Future of Division III

[Jake Feldman]

There 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.

[IC798891]

Jumping 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.

The 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.

[Jake Feldman]

Jumping 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.

The 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!

[Ralph Turner]

Jumping 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.

The 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!

Yeah Ole Miss 41 , Tulane 10 was just plain ugly.