Last year, I sent an article about being a Division III athlete to In The ‘Cac. I wrote about how–regardless of the size of the crowds at our games, lack of scholarships or the overall perception of what it means to play DIII sports–we had the same pride, respect and love for our sports as anyone. It was a feel good article.
This is not a feel good article. This is a bragging, in your face, we’re better than you article. This is about winning, and without a single Charlie Sheen reference, besides the one. This article should now probably be checked for diseases.
“The Redskins and Seahawks also used zone-read plays and Pistol sets to make the playoffs this season. Atlanta was able to defeat Seattle — though not contain its offense — because the Falcons had a bye and an extra week to prepare for college tactics, and knew they would get the Washington-Seattle winner. At Atlanta, Seattle’s offense came within 8 seconds of victory and making it two college wins out of four divisional games. Meanwhile New England was using its very-quick-snap offense, inspired by the Blur Offense at Oregon and the quick-snap pace employed at the University of Houston or, for that matter, in the New England Small College Athletic Conference around the corner from Bill Belichick’s office.”
From ESPN courtesy of @showmeurbobbys
“I’m not anti-sports on college campuses. I’m all for them. I went to a NCAA Division Three school in New England and really enjoyed the basketball and hockey games. They do promote a “university culture,” and they’re fun. But the good thing about sports at Bowdoin College and NCAA D3 in general is that sports are held in check. They don’t dominate the life of the institution (at least, not yet). There were no (official) athletic scholarships, so the athletes really were students first, not essentially hired professionals forced to limit earnings to the price of a scholarship.
My college was academically oriented (as most are, thankfully), and yet it had absolutely zero trouble raising a massive endowment (one billion dollars). Neither have many other schools. Ivy League institutions like Harvard (30 billion), Princeton (17 billion), and Yale (17 billion) aren’t having much trouble in this front despite their focus on academics, not sports. Sure, those are Ivy League schools, but the same is true of countless lesser-known schools. The point: you don’t need big-time athletic programs to raise money for the school.”"
Q: After the Bobby Petrino scandal, I realize we have been missing a big part of why a coach decides to stay or leave one program for another — I think we should call the formula “The Tang Factor,” based on the hotness of the coeds at the school combined with how much the coach will make there. What do you think?
— Darrin, Palm Springs, FL
SG: I think you just stumbled across the best advanced metric since OPS. I didn’t have enough time to rank all 300 colleges — suffice it to say that the NESCAC is the Bizarro SEC."