2012 Division III NCAA Tournament

[Pat Coleman]

You're not missing anything -- they haven't been released yet.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

You're not missing anything -- they haven't been released yet.

Yeah, I saw that on Twitter.  Man, I wish I would have thought to tag my tweets during the first round - I could have actually had people reading the updates from Cabrini.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

You're not missing anything -- they haven't been released yet.

They're out now.  http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2011/03/nabc-all-star-rosters


Smart money is on the West in this one.

[smedindy]

That only stands to reason, of course, since the vast majority of D3 schools have small student populations.

Which makes it even more amazing that, in general, the student populations at games are nonexistent at WIAC schools.  WIAC schools have somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 students, roughly, and if students do show up, the game is secondary.

I'm actually jealous to see and hear about rabid student sections at vastly smaller schools.  I've heard of the student sections at GAC and St. Thomas.  The student section at Concordia was pretty awesome and even the small student section that Luther had was loud. 

I just wish the students at the big WIAC schools would have half the heart these other schools do.  Even in non-tournament games, I've seen some good student sections at Lawrence and WLC. 

This is due to the nature of those WIAC schools. More commuters, part-time students and non-traditional students matriculate there than the typical D-3 school.

[John Gleich]

That only stands to reason, of course, since the vast majority of D3 schools have small student populations.

Which makes it even more amazing that, in general, the student populations at games are nonexistent at WIAC schools.  WIAC schools have somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 students, roughly, and if students do show up, the game is secondary.

I'm actually jealous to see and hear about rabid student sections at vastly smaller schools.  I've heard of the student sections at GAC and St. Thomas.  The student section at Concordia was pretty awesome and even the small student section that Luther had was loud. 

I just wish the students at the big WIAC schools would have half the heart these other schools do.  Even in non-tournament games, I've seen some good student sections at Lawrence and WLC. 

This is due to the nature of those WIAC schools. More commuters, part-time students and non-traditional students matriculate there than the typical D-3 school.

... I agree with the initial statement (due to the nature of the WIAC schools) but not the second one.

By number (and percentage, yes, the WIAC does have more commuters, part-timers, and non-trads...

But that doesn't meant that 80% of the 5-10k students fall in those categories.

Flip it around... 20% (just a stab at it) might be right, so 4-8kish students aren't in those categories.

I think that there is more of a sense of community with a lot of smaller private schools who have better student following.

When your school only has 1200 kids, and you live with those people (in the dorms) for 4 years and have classes with them, usually on a small campus, often times secluded from the nearby town, there will be more of a sense of community... You'll know the players or know someone who does, and so it matters to you.

The big D-I's are the same... but there's a chance you could get on TV, so that's part of the motivation there...

I've had some ideas of things that could be done at WIAC schools, such as an organization like the Orange Crush at Illinois... they cheer at the games, but they are essentially a non-profit org and do charitable things in the community, raise money for scholarships, etc.

Making it bigger than just the games might appeal to more people, and having it be part of something bigger, but especially something organized, means that you'll have somebody telling the group what to do, when to show up, etc.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I know nothing about this, Point, so this is really just an inquiry.  With the size and nature of the WIAC schools is it more likely the atheletes are recruited to the team as opposed to the school - at least moreso than some of the smaller schools?

One of the things I appreciated about a small school (really small, even by d3 standards) was how all of the athletes were really just students who played sports.

I've been around other schools where there's no real scholarships, but due to a larger size and a more focused athletic program, there was a feeling among most students that the athletes were a separate group - and were less inclined to go to games and support this group who, while technically just other students, had sort of separated themselves from the rest?

It just seems like large(r) public schools might be more inclined to athletes who are there "just to play sports."  Not that this is their sole purpose, but you get it.

Any chance this plays more of a part there?

[Gregory Sager]

I know nothing about this, Point, so this is really just an inquiry.  With the size and nature of the WIAC schools is it more likely the atheletes are recruited to the team as opposed to the school - at least moreso than some of the smaller schools?

Huh? Every D3 school of which I'm aware, be it public or private, large or small, recruits its basketball players. That's why there's a story about Ian Franks of Wooster on the front page -- because the fact that he wasn't recruited by Steve Moore to come to Wooster makes him such an anomaly.

However, if by "recruited to the team as opposed to the school" you are instead implying that coaches at smaller schools are more apt to focus upon the school as a whole rather than strictly upon the basketball program when actively recruiting prospects than are their coaching peers at larger schools, I'm not sure that I agree with that.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

However, if by "recruited to the team as opposed to the school" you are instead implying that coaches at smaller schools are more apt to focus upon the school as a whole rather than strictly upon the basketball program when actively recruiting prospects than are their coaching peers at larger schools, I'm not sure that I agree with that.

That's why I asked.  I'm testing a hypothesis, so to speak.  I have no experience with a school of 10,000.  I just wonder whether the athletes are more recognizable as athletes or as students when fewer students have direct contact with them on a regular basis.

Just trying to offer up some possible answers to the question.

I've been to schools where the "who's that?" question is answered, "some basketball player" and I've been to schools where the answer is, "Dave."  I just imagine the students are more likely to come out to games when they know someone on the team.

My first response would have been students come out when the teams are winning, but since we're talking about Point here, I figured that was a bad guess.

And, for the record, I do think there's a difference, recruiting-wise, between, "we'd like you to play basketball and we'll give you a great education" and "we think you'd fit well here and we'd like you to play basketball."  I don't think either one is better than the other, but I do think they might foster a different atmosphere.

[Mr. Ypsi]

I know nothing about this, Point, so this is really just an inquiry.  With the size and nature of the WIAC schools is it more likely the atheletes are recruited to the team as opposed to the school - at least moreso than some of the smaller schools?

Huh? Every D3 school of which I'm aware, be it public or private, large or small, recruits its basketball players. That's why there's a story about Ian Franks of Wooster on the front page -- because the fact that he wasn't recruited by Steve Moore to come to Wooster makes him such an anomaly.

However, if by "recruited to the team as opposed to the school" you are instead implying that coaches at smaller schools are more apt to focus upon the school as a whole rather than strictly upon the basketball program when actively recruiting prospects than are their coaching peers at larger schools, I'm not sure that I agree with that.

I will have to disagree (to some extent).  I thought Hoops Fan made some excellent points.  The larger the school, the more likely the 'jocks' are to be in their own world, with less attachment to other students; the smaller the school, the more likely they have all taken classes together, shared dorms, etc.

As to the recruitment, Dennie Bridges talks much more about 'selling the school'  than about selling the team.  I have no idea whether or not this is 'coachspeak', but it is what he claims repeatedly in A Dunk Only Counts Two Points.

[Gregory Sager]

I will have to disagree (to some extent).  I thought Hoops Fan made some excellent points.  The larger the school, the more likely the 'jocks' are to be in their own world, with less attachment to other students; the smaller the school, the more likely they have all taken classes together, shared dorms, etc.

I don't think that that's a function of school size at all. I've known lots of people from small schools who've talked about the self-segregation of their school's athletes from the rest of the student body. It's more a function of common identity, common purpose, and the hours upon hours that the team spends together as a unit and apart from the rest of the student body.

If anything, I think it varies more from sport to sport than from school to school. Football players, who live their lives within a cloud of societal stereotypes (some positive, many negative), are more likely on average to segregate themselves (or be segregated in turn by those who view them as troglodytic goons) than are, say, cross-country runners or soccer players, even at a school that strives to keep living and dining conditions socially integrated. And female athletes are much less likely to cluster into their own walled-in social cliques than are male athletes, since college women tend to be more socially advanced and have a wider net of interests and friends than their male peers.

That's why I asked.  I'm testing a hypothesis, so to speak.  I have no experience with a school of 10,000.  I just wonder whether the athletes are more recognizable as athletes or as students when fewer students have direct contact with them on a regular basis.

Just trying to offer up some possible answers to the question.

I've been to schools where the "who's that?" question is answered, "some basketball player" and I've been to schools where the answer is, "Dave."  I just imagine the students are more likely to come out to games when they know someone on the team.

My first response would have been students come out when the teams are winning, but since we're talking about Point here, I figured that was a bad guess.

As a UWSP alumnus and a former Pointer PS can answer this better than I, but from my conversations with various friends who've attended WIAC schools I think it's more a case of the campus culture as a whole than athletic culture. Kids at WIAC schools are often more disconnected from resident student life in terms of formal extracurricular activities (of which sports attendance is one example), even if they're resident students themselves, than are their peers at other D3 schools. My contacts at UW-Whitewater frequently call it a "suitcase school," meaning that everybody goes home on the weekends. And my various UWEC friends have told me that the traditional and stereotypical aspects of student life aren't really present much on that campus (unless you consider heavy drinking to be "traditional and stereotypical" ).

I know, I know ... the plural of "anecdote" is not "data". But my admittedly limited glimpse into life at a WIAC school leads me to believe that the campus atmosphere at at least some of those schools isn't really the type where you and a dozen of your closest buddies are going to get together and plan elaborate costumes, rituals, etc., for the student section of a basketball game.

And now I'll hang up the phone and wait for PS's reply.

And, for the record, I do think there's a difference, recruiting-wise, between, "we'd like you to play basketball and we'll give you a great education" and "we think you'd fit well here and we'd like you to play basketball."  I don't think either one is better than the other, but I do think they might foster a different atmosphere.

I agree. It's a subtle difference, but it is a noticeable one. I'm just not sure that it's a distinction that follows a trend with regard to school size. I think it's more likely to be a matter of individual preference on the part of a coach when he's making his presentation. If there is an exception, I think it'd be much more likely to be found in the recruiting patter of a UAA coach than a WIAC coach, because the campus atmosphere and academic expectations at UAA schools are so unique in terms of D3.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Greg, I totally agree that the 'self-segregation' varies by sport and gender.  But as far as the two 'biggies' on most campuses (football and men's basketball), while the size of the school is certainly not a definitive factor, I'm quite confident that on average the larger the school, the more likely the teams are a separate world unto themselves.

And that, I would suggest, is a partial explanation for lesser student support at larger campuses.  Commuter status is vastly more important, I'm sure, but even where non-commuters still present a large population, they may just not be 'invested'.  Eastern Michigan, for example, has been varying between 20 and 25 thousand students for years, with a (very rough) breakdown of 50% commuters, 25% on campus, and 25% apartments near campus.  While that means 10,000 or more on or near campus, student football attendance is rarely even close to 2,000, and basketball (student) attendance rarely hits 1,000.  When I attended IWU (and we could dodge the dinosaurs ), I'd estimate that bball brought out at least half the student body, and football probably 75%.

[Gregory Sager]

Greg, I totally agree that the 'self-segregation' varies by sport and gender.  But as far as the two 'biggies' on most campuses (football and men's basketball), while the size of the school is certainly not a definitive factor, I'm quite confident that on average the larger the school, the more likely the teams are a separate world unto themselves.

I just don't agree. If there is a connection at all, it's because larger schools are more likely to be scholarship schools, and scholarship schools are more likely to enact specific segregating policies (team dining halls, team dorms, etc.). But that's, at best, an indirect link.

And that, I would suggest, is a partial explanation for lesser student support at larger campuses.  Commuter status is vastly more important, I'm sure, but even where non-commuters still present a large population, they may just not be 'invested'.  Eastern Michigan, for example, has been varying between 20 and 25 thousand students for years, with a (very rough) breakdown of 50% commuters, 25% on campus, and 25% apartments near campus.  While that means 10,000 or more on or near campus, student football attendance is rarely even close to 2,000, and basketball (student) attendance rarely hits 1,000.  When I attended IWU (and we could dodge the dinosaurs ), I'd estimate that bball brought out at least half the student body, and football probably 75%.

Your EMU experience seems to be coloring your response to this topic, but it doesn't match the overall D1 experience. At Big Ten schools, f'rinstance, campus life revolves around the football and basketball teams. They're far bigger than WIAC schools, but their student-fan investment in the major sports is the exact opposite of what you're identifying as a big-school trend.

I don't know how I'd go about proving this hypothesis, but I wonder if investment -- the high price that private-school students pay to be immersed in the resident-student collegiate experience -- has something to do with the fact that D3 privates, at least in the estimation of Tom and PS, seem to be more likely to draw intense and involved student crowds for school sporting events than do WIAC schools.

[David Collinge]

I know, I know ... the plural of "anecdote" is not "data".

+k for this bit of brilliance.

[Ralph Turner]

I know, I know ... the plural of "anecdote" is not "data".

+k for this bit of brilliance.

+1, GS!   

[Mr. Ypsi]

Greg, I totally agree that the 'self-segregation' varies by sport and gender.  But as far as the two 'biggies' on most campuses (football and men's basketball), while the size of the school is certainly not a definitive factor, I'm quite confident that on average the larger the school, the more likely the teams are a separate world unto themselves.

I just don't agree. If there is a connection at all, it's because larger schools are more likely to be scholarship schools, and scholarship schools are more likely to enact specific segregating policies (team dining halls, team dorms, etc.). But that's, at best, an indirect link.

And that, I would suggest, is a partial explanation for lesser student support at larger campuses.  Commuter status is vastly more important, I'm sure, but even where non-commuters still present a large population, they may just not be 'invested'.  Eastern Michigan, for example, has been varying between 20 and 25 thousand students for years, with a (very rough) breakdown of 50% commuters, 25% on campus, and 25% apartments near campus.  While that means 10,000 or more on or near campus, student football attendance is rarely even close to 2,000, and basketball (student) attendance rarely hits 1,000.  When I attended IWU (and we could dodge the dinosaurs ), I'd estimate that bball brought out at least half the student body, and football probably 75%.

[1] Your EMU experience seems to be coloring your response to this topic, but it doesn't match the overall D1 experience. At Big Ten schools, f'rinstance, campus life revolves around the football and basketball teams. They're far bigger than WIAC schools, but their student-fan investment in the major sports is the exact opposite of what you're identifying as a big-school trend.

[2] I don't know how I'd go about proving this hypothesis, but I wonder if investment -- the high price that private-school students pay to be immersed in the resident-student collegiate experience -- has something to do with the fact that D3 privates, at least in the estimation of Tom and PS, seem to be more likely to draw intense and involved student crowds for school sporting events than are WIAC schools.

As to 1, you're probably correct.  The big difference between Big Ten and EMU is TV (and other media) exposure.

As to 2, interesting hypothesis, which might well have merit.  Although, of course, at the privates it is likely to be PARENTS' investments, while at WIAC and places like EMU it has a higher likelihood of STUDENTS' investments, which would seem to undercut your hypothesis.  Maybe students at private schools have more regard for their parents' investment than we might have guessed?!