Future of Division III

Started by Ralph Turner, October 10, 2005, 07:27:51 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mr. Ypsi

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 13, 2007, 11:03:30 AM

So which d3 school has a 40,000 student enrollment?

NYU's website claims 'over 40,000' when including international branches, etc.

Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)

Lead Columnist for D3hoops.com
@ryanalanscott just about anywhere

scottiedoug

Today's New York Times has a big story about the impending rift in DIII. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/13/sports/othersports/13ncaa.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

I'm curious what some of you who know about this think of the Times' slant on it.

Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)


That story was posted below.  Honestly, I don't think anything will come of it in the near future.  The majority of the D3 schools understand the value of what they have.  As evidenced by the quotes from various schools in the story, they don't want to have to choose between better competition and academic emphasis.  I don't think they will...yet.


If it goes down and some of the more prestigious schools have to choose, I could see the UAA, for example, doing an Ivy thing and going D1 without scholarships.  They certainly have the money for it and I couldn't see them giving up to notch athletics to enter a D4.

I think this split would be more of a split than just two divisions.  Unless there is some more explanation and structure to it, I see it as a bad thing.
Lead Columnist for D3hoops.com
@ryanalanscott just about anywhere

David Collinge

Quote from: Bill Pennington, New York TimesIf the division splits along the lines expected, Amherst would probably go with its conference members to the traditional category and would forfeit playing against the most competitive, national-level basketball programs and the spotlight that goes with it.

Well, maybe sometime in the future that might be true.  Recruiting and playoff restrictions (should they come about) might reduce the competitiveness of the "traditionalists" (to use the author's terminology.)  But as of right now, at least in basketball, I don't think there's a "haves" group and a "have-nots" group.  Looking at the current men's top 25 poll, I see about as many "traditionalists" (such as #3 Amherst, #4 Wooster, and #6 Wittenberg) as "non-traditionalists" like Stevens Point. 

The author treats the possibility of a D3 split as a foregone conclusion, despite comments such as these from Lisa Melendy, acting AD at Williams College:
Quote from: Bill Pennington, New York Times"When the leadership started telling us about the inevitability of a split, we all looked around and said, 'Who decided we had to split?' " Melendy said. "We like the way things are. It's a big group, but we can handle it. I like the diversity, instead of just playing the same New England or Eastern schools.  "When push comes to shove, I still think the membership won't want to split."

Maybe the surge of membership applications and the problems the NAIA and D2 seem to be having have pushed this issue, but I've had the sense that my conference (the NCAC) has been calling for a split for many years and nothing has come of it yet.  You could probably describe the formation of the NCAC in 1983 as the first act of these colleges in trying to force a divisional split, but I haven't seen much progress along these lines in the ensuing quarter-century, so I don't think a D3/D4 split is suddenly inevitable.

johnnie_esq

Quote from: David Collinge on February 13, 2007, 12:53:51 PM
Quote from: Bill Pennington, New York TimesIf the division splits along the lines expected, Amherst would probably go with its conference members to the traditional category and would forfeit playing against the most competitive, national-level basketball programs and the spotlight that goes with it.

Well, maybe sometime in the future that might be true.  Recruiting and playoff restrictions (should they come about) might reduce the competitiveness of the "traditionalists" (to use the author's terminology.)  But as of right now, at least in basketball, I don't think there's a "haves" group and a "have-nots" group.  Looking at the current men's top 25 poll, I see about as many "traditionalists" (such as #3 Amherst, #4 Wooster, and #6 Wittenberg) as "non-traditionalists" like Stevens Point. 

The author treats the possibility of a D3 split as a foregone conclusion, despite comments such as these from Lisa Melendy, acting AD at Williams College:
Quote from: Bill Pennington, New York Times“When the leadership started telling us about the inevitability of a split, we all looked around and said, ‘Who decided we had to split?’ ” Melendy said. “We like the way things are. It’s a big group, but we can handle it. I like the diversity, instead of just playing the same New England or Eastern schools.  “When push comes to shove, I still think the membership won’t want to split.”

Maybe the surge of membership applications and the problems the NAIA and D2 seem to be having have pushed this issue, but I've had the sense that my conference (the NCAC) has been calling for a split for many years and nothing has come of it yet.  You could probably describe the formation of the NCAC in 1983 as the first act of these colleges in trying to force a divisional split, but I haven't seen much progress along these lines in the ensuing quarter-century, so I don't think a D3/D4 split is suddenly inevitable.

The "haves" and "have-nots" are far more evident in football, where you have the perennials (Mount Union, St. John's, Rowan, a WIAC representative and a NWC representative) competing against the traditionalists (the MWC has won 1 playoff game since the playoffs were expanded in the late 1990s).  Is it really fair for Ripon to be playing against UW-Whitewater?  Basketball, perhaps because you need only 7-10 athletes, is at one end, as any school, no matter how small or rigorous, is theoretically able to find 2-3 athletes per year capable of playing with D3's best, whereas football, with the perceived need for 30-40 athletes, requires a much greater commitment. 

So how far apart is the division?  Probably somewhere in between the basketball and football examples, which isn't really that much of a difference.  However, in my opinion, the disturbing trend is the emphasis placed upon revenue from athletics at the D3 level.  Seeing schools obtain big corporate sponsors for athletic programs so they can produce D1-calibre gameday programs takes the emphasis off the STUDENT and encourages the celebration of the athlete.    That's where I think this discussion has legs, as some schools are actively promoting the student-ATHLETE and some are promoting the STUDENT-athlete, so on gameday the playing field is inherently not level.  That is a problem.  (and my alma mater should plead guilty to that).

But how do you split upon that criteria?  Those with Target or Wal-Mart as your sponsor go to the Blue tier; those with ShopKo or Joe's Supply go to the Red tier?
SJU Champions 2003 NCAA D3, 1976 NCAA D3, 1965 NAIA, 1963 NAIA; SJU 2nd Place 2000 NCAA D3; SJU MIAC Champions 2018, 2014, 2009, 2008, 2006, 2005, 2003, 2002, 2001, 1999, 1998, 1996, 1995, 1994, 1993, 1991, 1989, 1985, 1982, 1979, 1977, 1976, 1975, 1974, 1971, 1965, 1963, 1962, 1953, 1938, 1936, 1935, 1932

Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)



They should just let the "power" schools play in D1-AAA.  It would improve visibility for this invisible division and provide the athletic competition these schools are looking for.


It really does seem like its more of a football problem than a d3 problem at this point.
Lead Columnist for D3hoops.com
@ryanalanscott just about anywhere

johnnie_esq

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 13, 2007, 01:29:21 PM


They should just let the "power" schools play in D1-AAA.  It would improve visibility for this invisible division and provide the athletic competition these schools are looking for.


It really does seem like its more of a football problem than a d3 problem at this point.

I don't think it's the worst idea, but D1-AAA is, I think, a subdivision for D1 schools that don't have football (think Big East basketball teams like St. John's, Providence, et al.), so it may not be the best fit in terms of philosophies even with D3 "progressives" (I cannot see UW-Stevens Point enjoying competition with Providence College, as they are really different from a focus standpoint). 

It is a football problem, but it is an all-division football problem, much of which relates to D2's football members, who have higher costs than D3 (scholarships) and comparable revenue (larger student bodies than D3 (tongue-in-cheek pun intended), less alumni support generally).  This forces these schools to look to D1 or up to D3 to make the economics work, thus shrinking the division as well, not to mention making it less desirable for entry as NAIA schools.

Football was the reason for the NCAA, though the irony is that the NCAA gets relatively little from D1 football.  Given the concerns with the BCS and too many "Bowl Division" schools,  if the NCAA is smart they will look all-division to fix the football issue and stop the piecemeal division only approach. 
SJU Champions 2003 NCAA D3, 1976 NCAA D3, 1965 NAIA, 1963 NAIA; SJU 2nd Place 2000 NCAA D3; SJU MIAC Champions 2018, 2014, 2009, 2008, 2006, 2005, 2003, 2002, 2001, 1999, 1998, 1996, 1995, 1994, 1993, 1991, 1989, 1985, 1982, 1979, 1977, 1976, 1975, 1974, 1971, 1965, 1963, 1962, 1953, 1938, 1936, 1935, 1932

Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)


So, do you all think it's fair to say that without football, we wouldn't even be having this split conversation?
Lead Columnist for D3hoops.com
@ryanalanscott just about anywhere

johnnie_esq

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 13, 2007, 03:00:46 PM

So, do you all think it's fair to say that without football, we wouldn't even be having this split conversation?

I don't know if it would be as marked as it is.  WIAC schools have won the  D3 Cross Country championship 3 of the past five years, and finished 2nd and 3rd when they didn't win, and have been fairly dominant in track and field as well (both M & W), and you regularly see public schools at the top of baseball and volleyball, even though they make up around 20% of the D3.  That being said, I think the numbers advantage is key, and while the WIAC limits roster size to 100, it levels the playing field at least to keep them on the same field with the perennials. 

(*Note-- not trying to single out my neighbors to the East, but they're some of the bigger schools in D3 and thus easier to pick on)
SJU Champions 2003 NCAA D3, 1976 NCAA D3, 1965 NAIA, 1963 NAIA; SJU 2nd Place 2000 NCAA D3; SJU MIAC Champions 2018, 2014, 2009, 2008, 2006, 2005, 2003, 2002, 2001, 1999, 1998, 1996, 1995, 1994, 1993, 1991, 1989, 1985, 1982, 1979, 1977, 1976, 1975, 1974, 1971, 1965, 1963, 1962, 1953, 1938, 1936, 1935, 1932

Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)


But isn't the public-private thing more a product of differing tuition prices, not athletic vs academic priority?
Lead Columnist for D3hoops.com
@ryanalanscott just about anywhere

Ralph Turner

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 13, 2007, 04:01:59 PM

But isn't the public-private thing more a product of differing tuition prices, not athletic vs academic priority?

And mission and vision, and access to cash and funding...

The article quotes new ASC Commissioner Amy Carleton who has a broad  constellation of institutions:

UT-Dallas--historically the upper-level research institution for Texas Instruments, Dallas Semi-Conductor,  and lots of companies on the Silicon Prairie.  UTD may be the most academically restrictive in the conference.  UTD was the World Collegiate Chess Champion in 2005 (Yes, Chess Scholarships are given.  ;) )  (No Football)

UT-Tyler--formerly an upper-level institution, now admitting freshmen and sophomores.  Has great access to state and private funding for facilities in the athletically gifted east Texas area.

Quote...it is no exaggeration to say that UT Tyler has the finest athletics facilities in East Texas and possibly in all of NCAA Division III.  --UT-Tyler website

UT_Tyler will be a tuition challenger to the private schools in the area (ETBU, LeTU) plus NAIA schools Wiley, Jarvis Christian, Texas College.  The  elephant-in-the-room is to wonder if UT-Tyler is not more comparable to the D2's (TAMU-Commerce, Southeast Okie State and Southern Arkansas) or the D1-AA's Stephen F Austin and Sam Houston State.  (No Football.)

Sul Ross State has been a charter member of the ASC (1996) and a charter member of the old Texas Intercollegiate Athletic Association, TIAA, (with Trinity TX, Austin College, now D2 Tarleton State, and McMurry in 1976).  Geographically isolated, but has always been a supportive member.

Twelve private schools and all but 2 are on the US News Top Tier for comprehensive colleges or Regional Masters Universities.

She understands what all of these institutions are vying for and they have selected D3 as their academic/athletic model.

As for the WIAC, they were a power in the NAIA in the 1970's when they were men-only in the WSUC, Wisconsin State University Conference. 

This will be interesting...

oldknight

Quote from: johnnie_esq on February 13, 2007, 03:42:04 PM
  WIAC schools have won the  D3 Cross Country championship 3 of the past five years, and finished 2nd and 3rd when they didn't win, and have been fairly dominant in track and field as well

It's three of the last six now (on the men's side). Calvin won last fall and has won in 2003, 2004 and 2006 (Calvin also won in 2000). A Wisconsin school won in 2001, 2002 and 2005. But your overall point is correct--WIAC schools are very strong in cross and track.

Ralph Turner

Wanna change some of the economics of football?

Change the rules back to one-platoon (limited substitution) ball of the 1950's or the 1930's.

But that knocks out about 70 paying student athletes from the bottom line!  :o

Ralph Turner

The president of Franklin and Marshall laments that the tent has been stretched too far.

What happened?  Too much uncontrolled diversity?  Look at all of these new schools in D3.  A lot of them don't even have Phi Beta Kappa Chapters!   :D