D3 means zero discrimination without professonalization

Started by PaulNewman, September 07, 2018, 12:52:50 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

PaulNewman

OK....moved it.

The sad thing is I doubt anyone really disagrees much.  And I would guess that most will agree that the NCAA has within its oversight a couple or more contradictions.

To attempt one last angle....For me there is a difference from the 45 year old student who already was in the student body and wants to try out for kicking field goals versus active recruitment of a 45 (or 35 or 19) year old from Brazil (or North Dakota) specifically just to kick field goals. 

I can't speak for other D3 sports, but I imagine that a President or two might have some reservations about how serious ("professionalized"?) D3 soccer has become with D3 soccer recruiting having become quite serious and competitive.  I know I have often wondered about a possible inherent contradiction between the so-called missions of the NESCAC schools and NESCAC athletics (and the tension is seen in the ways NESCAC schools have attempted to straddle the fence and be different with limited games, no spring season, etc, etc....and even so I think Williams still wins that overall Cup thing almost every year).  I hear the tuba/cello player argument coming, but are there really "tips" for celloists?  Isn't part of the truth that colleges tolerate and/or embrace athletics and even devote resources/energy to having success because of what that does for the overall image and marketability of the institutions?

I think one can at least raise the issue about whether D3 schools have created any pipelines or are engaged in trends that are at least a bit inconsistent with at least the spirit of D3.

Mr.Right

The issue is with the College Presidents in D3. Frankly, D3 College Presidents for the most part could give 2 sh*ts about athletics until they start to interfere with academics. It has been like this for years and yes of course there is the exception here and there that will impose themselves onto their athletic teams and become the ultra fan but it is very rare. I will guess that because the Presidents do not care much about athletics that would be why this topic of age and international student participation in athletics does not come up in their meetings. Also, probably because it is a pretty rare occurrence. However, if a school like North Park were to keep pushing the issue and every couple of years we start to see 1 or 2 more starters becoming 25 year old married Swedish men than we could have our opening to get this topic on the Presidents agenda. I am guessing as it stands now that if you were to present this issue to current Presidents and poll them maybe more than 2/3 wouldn't care and 1/3 would ask what you were doing in their office. However, like business and politics if you were to get the elite academic institutions and their Presidents behind my 20 year old age limit plus their most powerful and influential donors to each school I am guessing we could pass this thing for 2020. Power and money talk even in D3 athletics so if you were to get the presidents of Williams. Amherst, Swat, Hopkins, MIT, etc, etc together and show them that this is completely against the mission and spirit of D3 athletics and were to show them the negatives of having these older men playing against College aged kids(I would show them in slow motion the UMASS Boston 27year old man that headbutted a referee 2 years ago as my first example) they could be swayed quite easily IMO. If the Presidents of the Top Elite schools in D3 were to all go along with this they would easily force the rest of the D3 Presidents to either comply or get out. So they would say listen North Park you have a fine little school and we encourage you if you need 30 year old married Swedish men to stay in business because they will pay full tuition then by all means have as many as you want matriculate BUT for them to play D3 athletics they must be 20 years old as a Frosh.

Pat Coleman

What do you propose to do with the U.S. citizen who spent a couple years serving his country and then comes to college? That happens far more often in Division III than this narrow slice you're looking to legislate.
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.

Pat Coleman

Also, I know you are based in New England but the majority of Division III is not particularly swayed by the NESCAC and Swarthmore and Haverford -- the fact that we have football playoffs and compete in them is a good indication of that. :)
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.

PaulNewman

Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2018, 02:59:13 PM
What do you propose to do with the U.S. citizen who spent a couple years serving his country and then comes to college? That happens far more often in Division III than this narrow slice you're looking to legislate.

I'm not necessarily agreeing to any age limit or international limit, but a quick answer to your question would be US Veterans always getting a waiver.  That's an easy one.

Pat Coleman

Just trying to show Mr. Right that a blanket ban is really poorly thought-out and not likely to succeed, despite his confidence.
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.

Mr.Right

Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2018, 03:01:24 PM
Also, I know you are based in New England but the majority of Division III is not particularly swayed by the NESCAC and Swarthmore and Haverford -- the fact that we have football playoffs and compete in them is a good indication of that. :)

I would be willing to bet the majority of D3 would be swayed by the Top 30-50 Academic Elite schools in the country. Not only New England...Nescac, UAA's like Chicago, CMU etc...Swat, Hopkins, Haverford in Mid-Atlantic...Emory down South..Pomona/Claremont McKenna out West..Carleton/Kenyon/Grinnell...These schools combined with about 10 others would HAVE SIGNIFICANT sway over the rest of D3. You think D3 Presidents really care about Football Playoffs besides Mount Union and a bunch of weak academically midwest schools some like the Wisconsin state schools with 10,000 undergrads that probably should not even be in D3. If the Presidents are not swayed by the Top Academic Schools in D3 what exactly do you think they are swayed by? Trust me if the money/power/major donors got behind the idea the rest of D3 would have their hands tied.

Mr.Right

Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2018, 03:33:21 PM
Just trying to show Mr. Right that a blanket ban is really poorly thought-out and not likely to succeed, despite his confidence.

It is not a blanket ban...I would call it common sense legislating

Pat Coleman

Quote from: Mr.Right on September 07, 2018, 04:17:07 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2018, 03:01:24 PM
Also, I know you are based in New England but the majority of Division III is not particularly swayed by the NESCAC and Swarthmore and Haverford -- the fact that we have football playoffs and compete in them is a good indication of that. :)

I would be willing to bet the majority of D3 would be swayed by the Top 30-50 Academic Elite schools in the country. Not only New England...Nescac, UAA's like Chicago, CMU etc...Swat, Hopkins, Haverford in Mid-Atlantic...Emory down South..Pomona/Claremont McKenna out West..Carleton/Kenyon/Grinnell...These schools combined with about 10 others would HAVE SIGNIFICANT sway over the rest of D3. You think D3 Presidents really care about Football Playoffs besides Mount Union and a bunch of weak academically midwest schools some like the Wisconsin state schools with 10,000 undergrads that probably should not even be in D3. If the Presidents are not swayed by the Top Academic Schools in D3 what exactly do you think they are swayed by? Trust me if the money/power/major donors got behind the idea the rest of D3 would have their hands tied.

I don't think you really have a lot of experience in how the D-III politics works, based on this, no. It's not just a matter of naming the schools at the top of the U.S. News & World Report rankings.
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.

Mr.Right

Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2018, 04:44:04 PM
Quote from: Mr.Right on September 07, 2018, 04:17:07 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2018, 03:01:24 PM
Also, I know you are based in New England but the majority of Division III is not particularly swayed by the NESCAC and Swarthmore and Haverford -- the fact that we have football playoffs and compete in them is a good indication of that. :)

I would be willing to bet the majority of D3 would be swayed by the Top 30-50 Academic Elite schools in the country. Not only New England...Nescac, UAA's like Chicago, CMU etc...Swat, Hopkins, Haverford in Mid-Atlantic...Emory down South..Pomona/Claremont McKenna out West..Carleton/Kenyon/Grinnell...These schools combined with about 10 others would HAVE SIGNIFICANT sway over the rest of D3. You think D3 Presidents really care about Football Playoffs besides Mount Union and a bunch of weak academically midwest schools some like the Wisconsin state schools with 10,000 undergrads that probably should not even be in D3. If the Presidents are not swayed by the Top Academic Schools in D3 what exactly do you think they are swayed by? Trust me if the money/power/major donors got behind the idea the rest of D3 would have their hands tied.

I don't think you really have a lot of experience in how the D-III politics works, based on this, no. It's not just a matter of naming the schools at the top of the U.S. News & World Report rankings.


Please do share your experience on how D3 Presidents are swayed? Also, if you do not think the top academic schools in D3 have the money/ power and sway you my friend are the naive one on this issue..

Pat Coleman

They certainly have money and they definitely have some sway, but you make it sound like it's those 20 schools who drive the decision-making, and it's really not anywhere near that simple.

I've seen you badger people into submission on soccer stuff, and I don't have the soccer expertise to say whether you are always right, but you're either simplifying this way beyond reality or you are just making assumptions on how things work. Sometimes sponsorship of legislation is driven by the management council, and sometimes by the presidents council, and that's their right, but sponsorship of legislation also comes from conferences, or from schools.

Here's the proposed legislation from the 2018 convention:
http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/2018DIII_proposal-summaryReport_20171201.pdf

Here's 2017:
http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/2017DIII_Legislative_Proposals_Chart20161114.pdf

And 2016:
http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/2016_DIII_Proposal_Chart.pdf

You can see in those documents who proposes legislation most often, for example. But often, the most influential group in recent years has actually been the SAAC.
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.


Dave 'd-mac' McHugh

Having been very close to how legislation and stuff works in the NCAA, especially at DIII, the top "ranked" schools don't have nearly as much pull as you may believe. Pat's points are dead on accurate. I am actually more surprised that NESCAC schools have LESS to say than most others. Also, Swarthmore and Haverford tend to be at odds over stuff their own conference brings up.

The entitreity of Division III has a say and no one has more than a single vote. The top 50 schools, let's say, can't out vote the other nearly 400. Nor do presidents look up to those schools with some kind of reverence as presidents come from all walks of life and all kinds of schools. They may appreciate those institutions, but as Pat point out ... if the NESCAC had as much power as everyone thinks they do ... why are their post season tournaments in Division III?

As for the point about presidents don't care about athletics until it impacts academics ... while I will never say there aren't presidents who don't know how to find the athletic departments on their own campuses (my alma mater being one of them for many years) ... there are also a LOT of presidents who know just how important athletics are for their own campuses. There are at least 200 who have football programs who know that the team helps pay a lot of bills. There are even more with lacrosse programs who realize the same thing. Presidents may show their interest in athletics in different ways, and again some may not care, but I'd argue from my experience and conversations a vast majority care a lot about the departments and students involved.
Host of Hoopsville. USBWA Executive Board member. Broadcast Director for D3sports.com. Broadcaster for NCAA.com & several colleges. PA Announcer for Gophers & Brigade. Follow me on Twitter: @davemchugh or @d3hoopsville.

PaulNewman

Well, I see Mr. Sager has thrown out another little missive.   I'll respond on this thread so as not to interfere with the CCIW thread.

Nothing escalates things more than someone who is sure he has superior knowledge and thinking skills insisting on his points in response to another person of similar confidence.  And the snark rachets up in correlation.

I never claimed there would be full teams or even majority teams of 25 year olds.  So please, make another argument.  A lot of sloppy reading comprehension and selective parsing.  I ACTUALLY endorsed the idea being presented on an INDIVIDUAL basis, and so if that is all that is being claimed as in the letter and spirit of D3, then end of discussion for me.  My objection is that the argument as presented had to by definition allow for endorsing a majority older team, because the policy as defended was presented as not an oversight or just something of too minimal interest to care about, but rather as a very INTENTIONAL policy matter, and indeed one that is fueled by the very spirit and philosophy of D3 in terms of embracing amateurism and inclusion for all.  I don't know how many times I have to say I never objected to the idea of an individual or two....but the argument presented breaks down -- if the argument is supposed to represent something that is a reflection of D3 instead of an idiosyncratic policy gap -- when we start talking about anything that smacks not of a student body which provides access to all activities regardless or age or anything else but instead an actual, intentional pattern, trend, strategy (whatever you want to call it) of a trend or pipeline-building.  Then we could start talking about recruits from wherever who are coming almost exclusively so that they can play soccer versus the regular students on the student body who can't walk-on because of the slots awarded to these essentially hired guns.  Instead of inverting the real intent of  these policies to suggest that they actually encourage outlier recruiting let's talk about what the policies truly intend.

BTW, there is no age limit in D1 either....just a certain number of years beyond high school to play.  Here's an interesting little thing I found with one glance below....I'm sure there are many others.

https://theithacan.org/columns/ncaa-age-rule-hurts-younger-college-athletes/


Gregory Sager

Quote from: Mr.Right on September 07, 2018, 01:16:41 PMHowever, if a school like North Park were to keep pushing the issue and every couple of years we start to see 1 or 2 more starters becoming 25 year old married Swedish men than we could have our opening to get this topic on the Presidents agenda.[snip] So they would say listen North Park you have a fine little school and we encourage you if you need 30 year old married Swedish men to stay in business because they will pay full tuition then by all means have as many as you want matriculate BUT for them to play D3 athletics they must be 20 years old as a Frosh.

These are ridiculous exaggerations.

Quote from: Mr.Right on September 07, 2018, 04:53:00 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2018, 04:44:04 PM
Quote from: Mr.Right on September 07, 2018, 04:17:07 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2018, 03:01:24 PM
Also, I know you are based in New England but the majority of Division III is not particularly swayed by the NESCAC and Swarthmore and Haverford -- the fact that we have football playoffs and compete in them is a good indication of that. :)

I would be willing to bet the majority of D3 would be swayed by the Top 30-50 Academic Elite schools in the country. Not only New England...Nescac, UAA's like Chicago, CMU etc...Swat, Hopkins, Haverford in Mid-Atlantic...Emory down South..Pomona/Claremont McKenna out West..Carleton/Kenyon/Grinnell...These schools combined with about 10 others would HAVE SIGNIFICANT sway over the rest of D3. You think D3 Presidents really care about Football Playoffs besides Mount Union and a bunch of weak academically midwest schools some like the Wisconsin state schools with 10,000 undergrads that probably should not even be in D3. If the Presidents are not swayed by the Top Academic Schools in D3 what exactly do you think they are swayed by? Trust me if the money/power/major donors got behind the idea the rest of D3 would have their hands tied.

I don't think you really have a lot of experience in how the D-III politics works, based on this, no. It's not just a matter of naming the schools at the top of the U.S. News & World Report rankings.


Please do share your experience on how D3 Presidents are swayed? Also, if you do not think the top academic schools in D3 have the money/ power and sway you my friend are the naive one on this issue..

Pat is right. Case in point: The D4 proposal of a few years ago. It was pretty much the academically elite schools that you mentioned that wanted to split D3 into two new divisions. The rest of the membership shot it down.

Pat's been running this website for a quarter-century now. He's literally made it his business to know how this division operates, including the byzantine minutiae behind the scenes. And Dave, likewise, has spent an awful lot of time over the years conversing with coaches, athletic directors, presidents, etc., as part of his duties in running Hoopsville. When it comes to knowing what goes on at D3 conventions and who gets listened to and who doesn't, I'm gonna go with what they're reporting.
"To see what is in front of one's nose is a constant struggle." -- George Orwell