Quote from: IC798891 on March 07, 2026, 10:08:57 PMJumping in late to this, but what the heck.

I wouldn't fan of using the Learfield standings for major decisions. As I often come back to (and as UMHB fans know) the core philosophy of Division III athletics is centered in conference and regional play, not where you sit nationally. I mean, we have sports where you don't even earn Director's Cup points for winning the team-wide conference championship, but instead for where a small handful of athletes finish at the NCAAs.

On a more micro level, treating every non-NCAA qualifier the same is problematic. A perennial 7/8 win football team like Brockport isn't the same as a perennial 1/2 win team like Hartwick, but the Director's Cup treats them that way.

Quote from: maripp2002 on March 06, 2026, 06:59:55 PMThe thing is, and I've said this before, the one thing you can always control is your conference. That's always going to be your best bet to partner with like minded institutions - academically, geographically, size, money, etc. If you choose to let a school that's 10 times your size, or has a 100 times your budget in, or is much more or less academically selective, you've made that bed and you lie in it. Win your conference, that's as even as you're going to get.

1,000 times this. It's not always going to be a perfect fit -- see Buffalo State football in the Liberty League rather than the E8 where they belong (not that it impacts the autobid) -- but absolutely. Find the [however many] schools that you call peer institutions, compete against them, let the results speak for themselves.

That's why the NESCAC and UAA always dominate most sports, and the WIAC dominates football. I don't want to see a ton of first-round blowouts for most sports, such as a St. John Benedict blowing out a Minnesota-Morris in a playoff game.

But hey, we can all agree NIL should remain only a D1 thing!

Quote from: Ron Boerger on March 07, 2026, 09:05:07 AMThere have been attempts to create a "Division IV" in the past to accomplish what you propose (in terms of creating a more competitive division for schools which are less competetive currently) that failed so badly they quit trying.  In order for any proposal to pass a majority of schools, not conferences, would have to approve it.

The chances of the NCAA being able to find funding for another division with the dramatically increased number of playoff teams proposed is effectively zero.  There is no "revenue pot" coming from "deep tournament runs in football and basketball" in Division III. 

Interesting anecdote about the proposed split. It's either split to increase competitive balance, or expand the postseasons in sports like volleyball and basketball to give more schools a shot.

Quote from: lumbercat on March 06, 2026, 05:10:53 PMOf course the NESCAC hasn't produced Hobey Baker candidates or NHL all stars- it's a D3 league recruiting D3 kids. Kudos to the Charging Dutchmen on their hockey successes at the D1 level but you're comparing a D1 hockey program with scholarships (and probably nil money at some point) to a D3 conference- apples and oranges.
If that's a valid comparison lets compare D3 Union Football or NESCAC Football with D1 Syracuse in terms of NFL players etc - it's a different ballgame.

But Union uses some of the hockey money for the Flutie effect, drawing the students that play hockey to a mostly D3 school.

Quote from: Jake Feldman on March 06, 2026, 05:41:28 PM

Quote from: maripp2002 on March 06, 2026, 04:55:21 PM

Quote from: Jake Feldman on March 06, 2026, 01:27:31 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 06, 2026, 12:01:48 AMBut OTT is competitive in other sports in the OAC. The women play RMC in the first round of Hoops tomorrow.

So, what would be a good all-sports equivalent of Mt. Union-Otterbein or St. John Benedict-Hamline in football?

You'd likely want to use the learfield cup standings to figure that out: https://nacda.com/sports/2018/7/17/directorscup-nacda-directorscup-current-scoring-html.aspx, from a quick glance Johns Hopkins at no. 2 and Haverford College at number 129 seems a pretty big divide. Wash U to CWRU also seems pretty large from 3 to 98.

Director's Cup standings in terms of average league performance could also work.

That sounds like a great idea. If a school has a majority of core members in the standings, they're in the D3 University division. If not, they're in the College Division
Based on the Fall Director's Cup standings, we'd go with this alignment:
The University Division would include the following 20 conferences with a total of 177 core schools (117 for football):
NESCAC (11 core, 10 football)
UAA (8, does not sponsor football)
WIAC (8)
SCIAC (10 with Azusa Pacific dropping down, 8 football)
Northwest (9, 8 football)
NJAC (10 with SUNY New Paltz joining, 5+2 C2C for football)
NEWMAC (9+3 of the Seven Sisters for women's sports only, 5+2 Skyline and 1 GNAC for football)
NCAC (9 all sports, add CWRU for football)
MAC (both divisions, 18 total, 10 football)
MIAC (12 + St. Catherine for women's sports, 10 for football)
MIAA (8 + St. Mary's (IN) for women's sports)
Liberty League (12 all sports, 5+ Rochester for football)
Landmark (10 all sports, 6 football)
Coast-to-Coast (6 all sports, we'd kick Santa Cruz out and put them in either NWC or SCIAC to lower travel budgets, does not sponsor football)
Centennial (10+Bryn Mawr, 7+Carnegie Mellon for football)
Collegiate Conference of the South (6+Agnes Scott for women, does not sponsor football)
American Rivers (8 for all sports+ Chicago for football)
American Southwest (6 all sports)
USA South (8+2 women's only, merges with CCS for football
College Division would be the remaining 25 conferences containing 252 schools (118 for football).
For most championships, we'd actually use published seeding to set brackets and guarantee the higher seed a home playoff game (2024 Lake Forest football is one of the reasons behind this change).
Sports played by both genders (basketball notably) would allow institutions to host both genders for opening round action.
Championship fields for D3 University Division football would be 32 (17 AQ, 15 at large), other all-sports championships of both Genders 48 (20 AQ, 28 at large), and
Championship fields for D3 College Division would be 28 for football (12 AQ, 16 at large), and 56 for all other sports (24 AQ, 32 at-large)

Either way, I'm trying to give the smaller conferences a chance at the revenue pot that comes from deep tournament runs in football and basketball. I wouldn't break up any of the leagues for this split and consider all 28 championships sponsored by the division. If a school has a program that competes in another division (Seneca-Hobart Men's Lacrosse, Union hockey) they'd still be allowed to play up.

Quote from: maripp2002 on March 06, 2026, 04:55:21 PM

Quote from: Jake Feldman on March 06, 2026, 01:27:31 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 06, 2026, 12:01:48 AMBut OTT is competitive in other sports in the OAC. The women play RMC in the first round of Hoops tomorrow.

So, what would be a good all-sports equivalent of Mt. Union-Otterbein or St. John Benedict-Hamline in football?

You'd likely want to use the learfield cup standings to figure that out: https://nacda.com/sports/2018/7/17/directorscup-nacda-directorscup-current-scoring-html.aspx, from a quick glance Johns Hopkins at no. 2 and Haverford College at number 129 seems a pretty big divide. Wash U to CWRU also seems pretty large from 3 to 98.

Director's Cup standings in terms of average league performance could also work.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 06, 2026, 12:10:58 PM

Quote from: monsoon on March 05, 2026, 06:13:13 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 05, 2026, 05:44:22 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 05, 2026, 03:04:51 PM

Quote from: Jake Feldman on March 05, 2026, 02:53:01 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 05, 2026, 12:53:24 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 05, 2026, 12:32:21 PMNeither the SCIAC nor the NWC would ever consider UCSC.  It doesn't make sense for either of them.

They can all schedule UCSC as they see fit without being required to do so.

This. UCSC is unlike any of the SCIAC schools in two important ways: 1) it's a state school, and the SCIAC consists of private schools; and 2) it's in northern California, and, as the name of the conference indicates, the SCIAC is is in southern California. The Banana Slugs are a five-hour drive away from the nearest SCIAC campus.

The NWC is the same in both respects, except that the distances are even further between UCSC and the Oregon- and Washington-based NWC schools.

So it looks like they either can go D2/NAIA to cut travel budgets but add scholarships, or stay in C2C and struggle to compete with the Mary Washingtons, Christopher Newports, and Salisburys, all while adding further strain on the overall school budget for possible travel expenses. The SCIAC would be most logical for them, since the LA area is 300 miles away, but I recognize your point.

The UCSC student body passed an additional fee on themselves a few years back to keep athletics.

They could probably raise a chunk of athletics money just by aggressively marketing Banana Slugs merch.

You can get a t-shirt here (I'm tempted): https://sideline.bsnsports.com/schools/california/santacruz/uc-santa-cruz-athletics

Back in 2015 the UCSC men's soccer team visited North Park for a match against the Vikings. The Banana Slugs brought a boxful of t-shirts with them and a Slug parent sold them in the stands. They were sold out in minutes. (I'm happy to report that none of North Park's fans put on their new t-shirts that night until after the Vikings had claimed a 3-0 victory over the Banana Slugs.)

Wearing a Banana Slug t-shirt in Pulp Fiction is probably the closest that John Travolta has ever come to being hip.

Don't **** on Saturday Night Fever or Grease! Those are classics!

Quote from: lumbercat on March 06, 2026, 12:27:25 AM

Quote from: Jake Feldman on March 05, 2026, 03:02:37 PM12 NHL players for the Garnet Chargers/Dutchmen, while only 1 that I know of from a NESCAC program (Guy Hebert who went to Hamilton College)

I the early-mid 70's Union hired Ned Harkness who was the former coach of the Detroit Red Wings to take their Hockey program to D1 heights with the construction of a beautiful new Hockey rink. NESCAC membership guidelines prohibited any deviation from NESCAC recruiting guidelines and competition in most D1 sports (which the exception of a few minor sports like skiing which has no D3).
The NESCAC and Union parted ways at that point.

As a prior poster pointed out it was a positive move for Union football which I think is correct. Other NESCAC purists might point to a decline in Unions academic ranking upon their severance from the NESCAC.
It was very controversial at the time.

Union has been competing in D1 Hockey with a significant financial commitment since around 1975 or 1976.
That's 50 years, give or take. I'd say 12 NHL players in that timeframe is nothing to brag about.

The NESCAC can't say they've produced an NHL All-Star or pro-era Olympian (Shayne Gostisbehere or Spencer Fu), plus a ton of Hobey finalists.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 06, 2026, 12:01:48 AMBut OTT is competitive in other sports in the OAC. The women play RMC in the first round of Hoops tomorrow.

So, what would be a good all-sports equivalent of Mt. Union-Otterbein or St. John Benedict-Hamline in football?

Quote from: Jake Feldman on February 11, 2026, 07:21:43 PMI'd personally use this framework for Division alignment
Division I would allow scholarships, rev-share, and NIL
Division II would only be scholarships, no player income.
Division III would be split in half by department budget, allowing for weaker conferences to have a shot at national titles in major sports.

For the D3 split, I'd do it by the average athletic budget in each league. The top 20 leagues (such as the NESCAC, UAA, WIAC, and leagues that opt to go D3 after the inevitable D1 fissure breaks) would be in the D3 University Division, while the remaining leagues would be in the College Division. This split would allow the smaller schools/conferences (like the UMAC or UEC) to have a chance to have an even playing field in terms of competitive balance. You've all seen those games between Mount Union and Otterbein, and while this idea might not get rid of all of them, it levels the playing field for postseason competition

Quote from: monsoon on March 05, 2026, 06:13:13 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 05, 2026, 05:44:22 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 05, 2026, 03:04:51 PM

Quote from: Jake Feldman on March 05, 2026, 02:53:01 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 05, 2026, 12:53:24 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 05, 2026, 12:32:21 PMNeither the SCIAC nor the NWC would ever consider UCSC.  It doesn't make sense for either of them.

They can all schedule UCSC as they see fit without being required to do so.

This. UCSC is unlike any of the SCIAC schools in two important ways: 1) it's a state school, and the SCIAC consists of private schools; and 2) it's in northern California, and, as the name of the conference indicates, the SCIAC is is in southern California. The Banana Slugs are a five-hour drive away from the nearest SCIAC campus.

The NWC is the same in both respects, except that the distances are even further between UCSC and the Oregon- and Washington-based NWC schools.

So it looks like they either can go D2/NAIA to cut travel budgets but add scholarships, or stay in C2C and struggle to compete with the Mary Washingtons, Christopher Newports, and Salisburys, all while adding further strain on the overall school budget for possible travel expenses. The SCIAC would be most logical for them, since the LA area is 300 miles away, but I recognize your point.

The UCSC student body passed an additional fee on themselves a few years back to keep athletics.

They could probably raise a chunk of athletics money just by aggressively marketing Banana Slugs merch.

You can get a t-shirt here (I'm tempted): https://sideline.bsnsports.com/schools/california/santacruz/uc-santa-cruz-athletics

My dad has an old shirt from there, with the Fiat Slug nerd logo.

Sorry if I'm delving into campus culture wars, I've been stung by the SJP crowd once before.

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 05, 2026, 03:04:51 PM

Quote from: Jake Feldman on March 05, 2026, 02:53:01 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 05, 2026, 12:53:24 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 05, 2026, 12:32:21 PMNeither the SCIAC nor the NWC would ever consider UCSC.  It doesn't make sense for either of them.

They can all schedule UCSC as they see fit without being required to do so.

This. UCSC is unlike any of the SCIAC schools in two important ways: 1) it's a state school, and the SCIAC consists of private schools; and 2) it's in northern California, and, as the name of the conference indicates, the SCIAC is is in southern California. The Banana Slugs are a five-hour drive away from the nearest SCIAC campus.

The NWC is the same in both respects, except that the distances are even further between UCSC and the Oregon- and Washington-based NWC schools.

So it looks like they either can go D2/NAIA to cut travel budgets but add scholarships, or stay in C2C and struggle to compete with the Mary Washingtons, Christopher Newports, and Salisburys, all while adding further strain on the overall school budget for possible travel expenses. The SCIAC would be most logical for them, since the LA area is 300 miles away, but I recognize your point.

The UCSC student body passed an additional fee on themselves a few years back to keep athletics.  The school was independent for a long time.  I think they appreciate having an opportunity to compete for an AQ - and they had a pretty good squad this year.  I think they'll be competitive.  Santa Cruz is a beautiful place to spend four years!

Unless you're a Jewish Student. There's a group trying to shut down the Hillel, and replace it with a more humanistic group that kowtows to SJP.

12 NHL players for the Garnet Chargers/Dutchmen, while only 1 that I know of from a NESCAC program (Guy Hebert who went to Hamilton College)

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 05, 2026, 11:46:37 AMI believe more than half (33) of this year's participants were not in the field last year. That seems crazy.

Don't forget the three debutants this year (Keuka, Belhaven, and MUW)

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 05, 2026, 12:53:24 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 05, 2026, 12:32:21 PMNeither the SCIAC nor the NWC would ever consider UCSC.  It doesn't make sense for either of them.

They can all schedule UCSC as they see fit without being required to do so.

This. UCSC is unlike any of the SCIAC schools in two important ways: 1) it's a state school, and the SCIAC consists of private schools; and 2) it's in northern California, and, as the name of the conference indicates, the SCIAC is is in southern California. The Banana Slugs are a five-hour drive away from the nearest SCIAC campus.

The NWC is the same in both respects, except that the distances are even further between UCSC and the Oregon- and Washington-based NWC schools.

So it looks like they either can go D2/NAIA to cut travel budgets but add scholarships, or stay in C2C and struggle to compete with the Mary Washingtons, Christopher Newports, and Salisburys, all while adding further strain on the overall school budget for possible travel expenses. The SCIAC would be most logical for them, since the LA area is 300 miles away, but I recognize your point.