D3boards.com

OK....moved it.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Quote from: Mr.Right on September 07, 2018, 04:17:07 PM

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

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

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

Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2018, 04:44:04 PM

Quote from: Mr.Right on September 07, 2018, 04:17:07 PM

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ok thanks will take a look

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

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

As for the point about presidents don't care about athletics until it impacts academics ... while I will never say there aren't presidents who don't know how to find the athletic departments on their own campuses (my alma mater being one of them for many years) ... there are also a LOT of presidents who know just how important athletics are for their own campuses. There are at least 200 who have football programs who know that the team helps pay a lot of bills. There are even more with lacrosse programs who realize the same thing. Presidents may show their interest in athletics in different ways, and again some may not care, but I'd argue from my experience and conversations a vast majority care a lot about the departments and students involved.

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

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

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

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

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

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

These are ridiculous exaggerations.

Quote from: Mr.Right on September 07, 2018, 04:53:00 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2018, 04:44:04 PM

Quote from: Mr.Right on September 07, 2018, 04:17:07 PM

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

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

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

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

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

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

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 05, 2018, 04:19:55 PM
Well, I see Mr. Sager has thrown out another little missive.   I'll respond on this thread so as not to interfere with the CCIW thread.

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

I'm escalating? These were your very first words in this conversation:

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 05, 2018, 04:19:55 PM
Mr. Sager, you are completely off-base.

In other words, you ratcheted this up right out of the box.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 05, 2018, 04:19:55 PMI never claimed there would be full teams or even majority teams of 25 year olds.  So please, make another argument.  A lot of sloppy reading comprehension and selective parsing.

Oh, come on. Behold:

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 05, 2018, 05:31:34 PMI won't ever have a problem with on eor two ad if that's the case with NPU, fine, but your argument is specifically argued to allow for a team of all 25 year olds.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 06, 2018, 09:15:49 PMNone of that suggests some far-reaching endorsement or SYSTEMIC trend beyond usual norms, and I am absolutely certain that D3 Presidents NEVER intended to support anything that would smack of exploitation of D3 in some semi-professional way.  I wonder what the response would be if a school, by mission, filled their athletic teams with a majority of 25-27 year olds.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 06, 2018, 09:25:21 PMExactly...in terms of specific individuals, not as a systemic strategy counter to an institution's norms.  Imagine if Williams filled a D3 college hockey roster with 25 year old semi-pro Canadians, way out of line with the overall student body.  Embracing any student, including an outlier student, to play the lead in a college drama event is so not even close the counter-argument here.

As for NPU, as I already said, if the overall student body is full of older age internationals, then fine, but if there is a concerted strategy to have 25 year old internationals I am really going to be at a loss if some of you think that is competitive advantage in the same vein as seeking recruits with speed, skill, or some other athletic attribute that all coaches would seek.

For the umpteenth time, a D3 team filled with 25-year-olds is patently absurd. It is impossible to construct one, and I'm pretty sure that nobody's ever even tried to construct one, or ever will. It should be a complete non-issue. The fact that you keep harping on the theoretical possibility that it could happen might charitably be written off as some sort of eccentric fixation, except that you keep throwing North Park into the midst of that harping with this stuff about systemic trends and systemic strategies beyond usual norms, and then you followed it up with an insinuation that there might be some sort of "concerted strategy to have 25-year-old internationals" on the NPU soccer team. There isn't, and I've said that repeatedly, because -- say it with me now -- it's impossible to construct a team of 25-year-olds. Heck, even getting two 25-year-olds on the roster at the same time would be a sheer fluke.

I'm not trying to be snarky just for the heck of it. I'm simply exasperated. Why are you arguing so vehemently about an impossibility?

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 05, 2018, 04:19:55 PMI ACTUALLY endorsed the idea being presented on an INDIVIDUAL basis, and so if that is all that is being claimed as in the letter and spirit of D3, then end of discussion for me.

Well, then. North Park has one -- one -- 23-year-old freshman on the men's soccer team. So if one individual doesn't bother you, then why all the drama?

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 05, 2018, 04:19:55 PM
  My objection is that the argument as presented had to by definition allow for endorsing a majority older team, because the policy as defended was presented as not an oversight or just something of too minimal interest to care about, but rather as a very INTENTIONAL policy matter, and indeed one that is fueled by the very spirit and philosophy of D3 in terms of embracing amateurism and inclusion for all.

There's no "intentional policy matter" here in terms of any school's recruiting. As I said, it's a fool's errand to go out looking for student-athletes in their middle or late 20s. The "intentional policy matter", if that's what you want to call it, insofar as it refers to D3 is a part of the division's overall mission, as I have previously pointed out. As Pat said:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 06, 2018, 08:53:26 PMFact of the matter is, the Division III philosophy specifically references focusing on participation opportunities, and on treating student-athletes the same as the rest of the student body. A 45-year-old wouldn't be prohibited from running for student government or participating in a student dramatic production, so this is in line with that.

Your protest that there's a discernible -- and legislation-worthy -- distinction between an older student running for student government or participating in a student dramatic production, and an older student participating in athletics, is not in keeping with the D3 philosophy. The D3 philosophy is that athletics, and the students that participate in them, are to be treated the same as everything and everybody else ... no better, but no worse, either.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 05, 2018, 04:19:55 PM
  I don't know how many times I have to say I never objected to the idea of an individual or two....but the argument presented breaks down -- if the argument is supposed to represent something that is a reflection of D3 instead of an idiosyncratic policy gap -- when we start talking about anything that smacks not of a student body which provides access to all activities regardless or age or anything else but instead an actual, intentional pattern, trend, strategy (whatever you want to call it) of a trend or pipeline-building.

And here's where I quote Pat yet again:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 06, 2018, 10:20:42 PM
Athletic teams are expected to be reflective of the student body. If a student body is filled with a majority of 25-27-year-olds, come on back and let me know, but otherwise, let's stick to realistic hypotheticals.

You countered Pat by saying that your using the let's-recruit-grown-men-as-program-policy hypothetical was only to show a flaw in my argument by taking it to a logical conclusion. But don't you see? That's the very point! What you're suggesting isn't a logical conclusion. It's a chimera, a phantasm, a cultural impossibility. It's the Loch Ness Monster of D3 recruiting strategies. And that's likely one of the reasons why the presidents of D3 institutions have never given a second thought to changing the no-age-requirement policy of the division throughout its four-and-a-half-decade existence.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 05, 2018, 04:19:55 PMThen we could start talking about recruits from wherever who are coming almost exclusively so that they can play soccer versus the regular students on the student body who can't walk-on because of the slots awarded to these essentially hired guns.  Instead of inverting the real intent of  these policies to suggest that they actually encourage outlier recruiting let's talk about what the policies truly intend.

That's an interesting argument, although I don't see it as germane to the topic at hand.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 05, 2018, 04:19:55 PMBTW, there is no age limit in D1 either....just a certain number of years beyond high school to play.  Here's an interesting little thing I found with one glance below....I'm sure there are many others.

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

I read that the other day, when this argument first began. I shrugged my shoulders, because somehow it's hard to take a student seriously when she writes, "But is it really fun when someone that could be your parent is on the team?" I've got a more pertinent anecdote than that to relate, because it's based on this website. Earlier in this decade, Carthage had a men's basketball player named Malcom Kelly. He was 22 or 23 when he arrived on campus, because he had served a hitch in the Navy. In fact, that's how he paid for his schooling; he stayed in the Navy Reserve and gave Uncle Sam his summers and selected weekends during the school year, and at one point he had to put his schooling on hiatus for a year when he was called up to active duty.

Malcom Kelly was very, very good. He was a three-time All-CCIW selection, and was twice named to the All-CCIW first team. Now, keep in mind that the CCIW men's basketball board on d3boards.com is one of the most heavily-trafficked pages on the entire site. It's had a third again more posts than the entire soccer section combined of d3boards.com has had, and if you added all the views together of the various soccer boards here it still wouldn't come close to the number of views that the CCIW men's basketball board has had. Keeping that in mind, it's enlightening to realize that in the four years that Malcom Kelly starred on the hardwood for Carthage, not once -- not once -- did any opposing fan (or neutral fan) gripe about his age on the CCIW men's basketball board.

Why? Because we all recognized that he was an outlier, a rarity. Just like the RIT lacrosse player. And just like Deni Cresto. And why bother to raise the issue about one outlier -- especially when you know why he's an outlier, and why those student-athletes in his age bracket will always be outliers.

And that, my friend, is why I again ask why you're making a mountain out of a molehill.

How long did that take to write?

Not long, surprisingly. Once I get on a roll ...  ;)

Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 09, 2018, 08:31:49 AM
Not long, surprisingly. Once I get on a roll ...  ;)

Mr. Sager, you really are a piece of work....and you consistently "speak" (post) with an arrogant, semi-insulting tone.

Let's review. 

In terms of who started what, I was the THIRD responder.  In response to EB2319's initial comment, you posted "Cry me a river..."  We're all entitled to our opinions.  You then assumed and or distorted posts by that poster and then again Mr.Right suggesting that they obviously don't know the rules  -- "You seem to have forgotten that there is no age limit" [your response].  One can know the rules, and their posts as I read them made clear they did understand, and STILL have an OPINION that something seems inconsistent with the spirit of D3.  EB2319 in fact said that "for me..that's not what D3 is all about" WHILE CONCEDING that many would not agree with him (or her).  Mr.Right said "ridiculous".....you can argue and disagree but he and any of us can express an opinion about what we find ridiculous.

"The umpteenth time..."???  Really??

I was very, very clear about my position.  I didn't initiate the idea of a large segment or "full team" of anything.  Indeed, again, EB2319 first said "just don't see how recruiting an international team of grown men is good for D3 soccer."  You used phrases in the thread about "potential pool of recruits" [the JUCO pool I believe], and also cited current roster of 10 Scandinavians, 2 Brazilians, 1 Dutch, 1 China....and btw, all teams with rosters in the 40+ to 60 category ARE NOT because "everybody wants to play for a winner."  You see to be making a ton out of last year's run while lecturing us that NPU's "pattern" or "trend" or aimless recruiting strategy is no different no than it ever was.  You gave a smart-aleky response to nearly every poster....1970s NESCAC, rudy, EB2319, Mr.Right, myself....

I'm not stupid.  I don't think or at least I hope there will not be full teams of 22-23+ year olds who actually recruited instead of just sitting there already in any student body....I said multiple times I have no issue with a couple of 65 year olds from Madagascar.....you and a couple of others defended your points by suggesting intentional policy as opposed to anamoly.....So, aside from likelihood, given your argument, and given 15 foreign players [what are all their ages???] you cited who I assume are not "reservists," it is very reasonable in my OPINION t ask you if you would be OK with the hypothetical.

Have a great day.

Since I opened Pandora's box on this issue, let me clarify my position.  And for the record, I'm new to the D3 scene so it's not like I'm "after" NPU because of their success. With that said...

I recognize it's not against the rules to field an entire roster of internationals or 25 year olds. It's not what I would do, but if that's what teams want to do, then so be it. As I've said before, "to each their own".  However, I do think it goes against the spirit of rules.  I likened it to the youth coach that purposely under flights his team so they can win a trophy against inferior competition.   

In NPU's case, their roster is 38% international.  Their international student-body percentage.... 4%.  Clearly there is a concerned effort to recruit international players for the sole purpose of playing soccer. To me, that's a D1 or D2 philosophy and not the mission of D3.  Is it legal?  Yes.  Does it smell funny? Absolutely.

Regarding the 24 year old Brazilian freshman, this too smells foul although it's perfectly legal.  Again, not the mission of D3 in my eyes, but I guess I'm wrong.  Do I think 11 of his friends will transfer in next semester? Certainly not. But honestly, it wouldn't shock me if it did happen somewhere, sometime.

I apologize for starting this s*#t storm.  I simply made what I thought was a harmless observation on something I disagreed with - like we all do about other things such as playing styles.  It was never my intention to create a debate or ruffle feathers. 

Moving on...

I do want to concede one point that I've been thinking about and in the spirit of NOT being myopic....there are a wide array of types of D3 schools.  Similar to I believe Flying Weasel once commenting in response to something I wrote that we can't presume all kids/men who play D3 soccer are going to college for similar reasons or with similar goals.

The three schools I'm most familiar with in the Chicago area are a great example....U Chicago, Wheaton and NPU are all very different.

There's the NESCAC and similar making up a large portion of the UNSNWR top 50 LACs, the larger UAAs, the Christian/evangelical colleges, the city-type, often more commuter-style schools, the large university schools (SUNYAC, NJAC, Wisconsin group, etc), the GNAC and CCC schools, the OAC schools, etc, etc....

No doubt how many of us think of D3 and what D3 means are heavily impacted by the type of D3 we are most familiar with, that we attended, and/or that our kids attended.

2-3 three years ago I actually did some posts featuring D3s that I had not been familiar with to broaden my knowledge and perhaps gives others a peak into less talked about schools....Concordia (Wisc) comes to mind, with blurbs about several other Concordia's around the country....Keuka, etc.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 09, 2018, 08:31:49 AM
Not long, surprisingly. Once I get on a roll ...  ;)

Mr. Sager, you really are a piece of work....and you consistently "speak" (post) with an arrogant, semi-insulting tone.

Physician, heal thyself. Again, the first words out of your keyboard in this conversation were to call me "completely off-base." If that's not arrogant and semi-insulting, I don't know what is.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AMLet's review. 

In terms of who started what, I was the THIRD responder.

I never said that you started it. I simply quoted your first words once you decided to jump into the fray with both feet and continue it.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AMIn response to EB2319's initial comment, you posted "Cry me a river..."

You're darned right I did. Now, how about applying some context to that?

Here's how he opened this whole thing up:

Quote from: EB2319 on September 03, 2018, 10:59:40 AM
It truly saddens me to see the NPU roster.  A 23 year old Brazilian freshman midfielder?  Come on already.  I know not everyone will agree with me, but to me that's not what D3 soccer is about.

Put yourself in my shoes, if you can. I don't know how attached you are to your alma mater (or, more specificially, to your alma mater's sports teams), but it ought to be clear to you and to everybody who posts here that I'm pretty firmly attached to mine. I've been an avid fan of the Vikings since I first arrived at North Park as a freshman almost forty years ago, and an avid supporter of a school that is not only my alma mater but the alma mater of most of my friends, as well as the only institution of higher learning of my denomination. I've been working for the athletic department on the side for a decade and a half, and as the school's sports broadcaster since this decade began. As Falconer said about himself, everybody here knows that I'm a homer.

And now someone comes along and posts, "That's not what D3 soccer is about." In other words, screw you, North Park, because you people don't understand the spirit of D3. Your school may not be cheating according to the NCAA rulebook, but you sure as heck don't belong here if that's the way that you go about your business. Never mind that North Park has been an active and engaged member of D3 since the division's inception in the early '70s, and that the athletic department busts its hump every year, as every good member does, to remain in compliance by doing all of the requisite paperwork and scrupulously following the rules. No, we don't belong in D3 with a team like that, because "that's not what D3 soccer is about."

He then sends a follow-up post that reiterates the insinuation that what NPU is doing isn't good for D3 soccer, along with an erroneous accusation that the Vikings are "an international team of grown men" (they're neither majority-international in terms of residence nor grown men in the sense that it's been used throughout this conversation, i.e., men in the 25-30 age range that constitutes the physiological peak of most athletes), along with saying that it reminds him of youth coaches that cheat by using players ineligible by age under the league's rules.

So here I see that some guy who is hiding behind an anonymous name on a public discussion board is flinging what I consider to be some pretty serious mud at my school and my school's soccer program. How do you think I'm going to react? How am I supposed to react? Frankly, if the worst that you have on me is a snarky "cry me a river," then I consider myself to have been a model of restraint towards EB2319.

Oh, and some of this is just you misreading me. The last post of mine, which you quoted at the top of your post, "Not long, surprisingly. Once I get on a roll ..." was the opposite of arrogant. It was self-deprecation, in agreement with a previous post from blooter in which he poked fun at the Tolstoy-like length of my response to you. (It's not the first time that I've been accused of long-windedness on d3boards.com. Guilty as charged.) But the point is that it should've been obvious to you that I was being self-deprecating rather than arrogant both by the context and by the fact that I put a winking emoji after the statement. The fact that you took it the wrong way either means that you're now assuming the worst of me and are reading my posts in a manner that is colored by that opinion, or maybe I should just cease with trying to engage anyone in humorous banter in the middle of an argument. Thing is, I thought that humorous banter was a way to deflate an argument. So much the sadder, I guess.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AM
We're all entitled to our opinions.

Yes, we are. And if EB2319's opinion is that my school's athletic department doesn't understand what D3 is all about, and if he compares the Vikings to youth-league cheaters, then he's going to read my opinion in return.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AM
  You then assumed and or distorted posts by that poster

No, I didn't. I stuck up for international students in general, and I clarified some points about the class standing and graduation rate of NPU's Swedish and Norwegian soccer players. I thought that EP2319 and I ended our exchange on a good note. He thanked me for clarifying, and said that his questioning NPU was sincere and not simply an attack, and I accepted his word on that.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AM
and then again Mr.Right suggesting that they obviously don't know the rules  -- "You seem to have forgotten that there is no age limit" [your response].

C'mon, that was sheer snark. That should be obvious, as "you seem to have forgotten" is not a phrase typically used literally. It's commonly used as a sarcastic way of suggesting that the listener/reader is well aware of something but chooses to ignore it. I certainly hope that I'm not going to get stuck festooning every post with emojis on the off-chance that a reader might not recognize a commonly-used sarcastic phrase and might actually take it literally.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AM
  One can know the rules, and their posts as I read them made clear they did understand, and STILL have an OPINION that something seems inconsistent with the spirit of D3.

It's clear that Mr. Right and EB2319 disagree with me about that, and we are not going to resolve it. My understanding of how D3 works, based upon everything that I've learned in my (all-too-many) decades of following it, and by closely following the specialist journalists who write and talk about it (particularly Pat Coleman and Dave McHugh), is that the men and women representing the division's various schools are sensitized to the needs and issues raised by the athletic competition of their various schools, and legislatively redress when needed those needs and issues at D3 conventions. In other words, the spirit of D3 is found within the division's rules. That's made plain by the fact that the school representatives at each D3 convention take seriously the eighth point of D3's philosophy statement, as found on the NCAA website:

8. Assure that athletic participants are not treated differently from other members of the student body.

That goes back to what Pat said about a 45-year-old running for a student government position or acting in a play. According to the D3 philosophy statement, if other students are entitled to full participation in whatever the school offers, then student-athletes ought to be entitled to full participation as well. And the no-age-requirement rule is consonant with that. That's what the spirit of D3 is all about.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AM
  EB2319 in fact said that "for me..that's not what D3 is all about" WHILE CONCEDING that many would not agree with him (or her).  Mr.Right said "ridiculous".....you can argue and disagree but he and any of us can express an opinion about what we find ridiculous.

Who said anything about not being allowed to express an opinion? I don't own this website. I don't control who posts here, or what gets posted here.

(con't)

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AM
"The umpteenth time..."???  Really??

Figure of speech. You really are determined to make me break out the emojis, aren't you? ;)

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AM
I was very, very clear about my position.  I didn't initiate the idea of a large segment or "full team" of anything.

No, but you keep going back to that well as some sort of hypothetical. And the point I've been trying to make is that, since the hypothetical is impossible to achieve in a real-world setting, it's also invalid.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AM
  Indeed, again, EB2319 first said "just don't see how recruiting an international team of grown men is good for D3 soccer."  You used phrases in the thread about "potential pool of recruits" [the JUCO pool I believe],

I don't see anywhere where I've used that phrase. I may have missed it, so, sincerely, if you can spot it, please point it out to me.

I do see where I've used the word "pool" twice:

Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 08, 2018, 12:22:36 PMExactly. PaulNewman's rant strikes me as being really bizarre. Nobody is going to recruit a team of 25-year-olds in any D3 sport, for the reason I mentioned earlier -- it's simply impossible in our culture for there to be a pool of 25-year-olds willing to be full-time students without full-time jobs that's large enough to warrant recruiting them. Even when you factor in international students -- and, even counting the men's soccer team, the number of international student-athletes at NPU is pretty limited -- the pool of 25-year-olds willing to be college athletes is miniscule. Dave got it exactly right:

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on September 06, 2018, 09:28:19 PMAnd how does ONE individual some how ruin the entire thing and make it "dangerous" for everyone else? The percentage of these individuals in DIII is staggeringly ... STAGGERINGLY ... low. But a rule should be created to stop a tiny number of insanely dedicated and resilient individuals. I only wish I could have still been playing collegiately at 25. I knew I was tapped out at 22... because those freshman were getting better and faster than me.

This is all a case of making a mountain out of a molehill.

... but I don't see anything about jucos in there. In fact, I don't recall jucos coming up in this conversation at all.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AMand also cited current roster of 10 Scandinavians, 2 Brazilians, 1 Dutch, 1 China....and btw, all teams with rosters in the 40+ to 60 category ARE NOT because "everybody wants to play for a winner."

You're being overly literal again. The phrase "everybody wants to play for a winner" strikes me as being a pretty obvious rhetorical flourish on my part. Of course not every student-athlete who chooses a D3 school does so because the team she or he wants to play for is a winner. That would be a nonsensical assertion, because (among other reasons) otherwise nobody would ever play for a program with a recent tradition of losing.

But choosing a program because it wins is, in fact, a pretty high motivator for an awful lot of student-athletes. That's why it's typical for a coach on the recruiting trail, if he or she coaches a winning program, to lead off with his or her program's accomplishments and will work that vein of propaganda pretty hard, even while talking about the school's alumni acceptance rate into medical school or the internship possibilities available or the new student center that just got built last year.

North Park has thirty freshmen on the men's soccer team this year. I'm pretty sure that John Born's never had more than half of that total in any previous recruiting cycle. Is it a coincidence that NPU was the national runner-up last year? No, it isn't. The NPU coaches have not hesitated to attribute the unprecedentedly swollen freshman class to the fact that the Vikings played for the national championship last season. A very high percentage of the guys that they contacted on the recruiting trail chose North Park, and my impression (not an ironclad proven fact, but rather my impression) is that some of them self-recruited by initiating the contact themselves. Even though this makes John Born the hero of the North Park admissions department, it's not necessarily an outcome that he would've chosen. He's had to hire another assistant just to help coach all of those guys, and the team now has to hold separate practices for the regular varsity and for the mammoth squad of reserves, many of whom will never get to even play in a reserve match.

But if you went up and down the line with those freshmen, you'd find that a large number of them wanted to attend North Park because they wanted to be a part of a winning program that they think can get back to Greensboro. That's not at all unusual. Heck, in our society at the D1 level, schools notice a bump in general admission among males, not student-athlete admissions, when a title or a Final Four is achieved in football or men's basketball, because guys want to be a part of a school that excels. Winning is contagious, and, while not literally everyone, lots and lots of people want to catch a dose of that contagion.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AMYou see to be making a ton out of last year's run while lecturing us that NPU's "pattern" or "trend" or aimless recruiting strategy is no different no than it ever was.

Wow. There's a mouthful of accusations. Let's wade through them:

* "making a ton out of last year's run" -- Sorry for the snark, but the only possible response is ... well, duh. North Park is my alma mater, I'm the school's sports broadcaster, the Vikings men's soccer team reached the national championship match, and this is the d3boards.com soccer forum. QED.

* "while lecturing us that NPU's 'pattern' or 'trend' or aimless recruiting strategy" -- See, here's what I'm talking about when I say that you're dishing it out every bit as much as you're taking it with regard to insults. The verb "lecturing" here to describe my explanations of what's going on in the men's soccer program at NPU is clearly a case of you sniping at me.

And I don't talk about a "pattern" or a "trend". Those are your words. "Aimless recruiting strategy" strikes me as more sarcasm here on your part, but if there's no sarcastic intent here, I will tell you that what John Born and his staff do is far from aimless. Aimless recruiting strategies are failed recruiting strategies. Like any good coaching staff, they know their school, they know what type of student-athletes they want to target, they know where to look for them based upon the first two points, and they pursue them. Recruiting is the biggest and most important part of a coach's job. Aimlessness in that endeavor means an eventual trip to the unemployment line.

* "is no different than it ever was" -- Not true. I've never said that. In fact, I've done the opposite. I've pointed out how it's changed over the past three years, because a recruiting pipeline in Norway has opened up. North Park's international contingent was almost exclusively Swedish from the program's beginning as a varsity sport 36 years ago (although the Swedes back then were walk-ons). Now there's more Norwegians than Swedes. It's a subtle change (as I like to joke, the age-old rivalry between Swedes and Norwegians is like identical twin sisters arguing over which one of them is prettier), but it's a change nevertheless.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AM
  You gave a smart-aleky response to nearly every poster....1970s NESCAC, rudy, EB2319, Mr.Right, myself....

Good grief. What sort of a blanket accusation is that? 1970s NESCAC? rudy? What do they have to do with anything?

You attacked me here, straight out, right from the get-go, with that "completely off-base" accusation. Telling me that you disagree with me is one thing. But starting off by telling me that I'm completely off-base is another thing entirely in terms of tone. I have the right to defend not only my school and my school's soccer program, but myself as well. I don't go around seeking conflict, although I enjoy a good back-and-forth discussion as much as anybody here on d3boards.com, but if you come after me I'm going to come right back at you.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AMI'm not stupid.

Never said you were. One of the main reasons why you're exasperating me is that I know full well that you're not stupid.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AMI don't think or at least I hope there will not be full teams of 22-23+ year olds who actually recruited instead of just sitting there already in any student body.

Wait a minute. Before it was 25-to-30-year-olds. Then it was 25-year-olds. Now it's 22-23+-year-olds. How far are you going to backtrack on this? I'll say this for Mr. Right -- he at least came flat out and said that just about any non-traditional student in age, even perhaps a few who only take a single gap year after high school in some cases, ought to be disqualified from participating in D3 sports:

Quote from: Mr.Right on September 05, 2018, 12:14:55 PMSo I have always said International players are fine but for D3 Sports there MUST be an age limit for incoming Frosh. Maybe 19-20 years old would be a good cut off.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AM...I said multiple times I have no issue with a couple of 65 year olds from Madagascar.....you and a couple of others defended your points by suggesting intentional policy as opposed to anamoly.

No, we didn't. We cited both points. Or have you forgotten Pat's gibe about a team from a school consisting of students aged 25-27?

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AM....So, aside from likelihood, given your argument, and given 15 foreign players [what are all their ages???]

Oh, come on. Are you really asking me to hunt down all of North Park's international men's soccer players and inquire as to each of their birthdays?

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AMyou cited who I assume are not "reservists," it is very reasonable in my OPINION t ask you if you would be OK with the hypothetical.

And, as I have said, I think that your hypothetical is so totally groundless as to not be worthy of debate. If something can't happen in the real world, it's invalid as a hypothetical.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:31:57 AMHave a great day.

You, too. Seriously.

It wasn't even my intention to poke fun, I was more or less just entertained that you had written such a long post.

Quote from: EB2319 on September 09, 2018, 10:37:42 AM
Since I opened Pandora's box on this issue, let me clarify my position.  And for the record, I'm new to the D3 scene so it's not like I'm "after" NPU because of their success.

Yes, you said that before and I accepted your word on that. Thank you for saying it again. Seriously.

Quote from: EB2319 on September 09, 2018, 10:37:42 AMWith that said...

I recognize it's not against the rules to field an entire roster of internationals or 25 year olds. It's not what I would do, but if that's what teams want to do, then so be it. As I've said before, "to each their own".  However, I do think it goes against the spirit of rules.  I likened it to the youth coach that purposely under flights his team so they can win a trophy against inferior competition.   

Can you see why that analogy bothers me so much? If the rules of a youth league include age limits, and a coach defies that rule, that's cheating. How are those of us who support North Park supposed to react when you use an analogy of a cheating team as a comparison to our school's men's soccer program?

As for the spirit of the rules, again, fielding a student-athlete who is of a non-traditional age doesn't go against them at all. As Pat, Dave, and I have in turn explained, the rules of D3 don't simply allow for student-athletes of any age to participate as an arbitrary decision or as an overlooked loophole. They are driven by the spirit of D3, as defined in point #8 of the D3 philosophy statement, as I quoted above to PaulNewman. It's right there on the website at www.ncaa.org.

Quote from: EB2319 on September 09, 2018, 10:37:42 AMIn NPU's case, their roster is 38% international.  Their international student-body percentage.... 4%.

It's actually 7%, but you're missing the bigger point here. And I think that it might have to do with your lack of familiarity with North Park University and with the city of Chicago.

NPU is an urban school. It's located on the North Side of a city of almost three million people -- a city that contains a bewildering variety of people from pretty much every nation on Earth. The 60625 zip code in which North Park is located is, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, one of the three most ethnically diverse zip codes in the entire country. The school reflects that diversity. A very large percentage of the student body consists of students from working-class or new-professional-class households in the city or the inner-ring suburbs, and a very large percentage in turn of that segment of the student body consists of first- or second-generation immigrants. It's very common at an NPU commencement to see young people cross the stage as the first person in their respective families to ever receive a university diploma -- and a lot of those proud families in the audience speak heavily accented or broken English. This is not at all unusual in a Chicago school such as North Park, DePaul, Loyola, UIC, or Roosevelt.

Look at the NPU men's soccer rosters of the past several seasons, and you'll see lots of Spanish and Polish names. Nearly every single one of those players was/is from a local immigrant family. You hear lots of Polish and Spanish, or English with a Polish or Hispanic accent, in the stands where the families sit at NPU soccer matches. In other words, the international students on the NPU roster are in some ways different from a lot of their North Park teammates -- and a lot of their North Park classmates -- only by the fact that their families haven't physically moved to America. A great many of NPU's American students live in the dual world common to an immigrant or an immigrant family. To some degree, the line between international player and American player is blurred for much of the team -- just as it is within the campus at large, especially among the traditional commuter population.

This is how soccer has always operated in Chicago. It's not a homegrown sport, as you all know. It's an imported sport. Because Americans at large disdained soccer for generations, a huge percentage of the people who played the sport or followed the sport at all were immigrants. This was especially true in a melting-pot city like Chicago, where ethnic clubs invariably had their own soccer leagues, and Germans, Serbs, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Italians, Croats, etc., and then Africans, Asians, and Latin Americans as well, got their first real experiences with people from other cultures outside of a job site or a government office by playing them on a soccer pitch in a public park. To this day, the immigrant population heavily shapes Chicagoland soccer, as any examination of the roster of a local college team (that's mostly locally-based, unlike Chicago or Wheaton or Illinois Tech) will tell you. Heck, you can even see it in the box score of last night's Chicago @ NPU match, in which the assistant referees were Tomas Kaczowka and Krzysztof Bajorek. At North Park, we've long grown used to seeing refs call our matches who came to this city from Croatia or Poland or Mexico or Iraq or Germany.

While there is no longer a substantial population of Scandinavian immigrants in Chicago (although it was at one time the second-largest Swedish city in the world after Stockholm, and the largest Norwegian city, even bigger than Oslo and Bergen), North Park is a school that has a Swedish heritage. (Hence, the royal blue and gold school colors, taken from the Swedish flag, and the nickname "Vikings".) It has a Center for Scandinavian Studies on campus, and it is one of less than a half-dozen colleges and universities in the U.S. that offers Swedish as a major. A substantial percentage of international students in general at NPU are from Scandinavia. So the international players from Norway and Sweden fit the school's ethos perfectly as well.

North Park's men's soccer roster is very much in harmony with what the school stands for and who it serves.

Quote from: EB2319 on September 09, 2018, 10:37:42 AMClearly there is a concerned effort to recruit international players for the sole purpose of playing soccer.

Not true. Just like every coach at every university or college in America -- well, I guess that I better be careful and except D1 football and men's basketball coaches from this blanket statement -- NPU coaches recruit student-athletes to both participate in their sport and to get an education. North Park is no different in that regard than any other school in D3.

Quote from: EB2319 on September 09, 2018, 10:37:42 AMTo me, that's a D1 or D2 philosophy and not the mission of D3.  Is it legal?  Yes.  Does it smell funny? Absolutely.

Sorry, but I just think that you're completely wrong about this. North Park recruits student-athletes in the exact same manner, and with the exact same intent, as does every other D3 institution. The only difference to which you can point is the fact that, as far as the NPU men's soccer team is concerned, some of those student-athletes come from overseas. But that's not unique to NPU; lots and lots of D3 schools have international soccer players, just as do D1, D2, and NAIA schools.

Quote from: EB2319 on September 09, 2018, 10:37:42 AMRegarding the 24 year old Brazilian freshman,

He's 23.

Quote from: EB2319 on September 09, 2018, 10:37:42 AMthis too smells foul although it's perfectly legal.

That's a completely subjective response. You're entitled to it, of course. But it holds no currency with me, because North Park men's soccer has neither broken any rules nor done something that goes against the school's mission or the D3 philosophy.

Quote from: EB2319 on September 09, 2018, 10:37:42 AMAgain, not the mission of D3 in my eyes, but I guess I'm wrong.  Do I think 11 of his friends will transfer in next semester? Certainly not. But honestly, it wouldn't shock me if it did happen somewhere, sometime.

I apologize for starting this s*#t storm.  I simply made what I thought was a harmless observation on something I disagreed with - like we all do about other things such as playing styles.  It was never my intention to create a debate or ruffle feathers.

Understood, and appreciated.

Quote from: blooter442 on September 09, 2018, 08:08:53 PM
It wasn't even my intention to poke fun, I was more or less just entertained that you had written such a long post.

I'll bet that I made your day today, then.  :D

Wow....just wow.  Is it OK if I have a little exasperation?

Mr. Sager, as long as we're getting fine-grained here....don't recall this in the other thread?

"The second benefit is that, as juco students, they represent a potential pool of recruits for North Park."

Couple of other errors on your part... I was not a poster who suggested any legislation or designated anything "designation-worthy."

I also for the msot part have not referred to 'intentional' as related to an y particular school.....was more a suggestion that you must be be assigning some level of intentionality to the NCAA and D3 Presidents given how you have cloaked the "policy" in terms of something exuding all of the best in terms of the grand spirit of D3.

Neither you nor Mr. Coleman will convince me of any equivalency regarding the tuba player or lead in To Kill a Mockingbird....but feel free to show me where Wheaton ever showed concern about the drama students at NPU possibly participating in professional Off-Broadway productions.

Again, giving already existent students in a student body and giving them full access to all college activities is far different than the current state of D3 soccer recruitment.

You are obviously quite proud of NPU's tradition and recruiting pipeline.  Just embrace it without all the defensiveness.

".....are driven by the spirit of D3"

Ummm, no, there's the rub....allowed, but not necessarily in the spirit of....which is my only point about intentionality and the hypothetical you keep binding to me.  The question is whether the NCAA and D3 Presidents have intentionality regarding any systemic recruiting....and especially whether what you want to be draped in something magnificent should be so draped.  The odd, occasional 45 year old Vet of Desert Storm isn't the issue we're debating.

And this was sweet -- "Because -- say it with me now...."

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 08:51:05 PM
Wow....just wow.  Is it OK if I have a little exasperation?

Plenty to go around, apparently. ;)

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 08:51:05 PMMr. Sager, as long as we're getting fine-grained here....don't recall this in the other thread?

"The second benefit is that, as juco students, they represent a potential pool of recruits for North Park."

See, that's the problem here. You're pulling in stuff from other boards and other conversational threads besides the one that started on the CCIW board a few days ago. That's the one where I went hunting for some reference to a "potential pool of recruits" and jucos following your previous post, because that's the source material for this current debate. Which other thread were you talking about? is the question that needs to be asked here. I've got 20,747 posts to my name on this website at the moment. How am I supposed to keep track of what you're quoting unless you give me context, such as date and board? At least use the d3boards.com quote function, so that I can track it down that way. Now that you've retyped my words, I can recall it and identify it as a post that I made at some point (still not sure when) as to why it's more useful for NPU to play jucos in reserve matches than other four-year-school reserve teams. (I've made the same point several times on the CCIW men's basketball board, and I may have even made it in the CCIW baseball room. It's germane to all three of those sports.)

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 08:51:05 PMCouple of other errors on your part... I was not a poster who suggested any legislation or designated anything "designation-worthy."

You certainly seemed to be implying that. But ... fair enough. Withdrawn.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 08:51:05 PMI also for the msot part have not referred to 'intentional' as related to an y particular school.....was more a suggestion that you must be be assigning some level of intentionality to the NCAA and D3 Presidents given how you have cloaked the "policy" in terms of something exuding all of the best in terms of the grand spirit of D3.

Your statement on 9/5 at 4:19:55 was vaguely worded in such a way that "intentional policy" could be interpreted from the context as being either a reference to NPU's soccer recruiting methodology or to D3's governing philosophy -- especially since you later referred to an "actual, intentional pattern, trend, strategy (whatever you want to call it) of a trend or pipeline-building" vis-a-vis NPU recruiting later on in the same post -- and so I covered both bases. (Emphasis mine.)

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 08:51:05 PMNeither you nor Mr. Coleman will convince me of any equivalency regarding the tuba player or lead in To Kill a Mockingbird....but feel free to show me where Wheaton ever showed concern about the drama students at NPU possibly participating in professional Off-Broadway productions.

Sorry, but that's just plain silly. Wheaton and North Park don't compete on the stage. But they do compete (very fiercely) on the soccer pitch. Nor, as far as I know, are college actors prohibited from participating in professional stage productions the way that college athletes are prohibited from being paid to play sports. Your analogy doesn't work.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 08:51:05 PMAgain, giving already existent students in a student body and giving them full access to all college activities is far different than the current state of D3 soccer recruitment.

Well, like you said, you are just going to have to disagree with Pat and I (and Dave) about that. Fortunately for the three of us, the division's rules and the college and university administrators who make them have agreed with us since the division was created in the early '70s.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 08:51:05 PMYou are obviously quite proud of NPU's tradition and recruiting pipeline.  Just embrace it without all the defensiveness.

I'd like to do so ...  but if the program's integrity is impugned on a public website, then you can bet your bottom dollar that I'm going to defend it.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 08:57:03 PM
".....are driven by the spirit of D3"

Ummm, no, there's the rub....allowed, but not necessarily in the spirit of....which is my only point about intentionality and the hypothetical you keep binding to me.  The question is whether the NCAA and D3 Presidents have intentionality regarding any systemic recruiting....and especially whether what you want to be draped in something magnificent should be so draped.  The odd, occasional 45 year old Vet of Desert Storm isn't the issue we're debating.

The intentionality lies in the no-age-requirement rule. And, yes, insofar as D3 is concerned, it is the 45-year-old vet of Desert Storm that we're debating ... and your mythical 65-year-old from Madagascar ... and the 25-year-old RIT lacrosse player ... and Deni Cresto, and Malcom Kelly, and whatever other mid-20s anomalies, both talented and untalented, that we're addressing. They're all of a piece to the NCAA.

The reference to a "pool of recruits" and "jucos" was pulled directly from the CCIW thread and in the same basic discussion or just before all this started, somewhere in the page 64-66 range.  That thread gave direct birth to this thread.  Sorry I haven't mastered the multiple quotes within a post function.

You can keep saying we disagree about NCAA D3 policy.  We don't, or rather we disagree to what extent it is a laudable, intentional thing or whether schools do what they can within the rules. 

Let's change the focus.  In my view one can argue about the degree to which NESCAC (and similar) schools aggressively recruit, use "tips," etc.  Allowed, yes, but in the best tradition of the spirit?  Not so sure.

My point is in the title of thread....agreeing with zero discrimination but wondering where the line is in terms of some bleeding into professionalization.

The truth is that I don't care that much.  I got caught up much more in how I experience you coming across, and I assume to some significant extent the same is true for you and my style/persistence.

"Wheaton and North Park don't compete on the stage. But they do compete (very fiercely) on the soccer pitch. Nor, as far as I know, are college actors prohibited from participating in professional stage productions the way that college athletes are prohibited from being paid to play sports. Your analogy doesn't work."

Exactly.  The analogy doesn't work for you guys or me.  That's the point.  Just like a student who is already a student who decides while already there to give kicking field goals a go versus being recruited basically only to kick field goals.

Whew!  ;D

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/jose-cresto/profil/spieler/406947 (https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/jose-cresto/profil/spieler/406947)

A 23 year old Brazilian freshman who had played in the Italian 4th division

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/joachim-hoff/profil/spieler/471704

20 year old Norwegian freshman who had played in Norway's 3rd division

I'm sure there are more.  I just can't be bothered to look others up.  Also, 30 freshman and a roster size of 50+ is absolutely insane. There are just so many anomalies regarding the recruiting practices of this school that don't pass the smell test.  I'm sure everything is done within the ncaa d3 regulations but they're really treading a fine line regarding amateur status in my opinion.

You'd have to be deluded to think that this roster was the result of a natural d3 soccer recruiting process and not some concerted effort by the coaching staff to get these players.  And they still lost to Messiah ;D

I'm not going to wade into this argument, but I thought I'd mention a D3 case in another sport that may have some related circumstances (not so much for the seemingly random international player since it's not surprising the school would have a connection to Israel, but for an older player who played pro), Bar Alluf for Yeshiva basketball last season. http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2018/03/yeshiva-alluf-not-suited-up (http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2018/03/yeshiva-alluf-not-suited-up)

Other than being held out of the tournament game when the situation was brought up as a precaution, I don't know if anything further happened.

Quote from: paclassic89 on September 10, 2018, 01:06:16 AM
https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/jose-cresto/profil/spieler/406947 (https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/jose-cresto/profil/spieler/406947)

A 23 year old Brazilian freshman who had played in the Italian 4th division

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/joachim-hoff/profil/spieler/471704

20 year old Norwegian freshman who had played in Norway's 3rd division

I'm sure there are more.  I just can't be bothered to look others up.  Also, 30 freshman and a roster size of 50+ is absolutely insane. There are just so many anomalies regarding the recruiting practices of this school that don't pass the smell test.  I'm sure everything is done within the ncaa d3 regulations but they're really treading a fine line regarding amateur status in my opinion.

You'd have to be deluded to think that this roster was the result of a natural d3 soccer recruiting process and not some concerted effort by the coaching staff to get these players.  And they still lost to Messiah ;D

Serie D https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serie_D

Norway's 3rd division (4th level):  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3._divisjon

Scandinavia's soccer system is run through the division system.  I think most top level D3 teams would draw from similar levels in the US if such a system existed.

For D1 BYU and D3 Southern Virginia, a pertinent dimension would be men who go on Mormon missions before playing collegiate sports. I don't know the numbers for this, but there must be many such students at those schools (or any other Mormon institutions). Of course, I assume that factor would also be reflected in the general student body, not just among athletes. It's apparently created a tougher recruiting situation in recent years, though not (from what I gather) one involving any age limits:

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/865572257/Mission-age-NCAA-rule-changes-close-BYUs-wiggle-room.html

Quote from: paclassic89 on September 10, 2018, 01:06:16 AM
I'm sure there are more.  I just can't be bothered to look others up.

::)

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 10, 2018, 03:32:41 AM
I'm not going to wade into this argument, but I thought I'd mention a D3 case in another sport that may have some related circumstances (not so much for the seemingly random international player since it's not surprising the school would have a connection to Israel, but for an older player who played pro), Bar Alluf for Yeshiva basketball last season. http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2018/03/yeshiva-alluf-not-suited-up (http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2018/03/yeshiva-alluf-not-suited-up)

Other than being held out of the tournament game when the situation was brought up as a precaution, I don't know if anything further happened.

According to one of the articles on this story... "the Maccabees opted to play it safe and hold out Alluf, who had allegedly played in a pro league in Israel before arriving at Yeshiva. That wouldn't necessarily make him ineligible, though."

Can someone (Sager?) explain the rules as they relate to playing in pro leagues prior to college? Sounds like there is some leeway so I'm curious to know what it is.  Thanks!

I thought there was a distinction between playing for a professional team (without getting paid) and being paid to play for a professional team.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:25:40 PM
The reference to a "pool of recruits" and "jucos" was pulled directly from the CCIW thread and in the same basic discussion or just before all this started, somewhere in the page 64-66 range.  That thread gave direct birth to this thread.  Sorry I haven't mastered the multiple quotes within a post function.

We're down to picking nits here, which I take as a good sign. ;) But you're wrong about this one. This current thread began when I posted my NPU @ IIT analysis eight days ago, which mentioned Deni Cresto on the CCIW board for the first time. Gotberg responded with a comment about Cresto and linked to the YouTube recruitment video that caused EB2319 to react and which thus brought about this entire contretemps. My postgame analysis and Gotberg's posting of the Cresto video were on page 68. In other words, this discussion started last week. The discussion of reserve matches and juco opponents is all the way back on page 65, and it took place the first week in August (long ago enough so that I couldn't recollect it at all at first). It was a completely different thread with no crossover.

As for the quote function, I'm certainly not telling you how to post. I'm just saying that it makes this sort of thing, in which someone has to do detective work and go digging back through past pages, a lot easier for everybody to follow.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:25:40 PMYou can keep saying we disagree about NCAA D3 policy.  We don't, or rather we disagree to what extent it is a laudable, intentional thing or whether schools do what they can within the rules. 

Fine. I'm happy with your wording. I think that it's a matter of semantics, but whatever.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:25:40 PMLet's change the focus.  In my view one can argue about the degree to which NESCAC (and similar) schools aggressively recruit, use "tips," etc.  Allowed, yes, but in the best tradition of the spirit?  Not so sure.

I don't know enough about the NESCAC's specific recruiting practices to comment on that.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:25:40 PMMy point is in the title of thread....agreeing with zero discrimination but wondering where the line is in terms of some bleeding into professionalization.

Re: "professionalization":

(https://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/340/205/4d5.png)

Nobody in this thread, as far as I can tell, is talking about players getting paid to play soccer prior to, or during, their collegiate careers. I don't think it's helpful to use a word that means pay-to-play in a discussion that has nothing to do with that topic.*

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 09, 2018, 10:25:40 PMThe truth is that I don't care that much.  I got caught up much more in how I experience you coming across, and I assume to some significant extent the same is true for you and my style/persistence.

Agreed. But I thought that it was important for you to understand why I got hot under the collar.

(*Or at least they weren't until today. Now, as I read the thread for the first time today, i see that that's changed.)

Quote from: paclassic89 on September 10, 2018, 01:06:16 AM
https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/jose-cresto/profil/spieler/406947 (https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/jose-cresto/profil/spieler/406947)

A 23 year old Brazilian freshman who had played in the Italian 4th division

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/joachim-hoff/profil/spieler/471704

20 year old Norwegian freshman who had played in Norway's 3rd division

I'm sure there are more.  I just can't be bothered to look others up.

I'll second Pat's comment:

::) ::)

Quote from: paclassic89 on September 10, 2018, 01:06:16 AMAlso, 30 freshman and a roster size of 50+ is absolutely insane.

Gee, and here I was under the impression that there was no such thing as a roster limit in D3 men's soccer.

The topic of the size of North Park's roster has already been dealt with. And I've already pointed out that the NPU coaching staff considers such a large roster to be unwieldly and difficult to manage.

Quote from: paclassic89 on September 10, 2018, 01:06:16 AMThere are just so many anomalies regarding the recruiting practices of this school that don't pass the smell test.

Gotta love this. Some guy makes pronouncements on his "smell test", but he "can't be bothered" to provide any evidence other than two links to players who played on amateur levels in overseas leagues. I'm tempted to throw in a few more eyeroll emojis.

Quote from: paclassic89 on September 10, 2018, 01:06:16 AMI'm sure everything is done within the ncaa d3 regulations but they're really treading a fine line regarding amateur status in my opinion.

How clever. You want to cast aspersions upon North Park's soccer program, but you can't prove that it's breaking any rules. So you post a couple of specious links to soccer leagues in foreign countries, and fulminate about "smell tests" and "anomalies" and the ethics of NPU recruiting without putting yourself on the line by actually leveling a hard accusation of cheating. Let's see evidence -- real evidence -- that North Park is breaking the rules. Otherwise, you're treading dangerously close to violating this site's Terms of Service.

Quote from: paclassic89 on September 10, 2018, 01:06:16 AMYou'd have to be deluded to think that this roster was the result of a natural d3 soccer recruiting process and not some concerted effort by the coaching staff to get these players.  And they still lost to Messiah ;D

For crying out loud, read the whole thread, willya? Get acquainted with a topic before you spout off about it. North Park has recruited Scandinavian players for many, many years. It is part of a "natural D3 soccer recruiting process." Your comment really makes no sense, because any recruiting process is an attempt by a coaching staff to "get those players," whatever "those" means in the context of a particular school.

Bottom line is that plenty of D3 soccer programs recruit international players. This is not some anomaly. It's a commonplace. Just within the CCIW, aside from North Park, there are:

* three Dutch players, two Ecuadorian players, a Norwegian player, and a Moroccan player at Augustana;
* a Spanish player, a Peruvian player, and a French player at Carroll;
* a Rwandan player, a Zimbabwean player, a Venezuelan player, and a Colombian player at Millikin; and
*  two Norwegian players, a Swedish player, an Argentinian player, an Australian player, and a Japanese player at North Central.

The only difference between North Park and its four CCIW rivals is one of numbers, not of kind.

Quote from: EB2319 on September 10, 2018, 04:39:04 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 10, 2018, 03:32:41 AM
I'm not going to wade into this argument, but I thought I'd mention a D3 case in another sport that may have some related circumstances (not so much for the seemingly random international player since it's not surprising the school would have a connection to Israel, but for an older player who played pro), Bar Alluf for Yeshiva basketball last season. http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2018/03/yeshiva-alluf-not-suited-up (http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2018/03/yeshiva-alluf-not-suited-up)

Other than being held out of the tournament game when the situation was brought up as a precaution, I don't know if anything further happened.

According to one of the articles on this story... "the Maccabees opted to play it safe and hold out Alluf, who had allegedly played in a pro league in Israel before arriving at Yeshiva. That wouldn't necessarily make him ineligible, though."

Can someone (Sager?) explain the rules as they relate to playing in pro leagues prior to college? Sounds like there is some leeway so I'm curious to know what it is.  Thanks!

I'm not certain exactly what the rule is with regard to amateurs playing in professional leagues, although my partly-informed understanding in this instance matches what Flying Weasel said (and as the Alluf case seems to imply), which is that it's permissible for an amateur to play in a professional league as long as he isn't paid.

But that's not the case here. As Gotberg's post pointed out, Cresto and Hoff played at amateur levels within the tier system of Italian and Norwegian soccer, respectively.

Greg, I was so looking forward to your concession on the "pool of recruits."  I should have known I would be denied.

Our little back and forth has been costly as I keep racking up negative karma even when I'm not still posting.  To quote our incredible joke of a President....what gutless cowards.  I respect that you at least respond and respond genuinely, albeit (in my opinion) parsing to your advantage and with some arrogance (and I say arrogance while admitting I can't claim I'm not). 

Anyway, I'm going to say I was still at least half-right.  I see that post was in August, but it WAS in the same thread and just a page or two before the latest discussion (and not irrelevant to that discussion insofar as references to "pools" for recruiting).  It wasn't in a baseball thread as I believe you threw out there.

I of course understand why you might defensive about NPU, but the word "professionalization" is not out of place, and I'm not referring to the subsequent allegations.  There is a whole literature about the "professionalization" of YOUTH SPORTS. I would assume you might conceded that a reasonable discussion can be had about the professionalization of major D1 sports, aside from any claims about whether major D1 athletes get "paid" or not. 

I'm open to a different word if you can suggest one, but for the sake of raising something I'd love to hear your take on, I wonder how you might rate D3 programs in terms of "professionalization."  Maybe different words would be investment in the program, commitment to winning, etc.  But on a scale where do various schools land.  I had this thought watching the film about Bader Ginsburg and features on the current Supr Court nominee where all nine fall from left to right.  If the scale is least competitive or least "professional" vesus more and most, where do college soccer programs fall?  I've been curious why certain programs haven't fared better, like Colby and Bates and especially Trinity and Conn Coll in the NESCAC.  Colby and Bates are certainly very competitive with admissions but historically they've been easier to get than Williams and Amherst which for years had the strongest programs.  Maybe the biggest variable is coaching....and I can think of coaches who obviously have been key to turning programs around or taking them up a notch.   



Almost everybody here has an agenda, or put more charitably, a rooting interest.  This may surprise some, but I find some of the Messiah posters the most fair, as they are like UK bball fans who appreciate good soccer when they see it.  But there are agendas still.  D3soccerwatcher is now not so subtlety pumping Hope just as he did the exact same thing with either Grove City or Geneva a year or two ago. 

I saw NPU live at Kenyon a few years ago when NPU lost a game that could have gone either way to Thomas More.  A really enjoyable game to watch.  NPU seemed more talented but Thomas More wanted it more, fueled by a great and gutsy D3 player, Austin Juniet.  I recall thinking that NPU had a few players who looked like grown men (one a barrel-chested fellow), and I can tell you that even though I noticed that I did not for one second have any thoughts about unfairness.  If NPU had won, I would have thought they won a game that could have gone either way with two teams who played a very good, very competitive NCAA D3 soccer game.  I was actually surprised NPU didn't make the tournament for a couple of years thereafter.  And I was happy for NPU's run last year, except for my own homerish hope that Kenyon should have gotten to NPU in the draw and would have had a fair chance, and then against Chicago where I personally thought Chicago had the better squad.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3ASerie_D (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3ASerie_D)

Serie C teams are allowed to pay salaries to players such as every company does with its employees. Serie D (and lower division) teams are not allowed to do that, since they're all amateur clubs, and instead pay so-called "refunds of expenses" to their players. This is the Italian meaning of professionism in football. In practice, Serie D teams are used to pay very high refunds of expenses for its players, often a few lower than Serie C salaries, that's why it's often referred to as "semi-professionism". --Angelo 18:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Ah, that makes sense, I suppose. So the "amateurs" in Serie D get paid nearly as much as the "professionals" in Serie C, then? john k 22:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
It depends of the team. If a team wanna win the Serie D, probably it would pay nearly Serie C salaries. --Angelo 00:03, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps all this should be explicitly discussed in the article. (And it seems like "semiprofessional" would be a more or less accurate shorthand to describe the setup, even if it's officially an amateur competition. john k 17:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Sheesh - I step away for a little bit (because, I'm busy) and ...

Couple of notes:

- If people are frustrated with international recruiting in soccer and how it might balance out with the student body, don't wade into ice hockey or some other sports.
- I love celebrating students of older age who are playing in Division III. It is so difficult especially since so many of them have to work at the same time due to most likely having families or other priorities. Sadly, this entire thread makes me shake my head because ... this isn't celebrating anything.
- Too many people think coaches go out and look for these older players. Coaches aren't looking for them. They either are told about them or the individual inquires themselves. In all my years of talking to coaches about recruiting, not once have I heard one say they are looking for older players. They usually just fall into their laps when looking elsewhere.
- Players playing overseas "professionally" is an example of the word "professionally" being misused. There are a lot of leagues that don't pay a penny as a salary. They may may expenses and such, but that is allowed by the NCAA.
- Sadly, I spent FAR too much time dealing and working the Yeshiva case last March - time I should have been spending on the others in the NCAA tournament. I can try and explain more, but my head hurt so much in March that mentioning the Yeshiva case just pisses me off (my opinion, stated publicly, is it feels like a sour grapes case of people who didn't like Yeshiva's success and instead of handling it professionally and inquiring, instead decided to do it in a sketchy way using others to do their dirty work ... I do need to check on the latest in the case, but I believe they did ask the NCAA for help confirming things.)

The spirit of DIII is to allow almost anyone who wants to play ... to play. I got a chance to play after taking a gap year, before a gap year was a thing to do, and travel. There are a number of older student-athletes in DIII just as there are a number of students who have returned to college and are on campus and involved in some way. There are only a very few older student-athletes who stand out ... and people say things like it doesn't pass the "smell test" and there should be rules about this. Not once in my lengthy coverage of Division III (as a whole, not just basketball) has an older student-athlete been the sole reason a team or program has been successful or even won any kind of trophy.

I have no idea where people think professionalism comes from in DIII. The idea of this and older student-athletes feels like a case of, as Sager has said, making a mountain out of a molehill. There are plenty of examples in DIII where coaches and programs have gone awry and punishments handed out, but professionalism and older students is not a case I can remember seeing. Yes, improper benefits have been dealt with, but not payments. And as I said above, just because someone plays in a "professional" league does not mean it is a pro league like we are used to (i.e. NBA, GNBA, NFL, minor league baseball, etc.). Things in Europe and overseas are very different and a town putting together a team to represent them and paying expenses is considered "professional." The NCAA and Division III have very specific rules about it. It is worth reading, but read very carefully as it can be hard to fully understand.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 10, 2018, 09:20:51 PM
Greg, I was so looking forward to your concession on the "pool of recruits."  I should have known I would be denied.

Our little back and forth has been costly as I keep racking up negative karma even when I'm not still posting.

I haven't been smiting you. I don't smite, as a personal rule.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 10, 2018, 09:20:51 PMTo quote our incredible joke of a President....what gutless cowards.  I respect that you at least respond and respond genuinely, albeit (in my opinion) parsing to your advantage and with some arrogance (and I say arrogance while admitting I can't claim I'm not). 

Anyway, I'm going to say I was still at least half-right.  I see that post was in August, but it WAS in the same thread and just a page or two before the latest discussion (and not irrelevant to that discussion insofar as references to "pools" for recruiting).  It wasn't in a baseball thread as I believe you threw out there.

We have a difference of terminology here. You're using "thread" as a synonym for "board" or "room". By "thread" I mean a specific ongoing conversation. The conversation on the CCIW board in which I mentioned reserves playing against jucos ended in August. The conversation that you've carried over from the CCIW board to this newly-minted board had nothing to do with that; as I said, it arose out of my summary of NPU's match against IIT two weekends ago and a subsequent post by Gotberg that linked to a Deni Cresto recruitment video on YouTube.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 10, 2018, 09:20:51 PMI of course understand why you might defensive about NPU, but the word "professionalization" is not out of place, and I'm not referring to the subsequent allegations.  There is a whole literature about the "professionalization" of YOUTH SPORTS. I would assume you might conceded that a reasonable discussion can be had about the professionalization of major D1 sports, aside from any claims about whether major D1 athletes get "paid" or not. 

I disagree completely. The word "professional" means getting paid for playing. That's all that it means, and to use it with a different connotation will nevertheless imply something that isn't there. It's a dangerous term to use in any discussion of amateur sports (e.g., D3 men's soccer) for that very reason -- it's too easy to interpret it as having to do with pay-for-play, because that's what "professional" means.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 10, 2018, 09:20:51 PMI'm open to a different word if you can suggest one, but for the sake of raising something I'd love to hear your take on, I wonder how you might rate D3 programs in terms of "professionalization."  Maybe different words would be investment in the program, commitment to winning, etc.  But on a scale where do various schools land.  I had this thought watching the film about Bader Ginsburg and features on the current Supr Court nominee where all nine fall from left to right.  If the scale is least competitive or least "professional" vesus more and most, where do college soccer programs fall?  I've been curious why certain programs haven't fared better, like Colby and Bates and especially Trinity and Conn Coll in the NESCAC.  Colby and Bates are certainly very competitive with admissions but historically they've been easier to get than Williams and Amherst which for years had the strongest programs.  Maybe the biggest variable is coaching....and I can think of coaches who obviously have been key to turning programs around or taking them up a notch.

Sorry, but I won't take part in that discussion, because I simply don't know enough about those schools in terms of how hard they're trying to win at men's soccer -- the internal emphasis within the administration and athletic department that they place upon having a nationally-successful men's soccer program, the resources invested in getting their program to that point and keeping it there (including coaching salaries and perqs), their admissions policies, their recruitment policies and emphases, etc. I've excoriated more than one person in this thread for talking about things that he didn't know anything about, so I'd be a pretty big hypocrite if I turned right around and spouted off in ignorance about a Williams or a Bates, wouldn't I? As I've said before, I really know next to nothing about NESCAC men's soccer. It's not on my radar in terms of things in which I'm seeking to become an expert.

Quote from: PaulNewman on September 10, 2018, 09:20:51 PMAlmost everybody here has an agenda, or put more charitably, a rooting interest.  This may surprise some, but I find some of the Messiah posters the most fair, as they are like UK bball fans who appreciate good soccer when they see it.  But there are agendas still.  D3soccerwatcher is now not so subtlety pumping Hope just as he did the exact same thing with either Grove City or Geneva a year or two ago. 

I saw NPU live at Kenyon a few years ago when NPU lost a game that could have gone either way to Thomas More.  A really enjoyable game to watch.  NPU seemed more talented but Thomas More wanted it more, fueled by a great and gutsy D3 player, Austin Juniet.  I recall thinking that NPU had a few players who looked like grown men (one a barrel-chested fellow), and I can tell you that even though I noticed that I did not for one second have any thoughts about unfairness.  If NPU had won, I would have thought they won a game that could have gone either way with two teams who played a very good, very competitive NCAA D3 soccer game.  I was actually surprised NPU didn't make the tournament for a couple of years thereafter.  And I was happy for NPU's run last year, except for my own homerish hope that Kenyon should have gotten to NPU in the draw and would have had a fair chance, and then against Chicago where I personally thought Chicago had the better squad.

After NPU lost to Thomas More in double OT in the 2014 playoffs, the program graduated a couple of great players who weren't adequately replaced, and that '15 team suffered some big injuries as well. But the chemistry wasn't good that year, either; North Park was really off its game all season long. The '16 team was better (although the overall record didn't show it), but they didn't get the job done against the playoff sides that they faced (Chicago, Benedictine, Carthage, and UWW, although the Vikes did beat Dubuque), and they took some inexplicable losses as well (Case Western, which finished under .500; Elmhurst, which barely finished above .500; and Wheaton, which finished right at .500, in the CCIW tourney after having beaten the Wheaties in the regular season).

Never meant "pay to play."  Just so you know I'm not just making stuff up....

https://journals.lww.com/cjsportsmed/fulltext/2009/03000/The_Professionalization_of_Youth_Sports__It_s_Time.1.aspx

https://changingthegameproject.com/the-adultification-of-youth-sports/

http://time.com/magazine/us/4913681/september-4th-2017-vol-190-no-9-u-s/

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/coaching-and-parenting-young-athletes/201707/the-professionalization-youth-sports

There are literally hundreds of articles about this...the term "professionalization" reflects an entire genre and not just some whim of mine.

I never doubted you when you said that others have used the variant form "professionalization" the way that you're using it, even though I've never seen or read of it being used that way before. I'm simply saying that it's an ill-advised usage, regardless of whether or not Psychology Today is using it, because it impinges upon the universally-understood meaning of the base word, "professional", and thus it lends itself to unfortunate (and avoidable) misunderstandings.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 16, 2018, 02:52:56 PM
I never doubted you when you said that others have used the variant form "professionalization" the way that you're using it, even though I've never seen or read of it being used that way before. I'm simply saying that it's an ill-advised usage, regardless of whether or not Psychology Today is using it, because it impinges upon the universally-understood meaning of the base word, "professional", and thus it lends itself to unfortunate (and avoidable) misunderstandings.

Sorry, I assumed you knew it was a term well-saturated within the culture, and often with kids ages 8-14.  Not just Psychology Today, but Time, Newsweek, dissertations, institutes.....google John Gerdy, the AA in bball for Davidson in late 70s/early 80s and the guy who played at Princeton [CORRECTION:  Univ Pennsylvania] and in NBA (can't think of his name off top of my head but he does clinics on the topic all over New England and the country.  It's an extremely common term in youth and club soccer.

In any event, I was never suggesting any NPU players or other D3 players for that matter are being paid as professional athletes.  Just like I never said I was in favor of any particular legislation regarding D3.  BTW, Kenyon has a proud history of embracing international soccer students (Clougher and Amolo the most well-known recently).

Bob Bigelow...


http://www.bobbigelow.com/

https://changingthegameproject.com/woc-29-retired-nba-player-bob-bigelow-just-let-kids-play/

http://www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id/10496416/are-youth-sports-ruining-kids-childhoods-espn-magazine

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED491127.pdf

Apropos of nothing, a few out there may find this interesting....John Gerdy held the Davidson College bball scoring record until Steph Curry broke it.  Frank McGuire, the Hall of Fame coach, was coaching South Carolina at the time and called Gerdy the greatest shooter he had ever seen.  In addition to his many projects and books, and after being a professor at Ohio State, he apparently is an Associate Commissioner of the Southeastern Conference.  This is a great piece below.

The reference to David Thompson takes me back to my young adolescence.  This era often has never heard of him...he was Michael Jordan before Michael Jordan.  He and George Gervin had a great dual for the NBA scoring title.  On the final night of the season Thompson scored 73 for the Denver Nuggets to take the lead by a hair.  Later that night Gervin dropped 50+ to take the lead back.


https://www.johngerdy.com/gerdy-left-mark-at-davidson/