7 SCAC teams plus Berry to form new conference

[Gregory Sager]

I think that he was referring to academics.

[smedindy]

In D-3, conferences are based upon 'like' institutions, not necessarily geography. No slight to Mississippi College, but its mission and academic footprint is way different than Millsaps.

[Pat Coleman]

I think that he was referring to academics.

Actually I meant that the schools felt they couldn't compete with Trinity athletically and by extension, that Trinity was somehow academically inferior because they were good at athletics. As if the two couldn't co-exist.

[CKBeber329]

Who would other "Like-Minded" institutions be that would fit with the other SAA schools?

[Ralph Turner]

Who would other "Like-Minded" institutions be that would fit with the other SAA schools?

I cannot think of many others in the southeastern US that are not D-3 and not already in a conference. There are some D1's and D2's who would be SAA "mission and Vision" if they switched classifications as Birmingham Southern did.

Berea KY is the only one that I think might be close to the "vision and mission" thing.

[sbparent]

In looking at a map, geographically speaking, both Mississippi College and the Ozarks would still have long trips the other directior to the other SAA schools if they switched. 

[scottiedoug]

Maryville is pretty much in the middle of the SAA.  To get from Centre to Oglethorpe you'd pass close by and then pass Sewanee.  Vision and mission match up ok but all but Oglethorpe have a lot more money and class pretensions.  Athletically Maryville would do fine...they already play a lot of the SAA.

[Ron Boerger]

Scottiedoug -  Birmingham-Southern has been hemorrhaging money for quote some time now and has an endowment barely north of $50M as of the last NACUBO study.

I think that he was referring to academics.

Actually I meant that the schools felt they couldn't compete with Trinity athletically and by extension, that Trinity was somehow academically inferior because they were good at athletics. As if the two couldn't co-exist.

Along with some of the other factors:  Trinity was the largest school in the conference [prior to UDallas' entry last season] and had the largest endowment by a sizable margin. 

To make Pat's point further, Trinity frequently led the SCAC in number of student-athletes named to the conference's All-Academic teams, even without offering sports like field hockey and lacrosse which tend to have a good number of high achievers.

I think it was K-Mack who wrote an article towards the end of last football season saying that most of the coaches thought it was a shame the SCAC was breaking up, what with many of the now-SAA schools having stepped up to be competitive.   The student-athletes were surveyed by the conference a couple of years back and they actually LIKED the travel and didn't find it to interfere with their studies.   IMO it was primarily about the SAA presidents wanting to take their ball and go home, and they did exactly that.  A lot of kids who might have had wonderful playoff experiences may instead be sitting home since the SAA won't have AQs until they've been a conference for a couple of years. 

[Gregory Sager]

I think that he was referring to academics.

Actually I meant that the schools felt they couldn't compete with Trinity athletically and by extension, that Trinity was somehow academically inferior because they were good at athletics. As if the two couldn't co-exist.

When I said "academics" I meant it largely in the self-perceived sense of the word. Academic status has more subjectivity to it than does athletic status, which means that, as you said, schools or groups of schools can sometimes hide behind it as an excuse to reconfigure conference arrangements.

I've seen this happen before. In 1992 Carroll left the CCIW and joined the MWC. The reason given by the school's president at the time was that he wanted Carroll to join a more academically elite league, but the general consensus both then and now is that Carroll actually left the CCIW because it was unable to keep up the pace of athletics facilities expansion set by some of the other CCIW schools.

[hickory_cornhusker]

I think that he was referring to academics.

Actually I meant that the schools felt they couldn't compete with Trinity athletically and by extension, that Trinity was somehow academically inferior because they were good at athletics. As if the two couldn't co-exist.

When I said "academics" I meant it largely in the self-perceived sense of the word. Academic status has more subjectivity to it than does athletic status, which means that, as you said, schools or groups of schools can sometimes hide behind it as an excuse to reconfigure conference arrangements.

I've seen this happen before. In 1992 Carroll left the CCIW and joined the MWC. The reason given by the school's president at the time was that he wanted Carroll to join a more academically elite league, but the general consensus both then and now is that Carroll actually left the CCIW because it was unable to keep up the pace of athletics facilities expansion set by some of the other CCIW schools.

When I was looking through Carroll's student newspaper archives a couple of summers ago, the paper knew it was an athletically based move the whole time. When the football team had that great season in 1988 the paper actually pointed out this was an anomaly and most of Carroll's teams don't do nearly that well. To be fair, Carroll had always wanted to be in the Midwest Conference. They tried joining in the early 50s when Beloit had gotten kicked out for being too good (seriously, the Midwest Conference investigated them and found nothing, still kicked them out for a few years). Carroll was denied and they joined the CCI (no W yet) in 1954. But I agree, academics was down the list of priorities when making the move.

[Gregory Sager]

It was down the list, but it was nevertheless the reason cited by the school's president at the time. He did not endear himself to anybody in the CCIW with that statement, and in fact he created some ill will that lingered long after his departure.

[smedindy]

Greg,

You must admit that sometimes academics does play a part. Wabash to the NCAC was an academics move.

[Gregory Sager]

I'm not denying it at all, smed. I'm simply reiterating Pat's point that the academics card can sometimes be played by administrators for PR purposes when the decision actually has more to do with athletic competitiveness.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Does anyone really think Cornell moved from IIAC to MWC primarily because of academics?   When their travel costs will rise dramatically, and they simply couldn't be competitive in many (most?) sports in the IIAC?

In fairness, I don't know whether or not Cornell played the 'academics' card.

[sunny]

I'm not denying it at all, smed. I'm simply reiterating Pat's point that the academics card can sometimes be played by administrators for PR purposes when the decision actually has more to do with athletic competitiveness.

I don't think anyone can deny that the two are tied together. Hear me out. For Presidents and Boards, it's one thing to go up against - and lose - to schools you feel are your peer schools or your aspirant schools. It's another to go up against and lose to schools who you are not generally recruiting against for your student body.  In fact, the latter case actually gives everyone an easier "out" - "we can't beat school X because they let anyone in" or "we can't beat school X because they have triple our student body" or "we can't beat school X because they are much cheaper." Competing against aspirant school changes the conversation into a much more (hopefully) productive one. 

President: Why can't we compete with School Y on the field?
AD: Facilities/Budget/Admissions + Financial Aid calendar/Early Decision Emphasis .... etc.

While some of the reasons given by an AD may or may not be true and may or may not be possible to overcome, they are a whole lot more approachable than the proverbial obstacles of "different mission," "larger," "cheaper."