic department.
So, I once again encourage the readers out there to make your voice heard if your school is one of the "offenders". Too often, schools at this level complain that they don't get enough media coverage. But more often that not, it's those same schools that treat athletic information like it's classified. The concept is simple: if the schools appear to not care, why would anyone else?
Game of the Week
Saginaw Valley State @ Ashland
Every D-II follower is familiar with SVSU. The Cardinals have been one of the top programs in the division over the past five years, reaching the playoffs four times. The only thing standing between SVSU and greatness has been Grand Valley-- the Cardinals have lost three close playoff games to the Lakers during that time frame.
Ashland was a solid program in the late 90's and even made a playoff appearance during that time frame. But after struggling for a few years, AU hired former Akron coach Lee Owens to run the show and he has immediately turned the Eagles back into a contender. Ashland went 9-2 last year, just missing the playoffs in the process. Clearly the Eagles are a program on the rise in Division II.
The name of the game this week is defense. Ashland was second in the country in scoring defense last year and returns 10 starters to that unit. Eagle linebackers Brady Miller and Allen Lattimore are among the best in the country. SVSU also returns several starters to a defensive unit that gave up just 14.7 points per game last season. Like any top program, the Cardinals are stout on defense year after year.
With both teams being so good defensively, it's obviously going to be the team that can generate something on offense that will win this game. SVSU was pretty average most of last year, but the Cards have several playmakers at wide receiver and quarterback Chris Dougherty should be much more consistent after going through some growing pains last season. The Eagles are an unproven commodity on offense. They had trouble scoring points last season and will need to replace their top two offensive threats as we enter 2006.
So, if you haven't already guessed, I'm going with the proven commodity (SVSU) in this game. The Cardinals have the talent to score a few points and although I'm sure Ashland has a very good team, I'm not convinced they have the offensive weapons or the continuity at this point to score enough points to win a game of this magnitude. Saginaw Valley 17 Ashland 13.
Other Games to Watch
Mesa State @ West Texas A&M
WTAMU would appear to have the upper hand entering this game, but I'm not convinced the Buffalos have fixed their defensive problems from a year ago and MSC has a pair of playmakers (WR Drew Bohannen and RB Bobby Coy) capable of causing major problems. I expect a shootout in this game, with the WTAMU offense doing just enough to pull it out. West Texas A&M 42 Mesa State 35.
Colorado Mines @ Washburn
These two teams have split a pair of pretty decent games over the past two seasons, with the winner (CSM in 2004 and WU last year) catapulting itself to a conference championship and a playoff appearance. But Washburn has more talent returning this season, including a pair of backs (Ra'Shawn Moseley and Trent Hearn) that have been 1,000 yard rushers in their careers. Washburn 37 Colorado Mines 21.
Edinboro @ West Chester
In last week's column I lauded West Chester as a team to beat in the Northeast Region this year. But Edinboro (2 playoff appearances in the last 3 years) will provide a stiff challenge this week, despite the departure of former head coach Lou Tepper to IUP. Edinboro has a strong defense, so that match up against Osagie Osunde and the Golden Ram offense will be the key to the game. I think Osunde does just enough damage to get WCU the win. West Chester 20 Edinboro 17.
North Dakota @ Central Washington
UND has manhandled the Wildcats the past two years (34-0 and 44-20) but CWU is much more experienced this season, led by sophomore quarterback Mike Reilly. This contest holds even more importance this year since the Wildcats are now in the NCC and this counts as a conference game. The Sioux will be tested in this game, but a much more potent UND offense will be too much for the Wildcats to deal with for four quarters. North Dakota 35 Central Washington 24.
Shaw @ North Carolina Central
This game features the past two CIAA champions (Shaw in 2004 and NCCU last year) and the winner this week would appear to be the early favorite (along with Bowie State) to win the crown again this year. After NCCU's defensive performance last week, it is hard to imagine the Bears being able to score enough points to win. NC Central 20 Shaw 9.
Valdosta State @ Albany State
The Blazers have had the upper hand over the years in this backyard brawl, but ASU has been competitive lately and did hand VSU its only loss during the 2004 national championship season. The Blazers are inexperienced and unproven at many key spots, but it's hard to imagine ASU winning with as poorly as they played on offense last week. Valdosta State 28 Albany State 10.
Missouri Western @ Central Oklahoma
Some (including this website's own Jeff Harlin) believe this is finally the year Missouri Western (8-3 in 2005) breaks through and makes the postseason. UCO had a down year last fall (3-7, including a season-opening loss to the Griffons) after two straight eight win seasons. But the Bronchos have some talent and MWSU's inexperience on the offensive line (just one returning starter) could be the equalizer. The strength of the Griffons' defense will pull this one out in the end, but it will be close. Missouri Western 24 Central Oklahoma 19
Nebraska-Kearney @ Nebraska-Omaha
Both teams reached the postseason last year and both would appear to have some rebuilding to do entering this season. But the Mavericks have won 12 of the last 13 in this series and consistently have had more depth and talent overall. Nebraska-Omaha 34 Nebraska-Kearney 17
Minnesota State @ Northwest Missouri State
Despite the fact that NWMSU reached the national title game last year and MSU won just two games, these two teams played an overtime contest last year. Not to mention that although the Bearcats have dominated in the series over the last decade, the Mavericks have played Northwest tough on several other occasions. The Mavs have the advantage of a game under their belts and their new pass, pass, pass offense will test the Bearcat defense. But in the end it will be more of the same in this series: another pretty good game and another Northwest win. Northwest Missouri State 31 Minnesota State 20
Bentley @ East Stroudsburg
The Warriors embarrassed Bentley in the season opener last season, but despite the return of Harlon Hill Trophy winning quarterback Jim Terwilliger, ESU won't be the fine tuned offensive machine it was a year ago at this time. Still, the Warriors have too much talent for the Falcons. East Stroudsburg 38 Bentley 24
Mailbag
[Q] In your preseason column you spoke in grave detail about GVSU as a D2 Football Dynasty. My question is, at what point does such dominance become unfair, and how soon do you believe we may see Grand Valley moving up into a D-IAA or even MAC spot? I understand that there is a lot more involved to make a move like that possible; however I feel that if any program has what it takes its GV, I just wanted an expert opinion.
Vaughn
[A] GVSU operates within the same rules as everyone else, so there is nothing unfair about the Laker dominance over the past few years. I know many people point to the size of GVSU (over 20,000 students) as a reason why they Lakers should move up. But Wayne State (also in the GLIAC) is even larger than GVSU and I don't see anyone claiming the Warriors should be moving up because they go 3-8 every year.
I don't think anyone would deny that the Lakers have some major advantages that many other D-II schools would love to have. The size of the Grand Rapids metro area and proximity to some hotbeds of football talent are factors that help to fuel the dynasty. But about 90% of what GVSU has accomplished in football over the past five years was through good old-fashioned hard work and a commitment to excellence throughout the athletic program. There are many other D-II schools out there that have their own built in advantages but don't tap into them, at least not to the level of GVSU.
Now I won't deny that it's quite possible GVSU may move to D-I in the future, and I don't think anyone would doubt the move if it did happen. But GVSU has carved quite a niche for itself as a D-II power and that may be very hard to replicate at a higher level. GVSU appears to be very happy in Division II at the present time and I think Division II is very happy to have them!
[Q] I've always wondered specifically about a school like Harding, which is a private school. On signing day each year, I notice they tend to have less signees than someone like North Alabama, for example. I know as a private school, scholarship money is probably funded only by donations to the school (like everything else is). Just wondering if they get part of their school paid for, but, not 100%? I know Harding, like a lot of D2 programs, depend a lot on kids who walk-on.
Jason
[A] You make a very good point here Jason, something that many people tend to overlook: Generally speaking, it is more difficult for private schools to compete in D-II than in any other level of college football.
The reason it's so difficult has to do with the partial scholarships that are prevalent at this level. For example, if it costs $20,000 to attend a private school and $10,000 to attend a public school and both schools are offering a player a half scholarship, it's going to cost the player $5,000 more dollars out of pocket to go to the private school. All other things being equal, the public school has a big advantage.
To compete for players, the private school is left with two options: either increase the scholarship amount to a few frontline players, which in turn hurts the program from a standpoint of depth, or hope to find some diamonds in the rough or recruit in areas that your opponents aren't. Both options make it difficult to win consistently.
The effect is especially noticeable in the power conferences where just one or two private schools are members. Some examples: Augustana in the NCC, Southwest Baptist in the MIAA, and your team, Harding of the GSC. Even with very good facilities (like Harding has) and coaching, the recruiting disadvantage makes it very difficult for the private schools to win on a consistent basis at the Division II level.
Correction
Last week I mistakenly stated that Bloomsburg running back Jamar Brittingham is a senior this year when in fact he is just a junior. I certainly apologize for the mistake, but with the way Brittingham played last year you can see why I assumed he was a senior this fall!
Have a comment or criticism? Want to see your question answered in the mailbag? Click here to email Bob.