Are the Purple Powers bad for D3?

[bleedpurple]

Thanks to everyone who has posted so far. Some of these ideas were exactly what I was looking for when starting the thread. I appreciate the reasoned thoughts of everyone on both sides of the issue. 

It seems to me, more "rules" attempting to level the playing field would reduce the quality of football, but would increase parity (that's if the "rules" were even effective in what they tried to accomplish).

In a sense, the purple powers aren't alone in creating the disparity. The "gap" in D3 football is also widened by schools who are given a wide open opportunity and choose a comparatively minimal level of commitment to the football program.  I'm not saying this is bad, because as someone noted, the university is not an NFL franchise and has far broader goals. However, when schools choose to keep status-quo as opposed to growing/strengthening their program, it may actually be a sign of a healthy "system" (D3 football) for them to fall further behind others with a stronger commitment.

 And certainly whatever schools choose a comparatively minimal commitment to football (again, not inherently a "bad thing"), really have no business aspiring to a national championship anyway.  D3 football is still made up of highly competitive athletes and coaches. It is legitimate, competitive college football. I think any effort to "level the playing field" by somehow restricting the commitment levels in some ways would serve to de-legitmize D3 in people's eyes, not increase interest.  (I realize no one has really advocated any rules changes to level the playing field, but rather noted their belief that the field is not level). 

[smedindy]

We see the disparity in the NCAC.

Teams like Wabash, Witt and others put a big effort into football - making sure they get plenty of freshmen who want to play football and are qualified to succeed at their institutions. Some schools, like Kenyon are not making an effort in football recruiting and it shows.

But conferences and D-3 are more than just football, a fact lost upon many of the D-1 programs and conferences. I pity the Boise State athletes now in the 'Big East' with the travel and the study interruptions.

[wesleydad]

great points and discussion.  there are plenty of really smart people on here.  glad i get to read your posts.

[AO]

We see the disparity in the NCAC.

Teams like Wabash, Witt and others put a big effort into football - making sure they get plenty of freshmen who want to play football and are qualified to succeed at their institutions. Some schools, like Kenyon are not making an effort in football recruiting and it shows.

But conferences and D-3 are more than just football, a fact lost upon many of the D-1 programs and conferences. I pity the Boise State athletes now in the 'Big East' with the travel and the study interruptions.

Yes, i'm sure the Boise athletes are just devastated, Imagine that you're 19 years old and you're forced to take time off of class to take trips to San Diego, Houston and Florida.  No one is going to want to play for Boise now.

[frank uible]

The college education of a Boise State football player will increasingly suffer relative to the college education of a football player from another college which travels significantly less than Boise State..

[Jonny "Utes" Utah]

The college education of a Boise State football player will increasingly suffer relative to the college education of a football player from another college which travels significantly less than Boise State..

These d1 teams have tutors that go with the teams on all these trips.  If a student is serious enough to go to the library for 10 hours a week instead of going to campus parties or watching TV in their dormrooms for those 10 hours, that same student can spend that time studying on football trips as well. 

There are just as many distractions on campus than there is on the road.

[NCF]

The college education of a Boise State football player will increasingly suffer relative to the college education of a football player from another college which travels significantly less than Boise State..

These d1 teams have tutors that go with the teams on all these trips.  If a student is serious enough to go to the library for 10 hours a week instead of going to campus parties or watching TV in their dormrooms for those 10 hours, that same student can spend that time studying on football trips as well. 

There are just as many distractions on campus than there is on the road.

And the students who take advantage of the studying on the road are the same ones who would study if they were on campus. The students who don't study much on campus will do even less on the road. I know firsthand from former D1 athletes about  how much "studying" goes on during the season. I'm not saying all schools and all athletes because this issue is different at different schools. It takes a special student-athlete to combine both and we all know that for many in D1 premier sports, school is not the main goal, just a stop before the NFL or NBA. Which brings up a whole new thread as this one is taking a turn from the original premise.

[frank uible]

Two points: 1) An on-the-road tutor is not nearly a substitute for what is missed in class; 2) The vast majority of DI players never make a career out of playing professional athletics.

[smedindy]

Yes, we've veered into a sidebar but the original point is this:

It's not the D-3 way to make exceptions or exclusions in any sport because of dominance. D-3 is more than a sport - it's about the entire athletics program fitting into the D-3 ethos. Yes, we like to complain about dominance by some teams, complain about some conferences not electing to go to the football playoffs, wonder why some teams even support a certain sport when they clearly don't have it in their heart to be competitive. But that's not the true point of D-3.

D-3 swimming didn't die because Kenyon won all of those championships. D-3 football won't be hurt by this long run by the purples.

[NCF]

Two points: 1) An on-the-road tutor is not nearly a substitute for what is missed in class; 2) The vast majority of DI players never make a career out of playing professional athletics.

Amen! And 3) so many scholarships are wasted on undeserving students just because they are gifted athletes. It is a slap in the face to those who not only busted their a$#@ on the field, but also took the high road in the classroom. 4) the shame of seeing so many D1 scholarship athletes who had been given a golden opportunity get dismissed from their teams for academic or legal issues. Sorry, will get off the soapbox now.

[AO]

Two points: 1) An on-the-road tutor is not nearly a substitute for what is missed in class; 2) The vast majority of DI players never make a career out of playing professional athletics.

Amen! And 3) so many scholarships are wasted on undeserving students just because they are gifted athletes. It is a slap in the face to those who not only busted their a$#@ on the field, but also took the high road in the classroom. 4) the shame of seeing so many D1 scholarship athletes who had been given a golden opportunity get dismissed from their teams for academic or legal issues. Sorry, will get off the soapbox now.

You don't have to take shots at D1 to be proud of D3.  D3 has plenty of poor students among its ranks.  D1 College football is the NFL's minor league.  I see nothing wrong with paying gifted athletes (though poorly in the form of scholarship, room and board), because I routinely pay to see them play, they earn it, and if they want to squander their opportunity at an education, it's up to them.  They're not taking anybody's spot, joe schmo bad athlete but good student just might not be worth the scholarship you want to give him.

[NCF]

Two points: 1) An on-the-road tutor is not nearly a substitute for what is missed in class; 2) The vast majority of DI players never make a career out of playing professional athletics.

Amen! And 3) so many scholarships are wasted on undeserving students just because they are gifted athletes. It is a slap in the face to those who not only busted their a$#@ on the field, but also took the high road in the classroom. 4) the shame of seeing so many D1 scholarship athletes who had been given a golden opportunity get dismissed from their teams for academic or legal issues. Sorry, will get off the soapbox now.

You don't have to take shots at D1 to be proud of D3.  D3 has plenty of poor students among its ranks.  D1 College football is the NFL's minor league.  I see nothing wrong with paying gifted athletes (though poorly in the form of scholarship, room and board), because I routinely pay to see them play, they earn it, and if they want to squander their opportunity at an education, it's up to them.  They're not taking anybody's spot, joe schmo bad athlete but good student just might not be worth the scholarship you want to give him.

I'm not taking shots, just read the papers. And there are plenty of D3 athletes that are not college ready either and don't belong there. There are also plenty of "joe schmo's" who are both and since we call college students "student-athletes" they better d$#m well be students first, otherwise stop giving them money for something they are not qualified to be doing. I would also say stop giving undeserving "student-athletes" in any division money, in any form ,if they are not able to handle college level work. And until you see joe schmo in action, don't take a shot at him either.  I think many people think college sports in general have gotten way out of hand in regard to this issue and don't know how to fix the problem anymore.

[Jonny "Utes" Utah]

Two points: 1) An on-the-road tutor is not nearly a substitute for what is missed in class; 2) The vast majority of DI players never make a career out of playing professional athletics.

Oh I think these tutors are better than what is missed in class in many cases.  These tudors and TAs often will go above and beyond what goes on in the classroom.  Of course it is always up to the student to get the most of these opportunities, but d1 atletes anyway have more academic resources than the average student has in many cases.

I'm also basing a lot of this on what I know goes on at Boston College, which probably does more than your average d1 school does in terms of athletets and academics.

[altor]

I must be one of the few sports fans who liked the old Division I system where, at the end of the season, conferences were locked into bowl games, pollsters decided who was the #1 team in the country and everyone else argued about it and complained about what a shame it was that there wasn't a tournament to settle it on the field.

I'm a fan of going back to JBOB (Just a Bunch of Bowls) in D-I.  It's not going to happen, but one can dream.

People put too much emphasis on National Championships any more.  This is true in most sports, but especially in football.  The focus should be on winning your conference.  Supposedly, the other institutions in your conference are "like-minded."  If you defeat all of them, doesn't that say enough about your ability?  Who cares if you can't defeat schools that have ten times the student population of your school?  Does it really matter that the schools that can beat you have admissions standards that would make the University of Phoenix turn their head in disgust?  You beat the schools whom you can most relate to, and that says something.

[AO]

I must be one of the few sports fans who liked the old Division I system where, at the end of the season, conferences were locked into bowl games, pollsters decided who was the #1 team in the country and everyone else argued about it and complained about what a shame it was that there wasn't a tournament to settle it on the field.

I'm a fan of going back to JBOB (Just a Bunch of Bowls) in D-I.  It's not going to happen, but one can dream.

People put too much emphasis on National Championships any more.  This is true in most sports, but especially in football.  The focus should be on winning your conference.  Supposedly, the other institutions in your conference are "like-minded."  If you defeat all of them, doesn't that say enough about your ability?  Who cares if you can't defeat schools that have ten times the student population of your school?  Does it really matter that the schools that can beat you have admissions standards that would make the University of Phoenix turn their head in disgust?  You beat the schools whom you can most relate to, and that says something.

So if you can't beat 'em, don't play em?  Smarter doesn't have to mean less athletic or skilled.