http://bit.ly/iiyr6p [Log Cabin Democrat]
Timothy Cloyd, Hendrix president, and his colleagues at Rhodes College, Centre College, Millsaps College, Birmingham Southern, Oglethorpe and Sewanee/University of the South will submit an official letter of resignation today at the annual SCAC meetings in Atlantic, effective by the end of the 2011-12 athletic season. Berry College of Rome, Ga., a new member of NCAA Division III (non-scholarship for athletics), will join the seven departing SCAC teams in the new league.
And Hendrix is starting FB.
D3Sports.com's take: http://bit.ly/leCs2v (http://bit.ly/leCs2v)
SCAC formal announcement: http://www.scacsports.com/news/major_changes_scac
...
The remaining five members of the SCAC, Austin College, Colorado College, University of Dallas, Southwestern University and Trinity University, have already been approached by potential new members, and have established a long-range goal of creating an eight to 10 member conference. The SCAC name, its history as well as key NCAA conference designations like automatic qualifications for its champions, shall be retained by these institutions.
...
Dwayne Hanberry, significantly, has opted to remain with the SCAC rather than follow the schools leaving the conference.
I'm dying to know: a) which schools have approached the SCAC about filling the vacancies; b) which schools in that part of the country the remaining five members view as academic and missional peers and, therefore, potential SCAC invitees; and c) if the Venn diagram of a) and b) involves any overlap between the two circles.
After all, it's not as though Dallas, Austin, Colorado C., Trinity TX, and Southwestern are going to accept any old Tom, Dick, or Harry U. who applies for SCAC membership, right?
Quote from: Gregory Sager on June 07, 2011, 04:47:06 PM
I'm dying to know: a) which schools have approached the SCAC about filling the vacancies; b) which schools in that part of the country the remaining five members view as academic and missional peers and, therefore, potential SCAC invitees; and c) if the Venn diagram of a) and b) involves any overlap between the two circles.
After all, it's not as though Dallas, Austin, Colorado C., Trinity TX, and Southwestern are going to accept any old Tom, Dick, or Harry U. who applies for SCAC membership, right?
Centenary will be invited, even as a provisional.
Texas Lutheran and Concordia TX are my first 2 choices "proverbially to bring up the rear".
I think that those schools are the most compatible private schools on the mission-vision thing. LeTourneau might be 3rd.
Yep, those are the three that have been mentioned over on the SCAC boards.
Some are throwing Huntingdon around as a possibility, but I really can't see the SCAC repeating the same mistake - if that indeed was truly the cause of the breakup - that got them into the current situation. One school WAY out by itself in the east isn't going to solve any problems, and is there really any way the SCAC will get back to seven football-playing teams? That to my mind is the only reason you bring the Hawks into the equation. With the schools mentioned here, you still don't have critical football mass:
Austin - Trinity - Texas Lutheran - ??Centenary?? - ??? Colorado College ???
Lack of a football AQ might cause TLU to think twice. They already play Trinity a bunch given their proximity.
The ironic thing about football is that the CAC - that's what I'm calling the guys breaking away, since most of them came from the CAC before it was renamed the SCAC - anyway, they'll need another football team themselves to get a pool A bid. They may end up having to affiliate with either Austin, Huntingdon, or Trinity - three schools they obviously just scorned - in order to do that.
The Log Cabin article above has been updated, and two of the comments are 'thank goodness we are leaving Trinity behind since we can't beat them.' Sigh.
The Log Cabin article is still short an "I" in the first paragraph.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on June 07, 2011, 07:03:28 PM
Yep, those are the three that have been mentioned over on the SCAC boards.
Some are throwing Huntingdon around as a possibility, but I really can't see the SCAC repeating the same mistake - if that indeed was truly the cause of the breakup - that got them into the current situation. One school WAY out by itself in the east isn't going to solve any problems, and is there really any way the SCAC will get back to seven football-playing teams? That to my mind is the only reason you bring the Hawks into the equation. With the schools mentioned here, you still don't have critical football mass:
Austin - Trinity - Texas Lutheran - ??Centenary?? - ??? Colorado College ???
Lack of a football AQ might cause TLU to think twice. They already play Trinity a bunch given their proximity.
The ironic thing about football is that the CAC - that's what I'm calling the guys breaking away, since most of them came from the CAC before it was renamed the SCAC - anyway, they'll need another football team themselves to get a pool A bid. They may end up having to affiliate with either Austin, Huntingdon, or Trinity - three schools they obviously just scorned - in order to do that.
The Log Cabin article above has been updated, and two of the comments are 'thank goodness we are leaving Trinity behind since we can't beat them.' Sigh.
Geographically, I think that Hendrix is more isolated than Huntingdon. Huntingdon is 3 hours southwest of Oglethorpe, and easy 5 hours east of Millsaps, 2 hours south of BSC and inside the 500-mile radius from Centre at 477 miles. Oglethorpe to Hendrix is 555 miles. (McMurry to Mississippi College is only 577 miles.)
How badly do those "CAC" schools want a football, (and possibly a men's lacrosse, AQ), versus competing against Wesley, Trinity and the UAA for a football Pool B bid?
I'd go with the new scac offering texas lutheran and centenary off the bat, which is a nice base of 7 assuming both accept. Than maybe call mcMurry to see if they would reconsider the d2 move. I would also look at some naia school's in oklahoma, ie ok city U to see if they would think about d3, same thing with maybe some Nebraska naia school's + neb w. If a couple were willing to move, than it might work out.
If they go with CAC, we're going to have to go with COAC since there already is a CAC. :)
For the remaining SCAC football members, McMurry's departure brings the ASC down to 8-football playing teams.
There is room for 2 football affiliates in the ASC. ;)
Either that or affiliate with NewConf for football. It would be an awful travel schedule, but if you did not like playing UMHB or HSU before, the travel back east might not be that bad.
On the other hand, one Texas trip for each NewConf football member might not be that bad for the sake of the AQ. Either go to Texas or affiliate with Huntingdon.
Head to head in Pool B with the likes of the UAA, Huntingdon and Wesley, it might be tough earning a bid. I am only counting on 1 Pool B bid for several years into the future.
The travel if the "CAC" affiliates with TU/Austin would only be one Texas trip per CAC team every other year, unless they took both. As far as AC or Trinity go, it's the same football travel they do now (plus a game to Hendrix, but that replaces the old CC trip), so no sweat on their end. The question is do you dance with the devil that caused this heartburn in the first place?
I don't know if affiliating with a conference where you're not going to be competitive, for the sake of a pool A bid you won't get, achieves much. There is no doubt that UMHB, HSU, and some other ASC teams are on a different plane than either TU or AC, and there's nothing in the trend of the last five years to say that's going to change any time soon. :'(
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 08, 2011, 12:06:55 AM
Head to head in Pool B with the likes of the UAA, Huntingdon and Wesley, it might be tough earning a bid. I am only counting on 1 Pool B bid for several years into the future.
Makes me wonder if there isn't some discussion going on to try to convince one or more of the ODAC schools to switch conferences. We have a history at Sewanee with both W&L and H-SC and I think that's true with many of the other schools in the new conference. I suspect the long trip to Hendrix would be a deal-breaker there. Another alternative would be poaching from the USASouth but I wouldn't think any of those schools beyond Maryville would be of interest to the new conference.
The nearby SCAC schools have consistently declined to invite Maryville into their club, even though it would make a lot of sense in many ways. Maryville is not a wealthy school and does not have a Phi Beta Kappa affiliation.
Quote from: scottiedoug on June 08, 2011, 10:02:26 AM
The nearby SCAC schools have consistently declined to invite Maryville into their club, even though it would make a lot of sense in many ways.
Would seem to make a lot of sense from a business perspective. From a financial standpoint, Maryville isn't much worse off than some of the other schools in this group. The question is how much weight are the institution's presidents assigning to the travel savings vs. academic reputation vs. a desire for an automatic bid into the football playoffs.
I could see berry college start a football program so the breakaway school's are back to 7 without any expansion but i'd guess they eventually expand to 10 in any case. What should happen in the region is covenant and huntingdon join the usa south with meredith and peace go to the great south to become an all women's conference. I'm also wondering if centenary would get a look from the breakaway school's but they probably leave them for the scac leftovers. The scac leftovers really need centenary to join and start a football program with Colorado College reviving their football program, they have the $.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on June 07, 2011, 11:11:00 PM
If they go with CAC, we're going to have to go with COAC since there already is a CAC. :)
What about New South Conference? I know at first blush it sounds generic and bland. But "New South" has been used in cultural discussion for some time.
Or (cynically) AWBTC Anywhere But Texas Conference.
Quote from: cush on June 08, 2011, 11:13:28 AM
I could see berry college start a football program so the breakaway school's are back to 7 without any expansion but i'd guess they eventually expand to 10 in any case.
A possibility that was brought up by some folks up on the Mountain was Oglethorpe restarting their football program. It becomes a lot more attractive to do so when you aren't having to worry about flying out to Texas schools. Combine that with Hendrix starting their program and the new CAC is up to 7 football schools. Sounded like some pretty wild speculation to me but it would explain why you aren't hearing a lot of talk about expansion from the schools leaving the SCAC.
Quote from: awadelewis on June 08, 2011, 09:50:43 PM
... Sounded like some pretty wild speculation to me but it would explain why you aren't hearing a lot of talk about expansion from the schools leaving the SCAC.
Well, they did just announce they were going to HAVE a conference two days ago ... with the addition of an eighth team. ;)
An interview with the Hendrix president appears in the Conway paper:
http://thecabin.net/sports/college/2011-06-08/hendrix-president-discusses-move-new-conference
I initially assumed that this discussion started getting serious when University of Dallas was invited instead of Berry, but the article suggests that the discussion started with the admission of Austin and Colorado into the conference. In retrospect, maybe the selection of University of Dallas was so that the remaining schools would be a bit closer to critical mass.
It also mentions a couple of possible membership requirements for the new conference. Coach salaries would be "in line with" professor salaries. More interestingly, each member would be required to sponsor at least 18 sports. This seems to be talking specifically about Austin, with 12 sports. (Colorado also has 12 represented in the SCAC All-Sports trophy, though you might include the two D1 teams and the two lacrosse teams to bring its total to 16.) The Hendrix president says that sponsoring fewer sports means that you can dedicate resources to gain an unfair advantage in other sports - though Austin's performance is hardly a good example of that.
Among the new conference, Oglethorpe currently sponsors 16 sports, so presumably they'd be adding two sports to reach 18. Berry seems to sponsor 18 - if you count women's equestrian even though I doubt it would be a conference sport. The other 6 seem to already be at 18.
The fewer sports sponsored by the newcomer schools is one sticking point that led to the split, according to the Hendrix president. The other is academic standards, as the Hendrix president is not shy about saying that at least one of the schools left behind in the SCAC is not up to snuff academically by the standards of the seven defectors and Berry.
Thanks for the link, arktraveler.
"The other is academic standards, as the Hendrix president is not shy about saying that at least one of the schools left behind in the SCAC is not up to snuff academically by the standards of the seven defectors and Berry."
Sounds like a shot at Trinity. The others haven't been in the league long enough or been dominant enough in any sport to exhibit any unfair advantage.
It certainly does. He might want to be more careful about all the stuff he's throwing out there ...
Trinity - which offers 18 sports, unlike some of the *other* schools he alleged have unfair advantages - is always among the conference leaders in all-academic selections even without sponsoring a sport like field hockey which by its nature tends to draw the brainy types. I believe they have had more NCAA post-graduate scholarship winners than anyone else in the conference over the years and are in the top ten of all D3 schools (per TU's web site). And, as I said on the SCAC board (and was chastised for so saying) the school that has dominated the all-SCAC standings the last half-decade has been DePauw. This year, Centre was a very close third to Trinity's second with Rhodes not far behind.
With all the aspersions Dr. Cloyd seems to be casting, Trinity managed to win all of five conference championships last season: baseball, men's/women's soccer, men's tennis, and women's swimming and diving.
Ron
That's the same argument that some of the USAC schools used to keep Wesley out and as it turned out Wesley would have had the second highest academic achievements in the conference!!!
Quote from: arktraveler on June 09, 2011, 03:51:04 PM
An interview with the Hendrix president appears in the Conway paper:
http://thecabin.net/sports/college/2011-06-08/hendrix-president-discusses-move-new-conference
I initially assumed that this discussion started getting serious when University of Dallas was invited instead of Berry, but the article suggests that the discussion started with the admission of Austin and Colorado into the conference. In retrospect, maybe the selection of University of Dallas was so that the remaining schools would be a bit closer to critical mass.
It also mentions a couple of possible membership requirements for the new conference. Coach salaries would be "in line with" professor salaries. More interestingly, each member would be required to sponsor at least 18 sports. This seems to be talking specifically about Austin, with 12 sports. (Colorado also has 12 represented in the SCAC All-Sports trophy, though you might include the two D1 teams and the two lacrosse teams to bring its total to 16.) The Hendrix president says that sponsoring fewer sports means that you can dedicate resources to gain an unfair advantage in other sports - though Austin's performance is hardly a good example of that.
Among the new conference, Oglethorpe currently sponsors 16 sports, so presumably they'd be adding two sports to reach 18. Berry seems to sponsor 18 - if you count women's equestrian even though I doubt it would be a conference sport. The other 6 seem to already be at 18.
Many of the arguments he makes seem similar to Earlhams president when the NCAC was talking about D IV a while back. Less emphasis on sports so the athelete could also participate in other parts of campus life.
Link to an article on insidehighered.com with comments from ADs from involved schools:'http://goo.gl/6PbRi
I'm not picking sides in whether Trinity and the former SCAC teams are academically similar because I don't know enough about them to say. But I think there's more to measuring academic equity than how many academic all-conference selections a school has or how many post graduate scholarships the top kids win. That measures how well the top performers do, not the performance of the student athletes at large.
When coaches complain to me about not being on an equal academic playing field, they normally cite the difference in admission standards. "School X could admit that player but we couldn't."
I checked out the admissions data at CollegeBoard.com and it shows Trinity as being well within the mainstream of teams who left the SCAC. The SAT scores are for writing and math since some schools didn't report the writing portion.
| School Acceptance rate Top 10% of HS SAT Low SAT High Act |
| Berry 64% 33% 1060 1270 23-29 |
| B-Southern 66% 31% 1050 1270 24-29 |
| Centre 74% 62% 1160 1370 26-31 |
| DePauw 57% 53% 1080 1320 24-29 |
| Hendrix 83% 53% 1180 1380 27-32 |
| Oglethorpe 67% 24% 1060 1280 23-27 |
| Rhodes 45% 53% 1180 1390 26-30 |
| Trinity 63% 55% 1170 1370 26-33 |
| Sewanee 62% 50% 1160 1360 26-30 |
| Millsaps 77% 40% 1060 1290 24-29 |
gordonmann:
Academic standards have a huge impact on recruitiing. Considering that D3 athletes can receive no athletic based financial aide, they fall into the standard aide requirements with the entire student body. That aide is academic and need based only. Athletes can be given no special treatment.
If school A has a higher academic standard than school B, the athlete will need a higher
academic standing than a recruit from school B in order to get a financial package good enough to attract the student athlete. This can create an uneven playing field when 2 different schools within a conference have uneven academic standards, and it plays out even moreso when you have , let's say, 8 teams in a conference with varying academic standards.
In SOCAL we have 9 D3 schools within a small radius. When recruiting local players, the coaches are recruiting the same players in many cases and these standards do have a big say in where average students can get a nice package from one school, and nothing from a school with higher standards.
I have seen the variance in "offers", and it can be very frustrating to a coach to lose a recruit they spent a lot of time with. The NCAA does moniter this very closely.
Gordo - thanks for the SAT/ACT details, of which I was well aware (in general) when I made my post. Your comment about 'measuring [solely] how well the top performers' rate is a decent one, but isn't it also the case that you generally don't see a lot of academic top performers hanging around where there are a bunch of non-performers?
If one looks at your stats, Berry, B-SC, Oglethorpe, and Millsaps are all about 100 points lower on SATs, significantly lower on students in top 10% of their class, etc. than the other schools. If you're going to throw around academics as an excuse for leaving a conference, you'd better have some numbers to back up the claim.
So maybe Cloyd means someone else, though from what I know of Austin, Colorado, and Southwestern don't think they have a standard lesser than any of the schools listed. I quickly looked up UDallas: 1090-1350 / 23-30.
I did think his comment were odd considering colorado college is probably the best academic school in the scac. My guess is he was just pouting off and reconsider it by putting out this statement:
http://www.hendrix.edu/news/news.aspx?id=52948&terms=scac
Travel distance is a reasonable reason to break off. Yet, the current commish of the scac seems to like the model of geography not playing much of a role in conference affiliation. With SW airlines all over texas, if you want pay $ to fly, its pretty easy to get around. I would be surprised if they pick up school's east of texas though but more like hitting the naia school's in Utah, Kansas, or Nebraska.
Geez, I go away for a while and all Hell breaks loose down South! ;)
Well it is the anniversary of the War of Secession.
Any news on the SCAC front? My son will be playing SCAC baseball next year and I am curious what, if anything, is going on.
Nothing as far as new schools. SCAC play in '11-'12 will be unchanged (except for DPU leaving, but the schools have known about that for some while and had already adjusted their schedules accordingly.
Quote from: 108 Stitches on July 14, 2011, 02:02:40 PM
Any news on the SCAC front? My son will be playing SCAC baseball next year and I am curious what, if anything, is going on.
108,
Please see my post from yesterday on the SCAC board.
Quote from: awadelewis on June 08, 2011, 08:34:54 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 08, 2011, 12:06:55 AM
Head to head in Pool B with the likes of the UAA, Huntingdon and Wesley, it might be tough earning a bid. I am only counting on 1 Pool B bid for several years into the future.
Makes me wonder if there isn't some discussion going on to try to convince one or more of the ODAC schools to switch conferences. We have a history at Sewanee with both W&L and H-SC and I think that's true with many of the other schools in the new conference. I suspect the long trip to Hendrix would be a deal-breaker there. Another alternative would be poaching from the USASouth but I wouldn't think any of those schools beyond Maryville would be of interest to the new conference.
Re: the ODAC, my ties there aren't as close as they once were, but I'd guess W&L would leave under the right circumstances. H-SC would never go. I think H-SC, R-MC, Bridgewater, E&H are always going to be ODAC schools. And now that Shenandoah is in, them too.
Any updates on the SCAC potential adds?
Read this week's Around the South football column. I'm pretty sure your son will have a conference for baseball, but things are still up in the air and especially where football is concerned.
I'm new to DIII and the SCAC. My daughter is a freshman playing soccer in the SCAC. this weekend, I kept hearing mentions of west coast schools joining the conference including UC Santa Cruz and some Washington/Oregon schools. Anyone got any insight to those possibilities?
Could that be the SCIAC instead of the SCAC?
Welcome to the boards, lit. I hope you and your daughter are enjoying the SCAC experience.
While some of the west coast teams do occasionally make the trek to TX (like UCSC who played the Trinity (TX) women in soccer this weekend), the logistics of adding teams from the West Coast would be pretty dreadful. Longer, more expensive flights, two hour time difference, not many direct flights from SA/Austin for SW and TU. Would make for some VERY long weekends for cross-sectional events.
Now watch them announce this next week. :)
No, it wasn't The SCIAC. I was at the UCSC V. SU game Friday and heard that UCSC and some other
west coast schools may be joining the conference. I know UCSC has been making the trek to Texas for several years now. I was also told that Centenary may jump from ASC although that seems odd since they just joined the ASC this year. As a parent, before the season began, we were told that SCAC schools will INTENTIONALLY try and join with "like minded" schools out of the Texas region to maintain a more "national" presence. They wanted to keep that experience for the players and they were not really worrying about reducing travel.
Again, I'm new to this and don't know if the folks talking about the West coast schools knew what they were talking about. The other information came from the school.
Oh, and thanks Ron. We are enjoying the experience. My daughter is loving the school and playing soccer there. She scored her first collegiate goal this weekend.
Centenary makes sense, and we had tossed them around at one point here as a prospective member. When they announced they were going D3 there weren't really any openings in the SCAC ... but obviously the situation has changed. ;) Their academic profile seems more like the average SCAC school than ASC school, plus they are tiny (895, according to US News). That would put them at somewhat of a disadvantage in the SCAC, but in the ASC, with state schools like UT-Tyler (6,476) and UT-Dallas (17,128, tho much of that is graduate), they're really going to struggle. It was the only port in the storm, though, when they decided to go non-scholarship.
The SCAC did say they were going to try for a wide geographic footprint; given the location of schools that are left, they don't have much of a choice. California schools might work, but it's just an awful long way to the Pacific Northwest. At some point the beauty of travel as an advantage for recruiting pales to the scholastic workload these kids have. I guess Colorado College would be happy to go west for a change.
If you haven't already, go to d3football.com and read Jason's Around the South column from last week. He talked to some of the SCAC football coaches about this and it seems that some of the options, such as recruiting ASC schools, are largely out the window. ASC schools like Texas Lutheran or Concordia were discussed as possibilities earlier this year.
Southwestern's a fine school - your daughter made a great choice. It's close enough to Austin to be convenient, but far enough away that's it's not too convenient. 8-)
Losing Centenary in a major shuffle, including McMurry's move to D2, may not be that difficult for the ASC.
Now that any prospect of being a symmetrical 16-team 2-division conference is gone, then restructuring to a 12 team conference might be easier. I know that makes it more expensive for 12 teams to support the conference overhead than 16, but if the SCAC and ASC schools will co-operate in non-conference games, then there may not be much difference.
How "Texas" maintains the football AQ is the critical question. TU and AC need games. Adding football-Centenary won't help much.
Also, if McMurry's move to D2 looks good from an academic, financial aid, student recruitment perspective ( and I think that I might be able to report that in 2014), then we may not have seen the end of the migration to D2 in this part of the state.
Who might move to D2? My conjecture, but TLU? Weren't the Bulldogs in D-2 in the mid 1990's?
Mississippi College? Also came to the ASC from D-2.
One other thing that works better at ASC schools than SCAC schools is the D-II partial scholarship model. With the loss of funding for Texas schools from the Tuition Equalization Grant (TEG), monies that were previously FASFA granted as monies ending up in the aid package for D-3 student-athletes may now be replaced with "Athletic Scholarships" under the D-2 model, especially in private schools that have discount rates in the 25-40% range.
I know that is a complex discussion that is beyond the scope of these boards at this time, but we will be seeing more of that in the next few years.
Ralph: If my memory serves, TLU was never in NCAA D2, though in the 1970s they won two consecutive national championships in NAIA D2. And I think they moved to NAIA D1 before dropping the sport.
The scac offering Centenary makes a lot of sense and should happen. I thought the new SAA might also offer them but centenary probably would prefer either over the ASC. Another school that might work that i read had interest was westminster college in salt lake, which would fit with what the scac had in mind going out of region. That would get the scac up to 7. Maybe ucsc could work to get to 8 but going with oregon/wash school's is crazy, just too far away. Ideally, the scac should try to get some oklahoma and kansas naia school's to move to d3 before going to far west.
I'm not sure that there are any NAIA schools in Oklahoma or Kansas that meet the SCAC's academic model ... and those academic standards seem to be the primary concern of the remaining schools in the rump SCAC.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 21, 2011, 11:35:33 AM
I'm not sure that there are any NAIA schools in Oklahoma or Kansas that meet the SCAC's academic model ... and those academic standards seem to be the primary concern of the remaining schools in the rump SCAC.
Well, that *is* why they joined the SCAC in the first place. ;)
The ironic thing is that one of the SAA presidents (Cloyd, Hendrix) went on record as saying at least one of the "rump SCAC" schools didn't meet the
SAA's standards and that was a major factor in the breakup. He later issued a statement saying 'no, really, it was all about the travel' but I've heard he wasn't the only one with that opinion.
Here is a couple of naia that could work, if you get one the others might be more interested:
http://www.okcu.edu/
http://www.nebrwesleyan.edu/
http://www.doane.edu/
http://www.friends.edu/
For what it's worth, Warren, I think Texas Lutheran was NCAA D-II right before it came to D-III. At least, that was the note I had on the old site.
Cush, here's some of the more relevant academic data regarding the schools you suggested, as compared to the rump SCAC members, plus some of the other schools that have been raised in this discussion (all info taken from www.petersons.com):
| school | PBK chapter | % ACT 30^ | % ACT 24^ | % ACT 18^ | % appl. acc. | hs gpa |
| Austin | yes | 19 | 75 | 100 | 80 | 3.56 |
| Colorado C. | yes | 49 | 94 | 100 | 32 | -- |
| Dallas | yes | 25 | 71 | 99 | 91 | 3.75 |
| Southwestern | yes | 31 | 83 | 100 | 63 | -- |
| Trinity TX | yes | 42 | 94 | 100 | 63 | 3.52 |
| school | PBK chapter | % ACT 30^ | % ACT 24^ | % ACT 18^ | % appl. acc. | hs gpa |
| Doane | no | 7 | 43 | 93 | 76 | 3.49 |
| Friends | no | 12 | 36 | 77 | 66 | 3.21 |
| Nebraska Wesleyan | no | 10 | 63 | 100 | 77 | 3.64 |
| Oklahoma City | no | 11 | 66 | 98 | 79 | 3.51 |
| school | PBK chapter | % ACT 30^ | % ACT 24^ | % ACT 18^ | % appl. acc. | hs gpa |
| Centenary | no | 11 | 62 | 100 | 54 | -- |
| UC-Santa Cruz | yes | 11 | 61 | 94 | 65 | 3.61 |
| Macalester | yes | 64 | 98 | 100 | 46 | -- |
| Westminster UT | no | 10 | 59 | 96 | 78 | 3.50 |
As you can see, none of the four Plains States schools you suggested are peer institutions with the rump SCAC schools. In fact, it's questionable as to whether or not Centenary and Westminster UT, two other schools whose names have been bandied about as potential SCAC members, fit the bill, either, and even UCSC is a bit borderline but probably acceptable on academic merits. (Distance, and UCSC's public affiliation, might be more problematic in the minds of the SCAC braintrust.) Macalester is eminently qualified for SCAC membership from an academic standpoint, and it certainly has the money for a big travel budget. The problem is that Macalester seems to be happy as a MIAC member, seeing as how the other schools in that league gave Mac permission to become a football independent while keeping the rest of its sports within the MIAC. That means that the SCAC could only count upon Mac for football.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 21, 2011, 01:05:01 PM
For what it's worth, Warren, I think Texas Lutheran was NCAA D-II right before it came to D-III. At least, that was the note I had on the old site.
You are correct. It was NCAA D2, non-football. Thanks for refreshing my failing memory. (And I should have known better than to disagree with Ralph. :-[)
Quote from: Warren Thompson on September 21, 2011, 03:34:59 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 21, 2011, 01:05:01 PM
For what it's worth, Warren, I think Texas Lutheran was NCAA D-II right before it came to D-III. At least, that was the note I had on the old site.
You are correct. It was NCAA D2, non-football. Thanks for refreshing my failing memory. (And I should have known better than to disagree with Ralph. :-[)
Thanks for the comment. Moving the D-III and the ASC was the impetus to resurrect football at TLU. :)
FWIW, Centenary recently announced the addition of men's lacrosse as a varsity sport. The SCAC recently gained an AQ in that sport and I'm sure, in an ideal world, would like to maintain it (even if it takes a couple associates). I don't the ASC will be sponsoring it any time soon ... Take that for what you will.
Quote from: sunny on September 22, 2011, 11:09:54 AM
FWIW, Centenary recently announced the addition of men's lacrosse as a varsity sport. The SCAC recently gained an AQ in that sport and I'm sure, in an ideal world, would like to maintain it (even if it takes a couple associates). I don't the ASC will be sponsoring it any time soon ... Take that for what you will.
Interesting thought. Of the five schools remaining in the SCAC, only Southwestern, Colorado College, and UDallas currently offer LaX. It's a club sport at Austin and Trinity - though the latter has a beautiful (fairly) new FieldTurf field and could turn it into a varsity sport whenever they'd like.
Good data on those school's but the problem for the 5 remaining scac school's is the middlebury's of the world, aren't on the phone/ in the area/etc. Granted, middlebury is at a higher lever than the scac profile but the point is the scac doesn't have many options. Thus, they should be concerned with trying to form a decent athletic conference more so than turning their nose down on some school's whose profile might be somewhat lower. To have a workable athletic conference takes at least 8 school's in my book.
Quote from: cush on September 22, 2011, 11:53:28 AM
Good data on those school's but the problem for the 5 remaining scac school's is the middlebury's of the world, aren't on the phone/ in the area/etc. Granted, middlebury is at a higher lever than the scac profile but the point is the scac doesn't have many options. Thus, they should be concerned with trying to form a decent athletic conference more so than turning their nose down on some school's whose profile might be somewhat lower. To have a workable athletic conference takes at least 8 school's in my book.
It really depends upon the direction that the rump SCAC chooses to go. If the five remaining schools share the same concern with travel that the defecting schools did when they decided to break off and form the SAA, then they will likely take your advice and seek out any interested schools within a thousand-mile radius. If, however, they consider the academic standards of the SCAC to still be paramount with regard to the league's makeup, then they'll plan on having UAA-type travel budgets and academic arrangements (tutors and proctors accompanying the teams on plane trips, etc.), and they'll seek out the far-flung schools like UC-Santa Cruz that appear to be more congenial academic matches for the SCAC than those other schools you named.
The "island" conferences like SCIAC and NWC compromised on these issues long ago. That is what the travel issues are in these times. The issue is how big an island do you want to live on.
... and whether or not you have the big coin to make it happen if you choose to make your island the size of Greenland.
It's official: Centenary is moving to the SCAC. (http://www.d3sports.com/notables/2011/09/centenary-moves-to-scac)
Thanks Gregory. So does this give us any clues as to what other schools could be ask to join. It looks like most of the schools you mentioned above are on par with Centenary.
Quote from: litig8r187 on October 01, 2011, 12:41:40 AM
Thanks Gregory. So does this give us any clues as to what other schools could be ask to join. It looks like most of the schools you mentioned above are on par with Centenary.
I would like to see anyone get out any reference, USN&WR, Templeton's, Phi Beta Kappa schools, etc., and designate the short list of schools on the list of candidates for SCAC membership.
In the perception realm, I think that there are no schools that are above the "old-SCAC" average in this part of the country.
I think that the prospective list of members would be from a grouping of schools which the Hendrix President may have tried to leave.
Gregory Sager has the best list that I have seen, a few posts back.
http://www.d3football.com/columns/around-the-nation/index (http://www.d3football.com/columns/around-the-nation/index)
Intersting read.
Berry today announced they will start football in 2013, track/field shortly thereafter. That'll get the SAA in line for an automatic bid in what, 2015?
http://www.berryvikings.com/GeneralNews/Articles/BerryAddingFootballExpandingTrack
Excellent news for the SAA. It's a shame the two SCAC teams hold the AQ for the next two years as it seems like the SAA is much further along in being a complete conference. Oh well. I do hope the two SCAC programs can find a home especially now that it seems like the SAA group is all squared away.
Barring a very unusual decision from the NCAA, the SCAC loses its bid after this season.
The SCAC and UAA need to hook up. Is there any reason Huntingdon hasn't been approached? Or have they been and are taking their time in thinking about a conference?
Quote from: Ron Boerger on October 22, 2011, 07:47:14 PM
Barring a very unusual decision from the NCAA, the SCAC loses its bid after this season.
Interesting. I thought they had 2 years to find members? Odds are I'm wrong on that, just something I thought I remembered. Thanks for the info.
Quote from: smedindy on October 22, 2011, 07:55:46 PM
The SCAC and UAA need to hook up. Is there any reason Huntingdon hasn't been approached? Or have they been and are taking their time in thinking about a conference?
The SCAC is on record saying they'd love to join forces, at least in football. I think the UAA doesn't want to add non-research institutions to their conference. UAA, serious Ph.D. granting institutions; SCAC, not.
Huntingdon ... earlier discussion was that their academics weren't at the same level as the rest of the SCAC schools. Ralph T. pointed out that Centenary's aren't either, perhaps opening that door. The only issue *now* with the SCAC and Huntingdon is that there's no travel partner and Alabama's an awful dog darn long way from TX/CO. Might work as a football-only affilliate but without someone else out there can't see them getting any consideration as a regular member. And with the SAA being the same people who turned their nose up at not only Huntingdon but at least some of the SCAC schools (per comments from Hendrix' prez Cloyd, later retracted), I can't see them welcoming HC now that they've got Berry to get their seven teams required for a bid.
Jknezek, K-Mack covered the SCAC's auto bid situation in this week's ATN. You gotta retain four football-playing core members to (temporarily) keep the bid, and the SCAC will only have the two. The SCAC commish says they're not interesting in pressuring the other schools to start FB (or LaX) just so the conference can keep a playoff bid.
I guess I assumed that the UAA cared about an auto-bid for its teams.
Thanks Ron. I must have forgotten or not read very closely they needed 4. Appreciate the info!
Smedindy -- as for the UAA, I guarantee you they care less about the bid than they do about being what their mission statement says:
"The participants in this association are private, research institutions in major metropolitan areas, who are committed to the NCAA Division III philosophy. They are similar institutions in many ways. They are research universities with several undergraduate programs and divisions as well as graduate and professional programs. Their academic programs are among the best in the country. Their undergraduate populations are also similar."
That is just one part of their philosophy statement and it goes on in the same vein. There is no way they are going to go against the mission statement of the entire conference just to get an AQ for football.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on October 22, 2011, 10:29:09 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 22, 2011, 07:55:46 PM
The SCAC and UAA need to hook up. Is there any reason Huntingdon hasn't been approached? Or have they been and are taking their time in thinking about a conference?
The SCAC is on record saying they'd love to join forces, at least in football. I think the UAA doesn't want to add non-research institutions to their conference. UAA, serious Ph.D. granting institutions; SCAC, not.
Huntingdon ... earlier discussion was that their academics weren't at the same level as the rest of the SCAC schools. Ralph T. pointed out that Centenary's aren't either, perhaps opening that door. The only issue *now* with the SCAC and Huntingdon is that there's no travel partner and Alabama's an awful dog darn long way from TX/CO. Might work as a football-only affilliate but without someone else out there can't see them getting any consideration as a regular member. And with the SAA being the same people who turned their nose up at not only Huntingdon but at least some of the SCAC schools (per comments from Hendrix' prez Cloyd, later retracted), I can't see them welcoming HC now that they've got Berry to get their seven teams required for a bid.
Jknezek, K-Mack covered the SCAC's auto bid situation in this week's ATN. You gotta retain four football-playing core members to (temporarily) keep the bid, and the SCAC will only have the two. The SCAC commish says they're not interesting in pressuring the other schools to start FB (or LaX) just so the conference can keep a playoff bid.
Centenary is a member of the Associated Colleges of the South (www.colleges.org). I think that Centenary, as a marginally competitive D-1 member in the far-flung Summit Conference, was not endearing themselves to the stature in their program that the other D-1 members, Davidson, Furman, Richmond were demonstrating.
I think that the move to D-III allows Centenary to re-align itself and "gain" its "respectability" among its peer institutions. This is just conjecture on my part, because I am not privy to the small talk and chit-chat that occurs at dinners which those college presidents attend.
My daughter was "courted" quite heavily by Centenary. It actually ended up being between Centenary and Southwestern as to where she would go. In had a number of conversations with the coaches about their move from DI to DII and where the school was going. What Ralph says is consistent with the direction the coaches indicated Centenary wanted to go. That is why I was a little surprised they went into the ASC and was glad when I heard they were joining the SCAC. I really liked the school and the folks there.
Now, I realize the biggest problem for the SCAC schools (at least Trinity and AC) is football. But I am really interested in what schools may round out sports like Soccer, Basketball, Baseball, Softball, Volleyball and Lacrosse. For example, the SCAC with Centenary is at 5 Men's and Women's Soccer schools (CC Soccer teams play DI. I didn't even know you could "mix and match NCAA divisions with different sports). Do y'all think Football, behind the mission statement of the SCAC, will be the determining factor in looking at new schools or do you think they will focus on the other sports (like soccer) that only need one 2-3 schools to maintain their AQ past 2012?
Also, since I'm new to this game, I gather it is a possibility that Trinity and AC could join other conferences, like the UAA, for Football only? However, to maintain the SCAC's AQ in football, they first must have 4 football programs from the SCAC to remain (Not happening) and then must be up to 8 (7?) by the beginning of 2013 to keep it? If that is right, there is almost no chance the SCAC keeps their AQ in football. So that leaves Trinity and AC either 1) waiting to rebuild an SCAC football conference to regain their AQ, 2) Moving to another conference for football ONLY (If you can do that?), or 3) leaving the SCAC altogether with all sports. Do I have this right?
The UAA could add Trinity and Austin as football-only members (there is a lot of that in east region conferences). But that would be one team short of an AQ.
etg posted on the SCAC football board back in June that:
"My contacts (in Cleveland,OH) tell me that the UAA greatly desires to "expand" the conference with 3 "quality institutions" (NOTE: current UAA members play full 9 or 10 game D3 football schedules without requiring that their opponents be mega-graduate institutions). I believe both Trinity and Austin will fit this criteria, leaving a now undecided third institution to be negotiated with."
My sense is that the discussion related only to football. My intuition though is that the UAA is not all that concerned about the AQ. To me the scheduling agreement with the NCAC bears this out, unless they thought it might utlimately lead to three NCAC teams chosing to leave for the UAA in football only.
The possible seventh might be Macalester (St. Paul MN) they are MIAA members, but independent in football. They have played Chicago recently and have travelled as far as Lewis & Clark.
Quote from: litig8r187 on October 23, 2011, 02:59:27 PM
My daughter was "courted" quite heavily by Centenary. It actually ended up being between Centenary and Southwestern as to where she would go. In had a number of conversations with the coaches about their move from DI to DII and where the school was going. What Ralph says is consistent with the direction the coaches indicated Centenary wanted to go. That is why I was a little surprised they went into the ASC and was glad when I heard they were joining the SCAC. I really liked the school and the folks there.
Now, I realize the biggest problem for the SCAC schools (at least Trinity and AC) is football. But I am really interested in what schools may round out sports like Soccer, Basketball, Baseball, Softball, Volleyball and Lacrosse. For example, the SCAC with Centenary is at 5 Men's and Women's Soccer schools (CC Soccer teams play DI. I didn't even know you could "mix and match NCAA divisions with different sports). Do y'all think Football, behind the mission statement of the SCAC, will be the determining factor in looking at new schools or do you think they will focus on the other sports (like soccer) that only need one 2-3 schools to maintain their AQ past 2012?
Also, since I'm new to this game, I gather it is a possibility that Trinity and AC could join other conferences, like the UAA, for Football only? However, to maintain the SCAC's AQ in football, they first must have 4 football programs from the SCAC to remain (Not happening) and then must be up to 8 (7?) by the beginning of 2013 to keep it? If that is right, there is almost no chance the SCAC keeps their AQ in football. So that leaves Trinity and AC either 1) waiting to rebuild an SCAC football conference to regain their AQ, 2) Moving to another conference for football ONLY (If you can do that?), or 3) leaving the SCAC altogether with all sports. Do I have this right?
The ASC seemed to be the logical choice for Centenary for the near term and long term.
The ASC needed an "8th" for the East Division. For Centenary, 7 of the 8 ASC-East foes are within 200 miles, and 4 within 2 hours. In this part of the country, that is nothing!
Putting one's self into the shoes of the new Centenary president, one sees the fluidity that is the SCAC. One can see their wanting Centenary, when B David Rowe, the new President, an Emory/LaGrange guy, gets the academics to
his liking!
The "ASC/SCAC" two-step fits nicely into the 5-10 year plan for Centenary. Besides, having another D-III team in this part of the country helps everyone, especially if there is good blood between everyone involved!
Quote from: litig8r187 on October 23, 2011, 02:59:27 PM(CC Soccer teams play DI. I didn't even know you could "mix and match NCAA divisions with different sports).
Only if it was grandfathered in when the rule was passed several years ago that a school must be in the same division in every sport, unless a particular sport is not offered by that division. Colorado College is one of the handful of D3 schools that evaded that rule because of the grandfather clause.
Quote from: litig8r187 on October 23, 2011, 02:59:27 PMDo y'all think Football, behind the mission statement of the SCAC, will be the determining factor in looking at new schools or do you think they will focus on the other sports (like soccer) that only need one 2-3 schools to maintain their AQ past 2012?
Football is not the 400-pound gorilla on the D3 level that it is in D1. In D1, football is the big moneymaker that drives the entire athletic department in many cases. In D3, it's just another sport. On this level, decisions tend to be made in the best interests of the athletic department overall rather than simply what's best for the football program.
Quote from: litig8r187 on October 23, 2011, 02:59:27 PMAlso, since I'm new to this game, I gather it is a possibility that Trinity and AC could join other conferences, like the UAA, for Football only?
As ADL70 indicated, football-only conference affiliations are common in D3. And they're not just an East Coast phenomenon, either; the Upper Midwest Athletic Conference, which is based in Minnesota and South Dakota, includes four schools that are a part of the St. Louis Intercollegiate Athletic Conference (Westminster MO, Greenville, Eureka, and MacMurray) in all other sports. These four, which are all located in downstate Illinois or central Missouri, are UMAC members in football only.
Quote from: ADL70 on October 23, 2011, 05:37:24 PMThe possible seventh might be Macalester (St. Paul MN) they are MIAA members, but independent in football. They have played Chicago recently and have travelled as far as Lewis & Clark.
Macalester would be a sensible choice for any high-academics football conference, be it the UAA or the SCAC. As I indicated in a post a few weeks ago, Macalester's academic bona-fides are second to none, and the school has so much money that the football travel budget shouldn't be a problem. Plus, being an independent is a headache in terms of scheduling. so I'm sure that Macalester would jump at the chance to join the UAA or SCAC for football purposes only if the invitation should come its way.
Though scheduling is that big of a headache for Macalester with the plethora of MIAC schools that they can compete with, plus the UMAC up there.
If they join a UAA / SCAC consortium, they may lose games against Carleton, Hamline and Augsburg, and I don't think they want to let those go.
Info on adding football from Berry website;
http://www.berryvikings.com/GeneralNews/Articles/BerryAddingFootballExpandingTrack (http://www.berryvikings.com/GeneralNews/Articles/BerryAddingFootballExpandingTrack)
FYI: I've created a new Southern Athletic Association (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=7534.0) thread in the South Region area to hopefully provide a single place to talk about SAA issues. Right now there's discussion here, in the SCAC thread, everywhere ;)
Quote from: roocru on October 25, 2011, 03:47:24 PM
Info on adding football from Berry website;
http://www.berryvikings.com/GeneralNews/Articles/BerryAddingFootballExpandingTrack (http://www.berryvikings.com/GeneralNews/Articles/BerryAddingFootballExpandingTrack)
Sam link Ron posted a couple days ago. Not as complete from a Division III perspective as our story:
http://www.d3football.com/notables/2011/10/berry-college-adding-football
Quote from: smedindy on October 25, 2011, 11:53:14 AM
Though scheduling is that big of a headache for Macalester with the plethora of MIAC schools that they can compete with, plus the UMAC up there.
If they join a UAA / SCAC consortium, they may lose games against Carleton, Hamline and Augsburg, and I don't think they want to let those go.
Six conference games leaves five weeks to fit those three in.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 25, 2011, 06:04:46 PM
Quote from: roocru on October 25, 2011, 03:47:24 PM
Info on adding football from Berry website;
http://www.berryvikings.com/GeneralNews/Articles/BerryAddingFootballExpandingTrack (http://www.berryvikings.com/GeneralNews/Articles/BerryAddingFootballExpandingTrack)
Sam link Ron posted a couple days ago. Not as complete from a Division III perspective as our story:
http://www.d3football.com/notables/2011/10/berry-college-adding-football
Sorry, I missed Ron's previous post. Just came across article and thought I would post it. My bad!
Quote from: ADL70 on October 25, 2011, 06:54:12 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 25, 2011, 11:53:14 AM
Though scheduling is that big of a headache for Macalester with the plethora of MIAC schools that they can compete with, plus the UMAC up there.
If they join a UAA / SCAC consortium, they may lose games against Carleton, Hamline and Augsburg, and I don't think they want to let those go.
Six conference games leaves five weeks to fit those three in.
True, but it becomes harder to slot them in with conference schedules on the MIAC and the UAA / SCAC / Macalester side
Quote from: roocru on October 25, 2011, 07:53:59 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 25, 2011, 06:04:46 PM
Quote from: roocru on October 25, 2011, 03:47:24 PM
Info on adding football from Berry website;
http://www.berryvikings.com/GeneralNews/Articles/BerryAddingFootballExpandingTrack (http://www.berryvikings.com/GeneralNews/Articles/BerryAddingFootballExpandingTrack)
Sam link Ron posted a couple days ago. Not as complete from a Division III perspective as our story:
http://www.d3football.com/notables/2011/10/berry-college-adding-football
Sorry, I missed Ron's previous post. Just came across article and thought I would post it. My bad!
That's OK. And what's a sam link? Is that like a will link? :) My bad too.
http://www.scacsports.com/sports/fball/2011-12/releases/southwestern_adds_football (http://www.scacsports.com/sports/fball/2011-12/releases/southwestern_adds_football)
I didn't see this coming. So any other SCAC schools thinking about adding football?
They all should, why can't dallas, centenary, and Colorado College have football teams? That would put the new scac, which probably should be renamed to wcac, at 6 football programs. Invite one more Texas school, maybe TLU, and they are at 7. I also like the westminster college invite to pair with CC.
A few years ago, Dallas tried club football and couldn't even get it off the ground. That would be a major hurdle.
Quote from: cush on October 31, 2011, 11:41:27 AM
They all should, why can't dallas, centenary, and Colorado College have football teams?
Colorado College would never admit the kind of student who enjoys football. Even in their hockey program, they brag about finesse. Besides, I'm not sure the league would let them play in sandals anyway.
Pretty snide there, Hoops Fan. Colorado College had football from 1882 to 2008 - a stronger tradition than many D3 schools can claim.
All it takes for one of the other schools to start football is an alum (or group of alums) with deep pockets and an administration willing to support it - witness Southwestern's shocking call to add it last week after poo-pooing the idea for years. CC doesn't have the admin support, apparently.
Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 31, 2011, 02:34:19 PM
Quote from: cush on October 31, 2011, 11:41:27 AM
They all should, why can't dallas, centenary, and Colorado College have football teams?
Colorado College would never admit the kind of student who enjoys football. Even in their hockey program, they brag about finesse. Besides, I'm not sure the league would let them play in sandals anyway.
Lots of tree-huggin' granolas at Stanford, too!
Quote from: Ron Boerger on October 31, 2011, 03:12:34 PM
Pretty snide there, Hoops Fan. Colorado College had football from 1882 to 2008 - a stronger tradition than many D3 schools can claim.
I went to high school in Colorado Springs. I love the campus and the school. It's just fun to pick on the uniqueness of the atmosphere, especially in contrast to the city around it.
CC in Colorado Springs is like plunking down Vassar or Swarthmore in Lynchburg, VA!
OK, Hoops Fan, sorry. It's hard to read voice inflection in comments.
I did find some interesting tidbits just now in the Washburn Foundation (http://www.washburnfoundation.org)'s updates. The WF is dedicated to bringing back football at CC. This is a quote from a post dated 19 October 2011 (emphasis is mine):
"At the Denver meeting with President Jill T. three of us did ask about bringing college football back to CC. The new president stated that the college's first concern with intercollegiate athletics is to find a new league for all DIII sports because the SCAC is splitting up and may not be a league in a few years. Travel expenses appear to be a big reason for this."
Well, the new SCAC is much more compact than the old, with the exception of CC, so I'd take that prediction with a large grain of salt. In any case the whole thing makes for interesting insight (http://www.washburnfoundation.org/updates/) on what is purported to be the current thinking from the Springs.
I have said this before, but being an isolated D-III program, more than 500 miles from the next D-III campus makes no sense for a school on a "block" academic program.
It is not that they are adverse to scholarship athletics (Ice Hockey and women' Soccer). Going D-II in the Rocky Mountain AC would handle most of the questions except the "purity" question of having to be in a conference with the likes of Colorado Christian University and Adams State and whoever else they invite into the conference as that part of the NCAA "shuffles".
(More than half of the membership is within a 2 hour drive of the Springs.)
Ralph,
That's not a small issue. I think, most of all, colleges want to be aligned with people they resemble, or aspire to resemble. It's why Wabash and DPU got out of the HCAC after a while. The administrations decided that after it stopped being a true "Indiana" conference, it was better to be with those whose mission, vision and academics fit with you the most.
I thought the scac was getting stable now. There is no d3 league cc will have an easy travel time given their location. Maybe the scac could jump to 12 with 6 in a southern division, than have CC pair up with the Nebraska/kansas school's mentioned who might look to d3. IF CC is staying in D3, i don't see a better league for them than the scac.
Quote from: cush on October 31, 2011, 05:32:49 PM
I thought the scac was getting stable now. There is no d3 league cc will have an easy travel time given their location. Maybe the scac could jump to 12 with 6 in a southern division, than have CC pair up with the Nebraska/kansas school's mentioned who might look to d3. IF CC is staying in D3, i don't see a better league for them than the scac.
Yeah, I'm not sure the CC president is too up-to-date on what the SCAC's doing. If they're staying D3 and want to be in a 'peer' league, they're not going to find anything else closer, cheaper, etc.
Quote from: smedindy on October 31, 2011, 05:25:58 PM
Ralph,
That's not a small issue. I think, most of all, colleges want to be aligned with people they resemble, or aspire to resemble. It's why Wabash and DPU got out of the HCAC after a while. The administrations decided that after it stopped being a true "Indiana" conference, it was better to be with those whose mission, vision and academics fit with you the most.
Oh, I understand. The "mission and vision" issue is big. She will have to clean up the mess that Dr (former Ohio Governor) Richard Celeste made of the athletic department.
I encourage the readers to go to the Washburn Foundation web site that Ron Boerger cited above. They are carrying the torch admirably.
Quote from: Gray Fox on October 31, 2011, 11:53:25 AM
A few years ago, Dallas tried club football and couldn't even get it off the ground. That would be a major hurdle.
A
Texas school that couldn't find enough interest to start a club football team? If that's not a sure sign of the apocalypse, I don't know what is. ;)
Tom Landry must've done a few thousand do-si-do's in his grave.
Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 31, 2011, 02:34:19 PM
Quote from: cush on October 31, 2011, 11:41:27 AM
They all should, why can't dallas, centenary, and Colorado College have football teams?
Colorado College would never admit the kind of student who enjoys football. Even in their hockey program, they brag about finesse. Besides, I'm not sure the league would let them play in sandals anyway.
If Oberlin can have a football team,
anybody can have a football team. ;D
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 01, 2011, 05:38:47 PM
Quote from: Gray Fox on October 31, 2011, 11:53:25 AM
A few years ago, Dallas tried club football and couldn't even get it off the ground. That would be a major hurdle.
A Texas school that couldn't find enough interest to start a club football team? If that's not a sure sign of the apocalypse, I don't know what is. ;)
Tom Landry must've done a few thousand do-si-do's in his grave.
Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 31, 2011, 02:34:19 PM
Quote from: cush on October 31, 2011, 11:41:27 AM
They all should, why can't dallas, centenary, and Colorado College have football teams?
Colorado College would never admit the kind of student who enjoys football. Even in their hockey program, they brag about finesse. Besides, I'm not sure the league would let them play in sandals anyway.
If Oberlin can have a football team, anybody can have a football team. ;D
The Yeomen have been the never-say-die club of the NCAC. And they actually draw pretty well. It's Kenyon that we NCAC types are worrying about, again...
I still wonder about teams named "Quakers" playing football...
Quote from: smedindy on November 01, 2011, 08:41:03 PMThe Yeomen have been the never-say-die club of the NCAC. And they actually draw pretty well. It's Kenyon that we NCAC types are worrying about, again...
Culturally, though, Oberlin seems to reflect the mix of academic snobbery and a granola-and-Birkenstocks neo-hippie atmosphere that HF was referencing with respect to Colorado College as a sort of double-barreled campus cultural attack on the idea of football. Or at least that's Oberlin's reputation ... or stereotype.
I dunno, maybe Kenyon's like that, too. But Oberlin's the NCAC school that really personifies that dual nature in the minds of a lot of us outsiders.
You're right about the granola nature with Oberlin, though I think Kenyon has the snobby factor, or did when I was in school. But yeah, I got the joke, but just had to defend Oberlin a touch. They are drawing about 1,400 a game, which is pretty remarkable considering Hiram and Kenyon don't get 500 a contest.
I've seen that number throw around lately. Anyone put actual eyeballs on that to know how accurate it is?
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 01, 2011, 11:14:35 PM
I've seen that number throw around lately. Anyone put actual eyeballs on that to know how accurate it is?
Hmm, if you count eyeballs, then might get 1400. ;)
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 01, 2011, 11:14:35 PM
I've seen that number throw around lately. Anyone put actual eyeballs on that to know how accurate it is?
I did look at the trends. They were at about 1,000 very early in the 2000's. At least they're consistent in reporting.
Quote from: smedindy on November 02, 2011, 10:35:01 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 01, 2011, 11:14:35 PM
I've seen that number throw around lately. Anyone put actual eyeballs on that to know how accurate it is?
I did look at the trends. They were at about 1,000 very early in the 2000's. At least they're consistent in reporting.
They could be counting Dogs, Cats, Snakes and Squirrels too.
Any additional news on SCAC additions?
Still very quite! When does anyone expect to hear rumblings about next season?
Well, we know none of the UAA schools are coming to the SCAC now. >:(
Quote from: Ron Boerger on December 13, 2011, 01:26:27 PM
Well, we know none of the UAA schools are coming to the SCAC now. >:(
And Hendrix and Oglethorpe are not pressured to add football for the sake of the AQ!
Whats up with the UAA schools?
NM, I saw it. :-\
Schreiner is joining the SCAC in '13-'14:
http://scacsports.com/news/schreiner_joins_scac
:o Hmmmmmmmm, I didn't see that one coming! Based on that, could we see another ASC school jumping ship?
If Texas Lutheran came along for the ride, you'd end up with a very compact conference with an almost ideal travel partner situation: Trinity/Schreiner, Southwestern/TLU, Austin/UD, and the only odd pair, Colorado College and Centenary. Mot sure TLU wants to be in a conference without a football AQ; SCAC football would be a like the current UAA situation with four teams. The UAA just took care of their football problem by splitting between the SAA and PAC.
Is there a chance that some of the schools without football programs, might be considering adding them?
When looking at starting a new program you have to look at a number of things. Colorado could easily start a program whenever the leadership there decides they want to. They already have facilities and plenty of money ($460M endowment per 2010 NACUBO study). During the financial crisis it was cut as a cost-savings move and there doesn't seem to be much going on towards restarting things. The Washburn Foundation met with the CC president last fall and at the time her concern was the viability of the SCAC going forward; perhaps now that the league is back to a full (-enough for Pool A bids) complement she might reconsider. Taking flights only to TX/LA should be cheaper than having to go further back east...
As for the other schools, they would need to build facilities and have some overriding desire to get a program going (like wanting to balance the m/f ratio, wanting to add enrollment overall). Also to consider would be that, due to Title IX, at least one and possibly two women's programs would need to be added, so financial position is going to factor in.
UDallas: $25M endowment (Wiki), 1337 undergrad students (USNews) (+1400 graduate), 51% female
Schreiner: $46M endowment (US News), 1043 students (US News), 56% female
Centenary: $102M endowment (US News), 1993 students (US News), 63% female
Centenary used to have football back in the day (like pre WW-II) similar to Southwestern. Given that, and given their gender imbalance, they could be a decent candidate to add it someday.
I would think that the SCAC will continue to poach a few ASC teams and I am sure that getting to the required 6 football programs will be the driving factor in whatever action they take. Most of the other sports now will now have enough programs for their AQ's, so I would imagine that getting two more football programs will be the driving force. Even at the DIII level, football tends to be self-funding, with the downside possibly being Title IX issues and start up costs. I have not heard what the "vision" is for the new SCAC so I am actually not sure, other than I am quite sure they will not stay pat with 7 members.
Ron,
CC was playing games with SCIAC teams regularly. Oxy had a very long series with them.
Quote from: Gray Fox on January 25, 2012, 12:46:33 PM
Ron,
CC was playing games with SCIAC teams regularly. Oxy had a very long series with them.
Schreiner had good football teams back in its JUCO days...long long ago.
Why UDallas, the "only" Catholic D-III in Texas could not put together a football program in the last decade was a surprise to me.
ASC is down to a nice comfortable 8-team football conference. The problem is that you need 10 teams down here to be comfortable, because finding games is so-o-o-o hard.
My sources say that Colorado College has considered the D-II RMAC and would likely enter as a non-football member. There are two other private schools in the conference, Colorado Christian and Regis, both non-football. The RMAC allows up to 28 football scholarships (D-II max in 36.)
I am wondering who looks at what McMurry does in the next few years, if we can pull it off, and jumps to the D-II model.
TLU might jump, if the SCAC became a football conference. Travel would be a lot nicer, especially if a non-football Colorado College moved out.
Peterson's have Centenary at 812 students 57 F/ 43 M.
Adding 90 more football players would bring that to about 52 F/ 48 M.
I could be wrong but I think I remember when Centenary was starting the transition to Division III they were going to take a look into the possibility of starting football. Now I haven't heard anything about it since they were accepted into the Division III provisional status.
Quote from: hickory_cornhusker on January 25, 2012, 05:11:37 PM
I could be wrong but I think I remember when Centenary was starting the transition to Division III they were going to take a look into the possibility of starting football. Now I haven't heard anything about it since they were accepted into the Division III provisional status.
I think that it is easier to start football in a conference full of Austin College's, Centenary's, and Southwestern's, than it is in a conference of UMHB, HSU, Mississippi College, LaCollege, and ETBU.
Texas Lutheran follows its much-rumored path:
http://www.d3sports.com/notables/2012/02/scac-adds-texas-lutheran
Huntingdon to the ASC next to fill the gap?
Quote from: jknezek on February 16, 2012, 02:07:45 PM
Huntingdon to the ASC next to fill the gap?
The ASC will still have 7 football playing members after the departure of McMurry in 2012 and TLU in 2013.
The non-playing members include Ozarks (Clarksville AR) LeTourneau (Longview TX), UT-Tyler, UT-Dallas and Concordia (Austin) Texas.
I still think that CTX should add football, (and LeTourneau should have accepted the "rumored" invitation to join the SCAC).
The only vulnerability that I see for the ASC is if Mississippi College returns to D-II from whence they came. The Gulf South Conference could use some members.
I've always thought Concordia was a better fit for SCAC (in my VERY limited experience) and, I agee, I would love to see them add football along with a jump to the SCAC.
I also think that CTX would be a great addition to the SCAC and they seem to fit in many ways with the other schools. The SCAC is shaping up to be a very competitive and compact conference with similar programs. If it keeps developing it could have some outstanding rivalries and end up being one of the most competitive conferences in the country.
Except for Football it looks like the split may have turned out well for the SCAC schools.
Quote from: Bishopleftiesdad on February 17, 2012, 01:43:49 PM
Except for Football it looks like the split may have turned out well for the SCAC schools.
Well, I dunno about that. What made the SCAC special IMO *was* the fact that it was a geographically widespread conference. The new SCAC is turning into the TCAC, kind of like the old SWC was the Texas Conference + Arkansas.
I would agree with you Ron other than the extra demands it puts on the students because of the travel requirements. My son was not playing back then, but he heard about some of the brutal 12-hour bus rides. I am hoping that some of the schools add in a home/away series for OOC games in the future with some of the southern schools. Trinity is doing a home/away with Chapman and it would add some interest to their schedule to do this with Millsaps, BSC or another school in the former SCAC South conference. The East/West break of the conference seemed like it would have worked, except for football I guess. I do like the addition of Centenary to give it a more diverse feel and I would think they would be looking for other schools in the Louisiana area. The southern teams broke away so the SCAC Texas teams really had no choice but to go the direction they are going, but I get what you are saying. I would also think that the focus now will now be to get enough football teams in the conference as the other sports will maintain their AQ’s. The critical additions are now in place so I am guessing football will be a focus for them.
And besides the demands on student-athlete's time, how many d3 schools can afford a 'geographically widespread conference'? The UAA, obviously (and I'd assume the NESCAC could afford it, but choose not to ;)); otherwise I'd think at most a couple dozen other schools in the whole division.
Which is yet another reason I'd prefer a de-emphasis (or elimination) of 'in-region' requirements. The overwhelming majority of schools cannot (or choose not to) schedule distant opponents anyway, but it sets up such anomalies as no one in the MIAA (except Hope) can schedule in-region games against Chicago-land schools, despite them being closer than nearly all their 'in-region' potential opponents.
At least my lobbying finally got Finlandia moved to the West, where there are over a dozen schools closer than any opponent in the North/Great Lakes! ;D 8-)
I still like the idea of adding westminster college in salt lake to get some travel exposure. With southwest airlines flying between texas and slc, travel isn't that bad. Also like university of ozarks. The scac really could jump to 12 given they have school's without football programs and break into two 6 team divisions, maybe one could be:
westminster
colorado college
dallas
austin
southwestern
trinity
Well, Mr. Ypsi, there are about 30 other conferences to choose from for schools that can't afford the travel (formerly) required in the SCAC. Not everyone has to fit into the same mold 8-)
That said, I'm in total agreement that the in-region crap, especially in football, brings absolutely nothing to the table and should be thrown out.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on February 17, 2012, 11:31:30 PM
Well, Mr. Ypsi, there are about 30 other conferences to choose from for schools that can't afford the travel (formerly) required in the SCAC. Not everyone has to fit into the same mold 8-)
That said, I'm in total agreement that the in-region crap, especially in football, brings absolutely nothing to the table and should be thrown out.
The in-region issue hits in hockey, too. Adrian, MI is in the West (we have two regions, East and West), but they have made trips for non-conference games in Minnesota (regional) that are longer than if they played some of the schools in Western NY. In last years NCAA tournament, to avoid flights, they were seeded with Eastern Schools, so when the NCAA wanted to save money, they put them in with the East.
You simply can not ignore football....particularly in Texas!!!! If you listen to the TLU president and AD they talk about the conference w/o football and look forward to the time that they have enough teams. This will happen I am sure, and also Colo College does not have baseball and their womens soccer is D1, so they may drift away to another conference long term. (or not, I don't know) I really don't know, but the way it is shaping up I think they will look for a school or two to add football and to pick up a few more regional schools. In any case the SCAC is set. I really feel sorry for BSC as they have not been in post season play for three years, they get this year and then have to wait again. (at large bid aside)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 17, 2012, 05:52:45 PMThe overwhelming majority of schools cannot (or choose not to) schedule distant opponents anyway, but it sets up such anomalies as no one in the MIAA (except Hope) can schedule in-region games against Chicago-land schools, despite them being closer than nearly all their 'in-region' potential opponents.
You're overstating the matter, Chuck. North Park, Concordia (IL), Dominican, Chicago, and Elmhurst are within 200 miles of Calvin, and all of them except for Elmhurst are also within 200 miles of Albion.
Quote from: 108 Stitches on February 17, 2012, 05:28:58 PM
I would agree with you Ron other than the extra demands it puts on the students because of the travel requirements. My son was not playing back then, but he heard about some of the brutal 12-hour bus rides. I am hoping that some of the schools add in a home/away series for OOC games in the future with some of the southern schools. Trinity is doing a home/away with Chapman and it would add some interest to their schedule to do this with Millsaps, BSC or another school in the former SCAC South conference. The East/West break of the conference seemed like it would have worked, except for football I guess. I do like the addition of Centenary to give it a more diverse feel and I would think they would be looking for other schools in the Louisiana area. The southern teams broke away so the SCAC Texas teams really had no choice but to go the direction they are going, but I get what you are saying. I would also think that the focus now will now be to get enough football teams in the conference as the other sports will maintain their AQ's. The critical additions are now in place so I am guessing football will be a focus for them.
And the SAA had to seek affiliates (Chicago and Wash StL) to earn the AQ in football.
Respectfully, there are no other schools in Louisiana for the SCAC. For D-III it is LaCollege and Centenary.
LSU-Shreveport? LSU-Alexandria? They don't even sponsor all of the SCAC sports.
The NAIA schools in New Orleans (Dillard, Loyola, Southern, Xavier) don't fit the SCAC model.
Everyone else in Louisiana is D1 or D-II.
NAIA schools in LA (http://www.naia.org/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=27900&ATCLID=205322922)
The SCAC I think would want colleges similar to those that left.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 18, 2012, 01:45:42 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 17, 2012, 05:52:45 PMThe overwhelming majority of schools cannot (or choose not to) schedule distant opponents anyway, but it sets up such anomalies as no one in the MIAA (except Hope) can schedule in-region games against Chicago-land schools, despite them being closer than nearly all their 'in-region' potential opponents.
You're overstating the matter, Chuck. North Park, Concordia (IL), Dominican, Chicago, and Elmhurst are within 200 miles of Calvin, and all of them except for Elmhurst are also within 200 miles of Albion.
Yeah, I didn't check the mileage and suspected I might be overstating the case. The point remains that many teams MUCH closer than MOST Great Lakes region teams are 'unavailable' to MOST MIAA teams.
Quote from: smedindy on February 18, 2012, 03:17:44 PM
The SCAC I think would want colleges similar to those that left.
There aren't many out there that aren't happily affiliated with other conferences (or don't want to pay the travel piper). They're probably doing the best they can by cherry-picking the most suitable schools from the ASC; perhaps after they re-establish themselves as an AQ conference (done or close for most sports except FB) some schools that might be on the fence given the SCAC's somewhat uncertain viability will reconsider.
Berea (Ky) College announced exploratory candidacy for D-III.
Are they a candidate for the SAA?
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 09, 2012, 03:12:10 PM
Berea (Ky) College announced exploratory candidacy for D-III.
Are they a candidate for the SAA?
That would be another 10+ hour bus ride for Millsaps. Maybe them and say Mississippi College could be persuaded to join a conference with a much tighter geographical footprint. ;)
I think Millsaps probably would be more interested in colleges that are similar in mission and not just distance related. Berea looks like a good fit for the SAA programatically. Plus it's only about 45 minutes away from Centre and closer to I-75 than Centre is.
If that was truly the case, Smed, they wouldn't have kicked the western SCAC schools out of their little puddle, would they?
And with financial means being the key qualifier for admission, I don't know that they fit the SAA model. They would appear to be at the bottom of the range from a test score perspective:
Berea : Average SAT (M+V): 1100; Average ACT: 24
Millsaps: NA / 26
Centre: 1230 / 28
Oglethorpe: 1120 / 25
Rhodes: NA / 28
Hendrix: NA / 29
BSC: NA / 26
Berry: 1130 / 26
Sewanee: 1250 / 28
[Austin 1220 / 26
Colorado 1320 / 29
Southwestern NA / 27
Trinity NA / 29
U Dallas 1190 / 27 ]
Source: US News & World Reports
There's also no ΦΒΚ chapter at Berea.
Mission, Ron, is more than test scores. Berea's mission, while unique, I believe is a good fit for the SAA. The emphasis on financial means and service means more rigor and a well-rounded college experience for their students compared to some other institutions.
When I've met kids from Berea (and alums) they understand the gift they are given and really plow themselves into their studies.
Update from the SCAC: http://www.scacsports.com/news/scac_stabilizes
Excerpt:
Quote"Just eight short months ago, our conference was down to five members and the future was a great unknown," said commissioner Dwayne Hanberry. "I am proud to say today that the state of the SCAC is strong and based on the inquiries we continue to receive from interested parties, possibilities exist for the league to become even stronger."
"We achieved our initial goal of shoring up league membership," said Hanberry, "but we will continue to seek out partners – both as core members and for sport-specific affiliate membership – where it makes sense philosophically and geographically."
The addition of Texas Lutheran on February 16 insures that the SCAC will retain its automatic bids in nine of its 14 AQ sports, including baseball, men's basketball, women's basketball, softball, men's soccer, women's soccer, men's tennis, women's tennis and volleyball.
The SCAC will continue to explore its options in other AQ sports such as football, men's golf, women's golf, men's lacrosse and women's lacrosse.
Very new to this board but now have 2 daughters who play D3 softball.
In my thinking a big concern is the travel time between schools for all sports. Given the location of the new SCAC schools, I would think that Sul Ross might be a good candidate. Seems like I read that the new SCAC all had the same common thoughts so SR might not fit that. Not sure.
Anyway, with the forming of the new SAA conference, I would think the Ozarks and Mississippi College would be prime candidates to join that conference.
Again, I am just looking at things from a geographic prospective.
Quote from: sbparent on July 18, 2012, 04:40:11 PM
Very new to this board but now have 2 daughters who play D3 softball.
In my thinking a big concern is the travel time between schools for all sports. Given the location of the new SCAC schools, I would think that Sul Ross might be a good candidate. Seems like I read that the new SCAC all had the same common thoughts so SR might not fit that. Not sure.
Anyway, with the forming of the new SAA conference, I would think the Ozarks and Mississippi College would be prime candidates to join that conference.
Again, I am just looking at things from a geographic prospective.
They do fit the geography but they definitely do not fit the philosophy. If those schools couldn't compete with Trinity, they won't even think of adding two ASC schools.
Its odd that University of Ozarks and Hendrix are 70 miles apart and Mississippi College and Milshaps are 10 miles apart yet they are both in seperate conferences.
When you say "couldn't compete with Trinity" are you referring to a specific sport or overall athletic program?
I think that he was referring to academics.
In D-3, conferences are based upon 'like' institutions, not necessarily geography. No slight to Mississippi College, but its mission and academic footprint is way different than Millsaps.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on July 19, 2012, 12:15:28 PM
I think that he was referring to academics.
Actually I meant that the schools felt they couldn't compete with Trinity athletically and by extension, that Trinity was somehow academically inferior because they were good at athletics. As if the two couldn't co-exist.
Who would other "Like-Minded" institutions be that would fit with the other SAA schools?
Quote from: CKBeber329 on July 20, 2012, 08:53:17 AM
Who would other "Like-Minded" institutions be that would fit with the other SAA schools?
I cannot think of many others in the southeastern US that are not D-3 and not already in a conference. There are some D1's and D2's who would be SAA "mission and Vision" if they switched classifications as Birmingham Southern did.
Berea KY is the only one that I think might be close to the "vision and mission" thing.
In looking at a map, geographically speaking, both Mississippi College and the Ozarks would still have long trips the other directior to the other SAA schools if they switched.
Maryville is pretty much in the middle of the SAA. To get from Centre to Oglethorpe you'd pass close by and then pass Sewanee. Vision and mission match up ok but all but Oglethorpe have a lot more money and class pretensions. Athletically Maryville would do fine...they already play a lot of the SAA.
Scottiedoug - Birmingham-Southern has been hemorrhaging money for quote some time now and has an endowment barely north of $50M as of the last NACUBO study.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on July 19, 2012, 11:40:53 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on July 19, 2012, 12:15:28 PM
I think that he was referring to academics.
Actually I meant that the schools felt they couldn't compete with Trinity athletically and by extension, that Trinity was somehow academically inferior because they were good at athletics. As if the two couldn't co-exist.
Along with some of the other factors: Trinity was the largest school in the conference [prior to UDallas' entry last season] and had the largest endowment by a sizable margin.
To make Pat's point further, Trinity frequently led the SCAC in number of student-athletes named to the conference's All-Academic teams, even without offering sports like field hockey and lacrosse which tend to have a good number of high achievers.
I think it was K-Mack who wrote an article towards the end of last football season saying that most of the coaches thought it was a shame the SCAC was breaking up, what with many of the now-SAA schools having stepped up to be competitive. The student-athletes were surveyed by the conference a couple of years back and they actually LIKED the travel and didn't find it to interfere with their studies. IMO it was primarily about the SAA presidents wanting to take their ball and go home, and they did exactly that. A lot of kids who might have had wonderful playoff experiences may instead be sitting home since the SAA won't have AQs until they've been a conference for a couple of years.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on July 19, 2012, 11:40:53 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on July 19, 2012, 12:15:28 PM
I think that he was referring to academics.
Actually I meant that the schools felt they couldn't compete with Trinity athletically and by extension, that Trinity was somehow academically inferior because they were good at athletics. As if the two couldn't co-exist.
When I said "academics" I meant it largely in the self-perceived sense of the word. Academic status has more subjectivity to it than does athletic status, which means that, as you said, schools or groups of schools can sometimes hide behind it as an excuse to reconfigure conference arrangements.
I've seen this happen before. In 1992 Carroll left the CCIW and joined the MWC. The reason given by the school's president at the time was that he wanted Carroll to join a more academically elite league, but the general consensus both then and now is that Carroll actually left the CCIW because it was unable to keep up the pace of athletics facilities expansion set by some of the other CCIW schools.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on July 23, 2012, 12:06:42 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on July 19, 2012, 11:40:53 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on July 19, 2012, 12:15:28 PM
I think that he was referring to academics.
Actually I meant that the schools felt they couldn't compete with Trinity athletically and by extension, that Trinity was somehow academically inferior because they were good at athletics. As if the two couldn't co-exist.
When I said "academics" I meant it largely in the self-perceived sense of the word. Academic status has more subjectivity to it than does athletic status, which means that, as you said, schools or groups of schools can sometimes hide behind it as an excuse to reconfigure conference arrangements.
I've seen this happen before. In 1992 Carroll left the CCIW and joined the MWC. The reason given by the school's president at the time was that he wanted Carroll to join a more academically elite league, but the general consensus both then and now is that Carroll actually left the CCIW because it was unable to keep up the pace of athletics facilities expansion set by some of the other CCIW schools.
When I was looking through Carroll's student newspaper archives a couple of summers ago, the paper knew it was an athletically based move the whole time. When the football team had that great season in 1988 the paper actually pointed out this was an anomaly and most of Carroll's teams don't do nearly that well. To be fair, Carroll had always wanted to be in the Midwest Conference. They tried joining in the early 50s when Beloit had gotten kicked out for being too good (seriously, the Midwest Conference investigated them and found nothing, still kicked them out for a few years). Carroll was denied and they joined the CCI (no W yet) in 1954. But I agree, academics was down the list of priorities when making the move.
It was down the list, but it was nevertheless the reason cited by the school's president at the time. He did not endear himself to anybody in the CCIW with that statement, and in fact he created some ill will that lingered long after his departure.
Greg,
You must admit that sometimes academics does play a part. Wabash to the NCAC was an academics move.
I'm not denying it at all, smed. I'm simply reiterating Pat's point that the academics card can sometimes be played by administrators for PR purposes when the decision actually has more to do with athletic competitiveness.
Does anyone really think Cornell moved from IIAC to MWC primarily because of academics? When their travel costs will rise dramatically, and they simply couldn't be competitive in many (most?) sports in the IIAC?
In fairness, I don't know whether or not Cornell played the 'academics' card.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on July 23, 2012, 07:49:11 PM
I'm not denying it at all, smed. I'm simply reiterating Pat's point that the academics card can sometimes be played by administrators for PR purposes when the decision actually has more to do with athletic competitiveness.
I don't think anyone can deny that the two are tied together. Hear me out. For Presidents and Boards, it's one thing to go up against - and lose - to schools you feel are your peer schools or your aspirant schools. It's another to go up against and lose to schools who you are not generally recruiting against for your student body. In fact, the latter case actually gives everyone an easier "out" - "we can't beat school X because they let anyone in" or "we can't beat school X because they have triple our student body" or "we can't beat school X because they are much cheaper." Competing against aspirant school changes the conversation into a much more (hopefully) productive one.
President: Why can't we compete with School Y on the field?
AD: Facilities/Budget/Admissions + Financial Aid calendar/Early Decision Emphasis .... etc.
While some of the reasons given by an AD may or may not be true and may or may not be possible to overcome, they are a whole lot more approachable than the proverbial obstacles of "different mission," "larger," "cheaper."
Just for fun (because rankings can be so random at times), here are the latest Forbes 'Top College' Rankings (http://www.forbes.com/top-colleges/list/#p_1_s_a0_All%20states_) for the schools in the two conferences.
SAA (mean: 167):
- Berry: 295
- BSC: 211
- Centre: 60
- Hendrix: 118
- Millsaps: 122
- Oglethorpe: 367
- Rhodes: 107
- Sewanee: 59
SCAC (mean: 146):
- Austin: 242
- Centenary: 289
- Colorado: 29
- U of Dallas: 120
- Southwestern: 92
- Trinity: 101
As a side note, neither TLU or Schreiner, who join the SCAC next year, are listed in the Forbes rankings.
That is a pretty odd ranking scheme, especially when you get down below the first 100.
Quote from: scottiedoug on August 05, 2012, 12:11:26 PM
That is a pretty odd ranking scheme, especially when you get down below the first 100.
Perhaps, but the mesures used to build list look to be pretty solid given their based on student satisfaction, academic success, and post-graduate success.
The Forbes survey is based on a set of metrics developed by the Center for College Affordability and Productivity whose survey methodology can be found at http://centerforcollegeaffordability.org/uploads/2012_Methodology.pdf (http://centerforcollegeaffordability.org/uploads/2012_Methodology.pdf)
My biggest qualm with this particular ranking is the significance of reviews on ratemyprofessor.com ... They do explain why they use this, but I still think the high percentage given to that parameter is a little dubious.
Another concern of mine is this assertion in the explanation:
"For many (if not most) college students, the bottom line of higher education is whether it helps them get a good job after graduation. Other things being equal, students will choose a school that provides them the opportunity to earn the highest possible salary upon graduation."
The relatively high importance of post-graduate salaries, based on this belief, should be no surprise since Forbes is clearly a pro-wealth is good tool, but it does not help schools that attract students who want to be, say, school teachers or for that matter, college professors or social workers....
Quote from: pg04 on August 06, 2012, 11:05:22 AM
My biggest qualm with this particular ranking is the significance of reviews on ratemyprofessor.com ... They do explain why they use this, but I still think the high percentage given to that parameter is a little dubious.
Agree, not to mention that for smaller schools, a relatively few students have the potential to skew the rankings in one direction or the other. The fewer students who rate professors, the less statistically significant the result. Or, for that matters, schools can try and 'influence' things themselves, indirectly or directly. 17.5% of the ranking is a huge part of the overall number. Better would be an independent study/survey rather than one where the participants are self-selected, but that would mean Forbes would have to actually do some work ...
The use of RateMyProfessor does make the Forbes survey more of a popularity contest. A better measure would be the National Survey of Student Engagement (http://nsse.iub.edu/html/about.cfm (http://nsse.iub.edu/html/about.cfm)).