FB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference

Started by admin, August 16, 2005, 05:13:40 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

tigerfanalso

You've got to admit, the current system is funny in some ways. Over 240(?) teams with only 4 or 5 (usually the same 4 or 5)having any chance to compete for championship. The reasons for same have already been well documented. 

Pat Coleman

Quote from: jknezek on December 16, 2014, 04:35:09 PM
Quote from: Bombers798891 on December 16, 2014, 04:09:12 PM
Quote from: jknezek on December 16, 2014, 03:40:47 PM

I'm with you 100% here. I discussed that as flexibility in a previous post and didn't want to repeat myself. But yes... I think Bridgewater is a very, very good example. Those years they were Stagg quality? There was a lot of institutional will that made that happen. And when a certain administrator left... what do you know, Bridgewater moved back down again toward the ODAC pack. Amazing.

Something similar happened at Ithaca as well. The President/AD combo during the Butterfield era had a different will regarding football than the ones that took over in Welch's era.

This is why I think the "It's the responsibility of everyone else to get better" is a lazy solution to the parity issue at this level. We simply have too wide a disparity in what schools are willing to commit to make their football program nationally competitive. They're simply not interested in investing that heavily in their programs.

Now, to be frank, I don't think that's the wrong decision for many schools, even Ithaca. But it's also created much of this issue. In a perfect world, I'd love to see a split of D-III, into the schools that are willing to say "We're going to commit to making our program competitive with the elites of the country," and those who say "We support our football team, but we're content to do so on a much smaller scale."

Why does there need to be a split? You could simply opt out of the playoffs ala the NESCAC. You don't have to opt out of OOC games, and you can schedule those with like minded opponents. In theory your conference is more or less like minded.

Many conferences/schools have opted out of the semifinals or quarterfinals just based on how they support football. They still get AQs and participate but one win is generally the ceiling.
Publisher. Questions? Check our FAQ for D3f, D3h.
Quote from: old 40 on September 25, 2007, 08:23:57 PMLet's discuss (sports) in a positive way, sometimes kidding each other with no disrespect.

jknezek

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 16, 2014, 04:46:26 PM


Many conferences/schools have opted out of the semifinals or quarterfinals just based on how they support football. They still get AQs and participate but one win is generally the ceiling.

yeah. but sometimes that includes a beating. opting out completely would make a different kind of statement. just a thought. I have no real interest in W&L following that route (not that I have anything to say about it!), but it's a valid idea that is already partially enacted.

Bombers798891

Quote from: jknezek on December 16, 2014, 04:35:09 PM
Quote from: Bombers798891 on December 16, 2014, 04:09:12 PM
Quote from: jknezek on December 16, 2014, 03:40:47 PM

I'm with you 100% here. I discussed that as flexibility in a previous post and didn't want to repeat myself. But yes... I think Bridgewater is a very, very good example. Those years they were Stagg quality? There was a lot of institutional will that made that happen. And when a certain administrator left... what do you know, Bridgewater moved back down again toward the ODAC pack. Amazing.

Something similar happened at Ithaca as well. The President/AD combo during the Butterfield era had a different will regarding football than the ones that took over in Welch's era.

This is why I think the "It's the responsibility of everyone else to get better" is a lazy solution to the parity issue at this level. We simply have too wide a disparity in what schools are willing to commit to make their football program nationally competitive. They're simply not interested in investing that heavily in their programs.

Now, to be frank, I don't think that's the wrong decision for many schools, even Ithaca. But it's also created much of this issue. In a perfect world, I'd love to see a split of D-III, into the schools that are willing to say "We're going to commit to making our program competitive with the elites of the country," and those who say "We support our football team, but we're content to do so on a much smaller scale."

Why does there need to be a split? You could simply opt out of the playoffs ala the NESCAC. You don't have to opt out of OOC games, and you can schedule those with like minded opponents. In theory your conference is more or less like minded. But again, I'm not sure what else you need to do. If you were to split into a DIV I'd be interested in how you define the criteria of "smaller scale".

Again, I'm not sure I consider UMU's football program vis a vis the OAC all that different from W&L's tennis program vis a vis the ODAC. There are many, many, many situations like this in all conferences, I'm just familiar with that one, so I'm really not sure how you would define where one school is working too hard.

I think the schools could make the decision for themselves. Heck, I think they do already. If your football facility can't host NCAA Division III playoff games, how important, institutionally, can it be that the football team qualifies for and advances in them? And if that's the case, why compete for them at all? Why not present those teams with another option besides going the NESCAC route?

tigerfanalso

D3A Championship Playoffs: 2 teams from WIAA/MU/Linfield/MHB/Wesley/2 at large
D3B Championship  AQ's & Pool C's; winner of D3B eligible for one of the 2 at large for D3A bracket
Might be more interesting to a larger fan base,maybe? I just don't see  D3 schools committing additional resources/time/energy to compete with the big boys of D3.   


jknezek

Quote from: tigerfanalso on December 17, 2014, 08:15:49 AM
D3A Championship Playoffs: 2 teams from WIAA/MU/Linfield/MHB/Wesley/2 at large
D3B Championship  AQ's & Pool C's; winner of D3B eligible for one of the 2 at large for D3A bracket
Might be more interesting to a larger fan base,maybe? I just don't see  D3 schools committing additional resources/time/energy to compete with the big boys of D3.   

Again, why bother? What are the big teams doing that the rest of D3 can't do? Are they operating under a different set of rules? No. What is the point of splitting the division simply because other schools don't want to compete with the big boys? If you don't want to compete with them, don't. If you do, go for it. But don't split the division just because they are too good. That's a cruddy excuse.

I think the string of UMU vs UWW games is boring, bad for the division, and it has almost completely lost my attention as a game. However, simply splitting up the division for no reason other than a handful of teams are too good is silly. That's just a way of saying we want a trophy, but we don't want to compete with the best teams using the same playing field, to win that trophy.

If you are going to split into a DIV or a DIIIB or whatever, there has to be a substantive change in the rules of competition from existing DIII. Whether that is roster, recruiting, practice time, number of games, and money spent restrictions, or something else I don't know, but just splitting the division to create a second championship because a couple teams are hogging the trophy won't fly for me.

tigerfanalso

You certainly have strong opinions, and I don't disagree. However the dominance is not helping D3 football and obviously the rest of D3 schools either have no answer or could care less about competing at the national level.

jknezek

Quote from: tigerfanalso on December 17, 2014, 09:25:37 AM
You certainly have strong opinions, and I don't disagree. However the dominance is not helping D3 football and obviously the rest of D3 schools either have no answer or could care less about competing at the national level.

Very, very true. I've been on both sides of this argument but I've settled here. There has to be a reason to compete for another trophy. A reason why you can't compete for the one we have.

The only thing I'll add is that it's not just football. That may be the flagship we are all looking at, but a good portion of D3 sports work this way. If it was one school or one conference dominating all of D3, I'd be more inclined to see a big problem. But traditionally it's not. Lots of schools have a niche, and that is where they focus.

UWW is one to watch however. Winning the big 3 sports last year is an interesting occurrence. I will get concerned if they keep winning team sports at an outsized rate. I think UWW is using athletics to differentiate themselves from the rest of the WIAC. It's a good strategy, and I applaud their innovation. But a school that size taking that tack could throw D3 out of whack from a money standpoint. A student activity fee of an additional $100 focused on athletics will raise a good chunk of money annually for them.

D3ISGREAT

I dont want to beat a dead horse so to speak, but the ability to fund an athlete at the d3 level is the biggest factor. Now you have programs that sell itself because they win (UMU, UWW, UMHB..etc) and some kids might look past the fact that it might cost alot out of pocket to go to UMU, and they will go there to win a Nat Champ. But for example, a kid John Carroll is recruiting and really likes JC, and they are tops on the list, with UMU being second. Now right off the top JC costs 15g more, so when its all said and done kid gets in both schools and he wants to got to JC but its going to cost him 20g out of pocket where as UMU might cost 10g out of pocket. Thats where teams will lose kids. Thats 40,000 more out of pocket the family will have to pay just to go to JC. Yes kids will choose to do that, but more often then not "its going to cost me less to go to UMU, and I will most likely win a nat champ within my four years.. once again a hard sell for JC coaching staff. My argument is not what the current top programs are doing, but this is why you wont see a big change anytime soon. I think its big possibility another Wisc State school will step up, with the loss of UWW coaching staff. However I think you could take UMU coaching staff and put them at Johns Hopkins, and they are not going to to do any better then the current staff there. I mean no disrespect either with that statement. Something needs to change at this level for other teams to have a shot. At this level you cant just say I am going to go get better players and we will win. Its not an even playing field like it is at D1 , where kids have to just qualify by NCAA standards to be eligible to get a scholarship.

At the D3 level its not like D1( as far as funding players), where programs are trying to build the best facilities in the country to compete against other league opponents. UMU stadium is nothing special, and places like UWW and UMHB and even cortland St have better facilities. Look at RPI's stadium, its borderline irresponsible for the d3 level. They never come close to selling out the place, and it cost a truckload of money to build. Now there was talk about them moving to 1aa, but i dont see that happening.


HSCTiger fan

Who has had talked of moving to 1AA which is actually D1 FCS? MU? UWW? Or both? That would make ZERO sense. Moving up would not put more people in the stands for home games. They would play fewer home games. They would have to provide free education to the tune of 63 scholarships.  Finally, by NCAA rule - all other sports would have to play D1. Meaning many more scholarships and exceptionally high travel costs across all sports, softball, swimming, cross country..  I cannot imagine either team moving up. 
Hampden Sydney College
ODAC Champions 77, 82, 83, 87, 07, 09, 11, 13, 14
NCAA Playoffs - 77, 07, 09, 10, 11, 13, 14
The "Game" 60 wins and counting...
11/18/2018 Wally referred to me as Chief and admitted "I don't know about that!"

jknezek

Quote from: HSCTiger fan on December 17, 2014, 10:30:39 AM
Who has had talked of moving to 1AA which is actually D1 FCS? MU? UWW? Or both? That would make ZERO sense. Moving up would not put more people in the stands for home games. They would play fewer home games. They would have to provide free education to the tune of 63 scholarships.  Finally, by NCAA rule - all other sports would have to play D1. Meaning many more scholarships and exceptionally high travel costs across all sports, softball, swimming, cross country..  I cannot imagine either team moving up.

RPI at one time discussed it. I don't think it got very far.

02 Warhawk

#18206
Quote from: HSCTiger fan on December 17, 2014, 10:30:39 AM
Who has had talked of moving to 1AA which is actually D1 FCS? MU? UWW? Or both? That would make ZERO sense. Moving up would not put more people in the stands for home games. They would play fewer home games. They would have to provide free education to the tune of 63 scholarships.  Finally, by NCAA rule - all other sports would have to play D1. Meaning many more scholarships and exceptionally high travel costs across all sports, softball, swimming, cross country..  I cannot imagine either team moving up.

Glad you said this, because there's a lot of people that don't realize that's rule. Also, there isn't a DIII school out there that's prepared to start offering scholarships to their entire athletic department just because one, two, or even a handful of programs are having success.

I've stated this on just about every board, so I might as well say it here. The #1 reason the WIAC is successful is because the lack of D1 and D2 programs in the state of Wisconsin. That goes double for football. Outside UW (Badgers), there isn't a scholarship offering football program in the entire state (DI or DII). So recruiting here at the DIII level is a helluva lot easier than say Ohio, Texas, Minnesota, etc....

jknezek

Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 17, 2014, 10:50:23 AM
Quote from: HSCTiger fan on December 17, 2014, 10:30:39 AM
Who has had talked of moving to 1AA which is actually D1 FCS? MU? UWW? Or both? That would make ZERO sense. Moving up would not put more people in the stands for home games. They would play fewer home games. They would have to provide free education to the tune of 63 scholarships.  Finally, by NCAA rule - all other sports would have to play D1. Meaning many more scholarships and exceptionally high travel costs across all sports, softball, swimming, cross country..  I cannot imagine either team moving up.

Glad you said this, because a lot of people don't realize that rule. Also, there isn't a DIII school out there that's prepared to start offering scholarships to their entire athletic department, just because one, two, or even a handful of programs are having success.

This cuts both ways. You don't have to offer scholarships to all athletes. There are non-scholarship D1 conferences. You can even pick and choose within the limits of Title IX, conference restraints, etc. Butler, for example, is non-scholarship for football but scholarship in other sports. That being said, it is a massive change and I agree there isn't a DIII school that could easily make that jump. There are schools that could do it based on endowment funding, but it would involve massive planning and expenses.

02 Warhawk

Quote from: jknezek on December 17, 2014, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 17, 2014, 10:50:23 AM
Quote from: HSCTiger fan on December 17, 2014, 10:30:39 AM
Who has had talked of moving to 1AA which is actually D1 FCS? MU? UWW? Or both? That would make ZERO sense. Moving up would not put more people in the stands for home games. They would play fewer home games. They would have to provide free education to the tune of 63 scholarships.  Finally, by NCAA rule - all other sports would have to play D1. Meaning many more scholarships and exceptionally high travel costs across all sports, softball, swimming, cross country..  I cannot imagine either team moving up.

Glad you said this, because a lot of people don't realize that rule. Also, there isn't a DIII school out there that's prepared to start offering scholarships to their entire athletic department, just because one, two, or even a handful of programs are having success.

This cuts both ways. You don't have to offer scholarships to all athletes. There are non-scholarship D1 conferences. You can even pick and choose within the limits of Title IX, conference restraints, etc. Butler, for example, is non-scholarship for football but scholarship in other sports. That being said, it is a massive change and I agree there isn't a DIII school that could easily make that jump. There are schools that could do it based on endowment funding, but it would involve massive planning and expenses.

Yea, I have thought about that though. But what would be in it for UWW, UMU, MHB, etc. bumping up to a non-scholarship D1 conference? Yes, it would benefit other DIII schools as they would now have a better chance at winning a Stagg Bowl because the playoffs are watered down.

jknezek

Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 17, 2014, 11:05:25 AM
Quote from: jknezek on December 17, 2014, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 17, 2014, 10:50:23 AM
Quote from: HSCTiger fan on December 17, 2014, 10:30:39 AM
Who has had talked of moving to 1AA which is actually D1 FCS? MU? UWW? Or both? That would make ZERO sense. Moving up would not put more people in the stands for home games. They would play fewer home games. They would have to provide free education to the tune of 63 scholarships.  Finally, by NCAA rule - all other sports would have to play D1. Meaning many more scholarships and exceptionally high travel costs across all sports, softball, swimming, cross country..  I cannot imagine either team moving up.

Glad you said this, because a lot of people don't realize that rule. Also, there isn't a DIII school out there that's prepared to start offering scholarships to their entire athletic department, just because one, two, or even a handful of programs are having success.

This cuts both ways. You don't have to offer scholarships to all athletes. There are non-scholarship D1 conferences. You can even pick and choose within the limits of Title IX, conference restraints, etc. Butler, for example, is non-scholarship for football but scholarship in other sports. That being said, it is a massive change and I agree there isn't a DIII school that could easily make that jump. There are schools that could do it based on endowment funding, but it would involve massive planning and expenses.

Yea, I have thought about that though. But what would be in it for UWW, UMU, MHB, etc. bumping up to a non-scholarship D1 conference? Yes, it would benefit other DIII schools as they would now have a better chance at winning a Stagg Bowl because the playoffs are watered down.

I agree 100%. I never make the argument they should move. Nor do I see any great advantage to those schools. I simply pointed out that you don't have to provide all those expensive scholarships. They are a maximum, not a requirement.