FB: American Southwest Conference

[Ralph Turner]

As I have posted elsewhere, I honestly think that the SCAC is closer to having a Football AQ in 2016 than the ASC!

[Warren Thompson]

Ralph: While I've perched [rusticated?] amongst the Pennsylvania Dutch Volk since 1967, as you may recall, I have a connection with two DIII venues in Texas (one gave me a diploma, the other a paycheck for three years), and I follow their activities, academic and athletic.

Hence, I was struck by your thoughtful post about UMHB. As I view it, UMHB has indeed done "something" to the ASC. I'm not certain what this is -- "destabilization," in your words, or something else -- but whatever it is has not, in my opinion, over the years been beneficial.

As an institution, UMHB, of course, can do what it wishes to do in athletics, subject to the constraints of law and NCAA regulations. My question, however, is why it wishes to do so in a conference wherein  its competing venues do not (apparently) have the wherewithal or the inclination to match it in funding, mission, and drive for success.

[umhb2001]

An article in the temple paper talks about the MC situation with regard to UMHB. You have to subscribe to read the article, but here are some interesting excerpts:

"The schools in Texas, we're going to have to find a way to work together," O'Rear said. "Having two conferences in the state and neither one having an AQ would not make any sense."

Questions from the internet fandom:

1)  Mr O'Rear, for the other schools in the ASC, when was the last time that someone other than UMHB won a conference championship?  (Just how old were the current crop of freshmen when that happened?)

2)  You have poured millions of dollars into your athletic program and facilities (including basketball/volleyball).  Other schools in Texas have not had the resources or the institutional goals to put that much money into the athletic resources that UMHB has.  Has UMHB de-stabilized the ASC with this financial commitment to its program and facilities?

3)  From the perspective of the other schools in Texas, is this a recognition that mission and vision for D-III athletics for numerous schools is different from what UMHB wants to have?

4)  From the perspective of the other D-III schools in Texas, can I find 6-7 other football playing schools whose mission and vision are different from the way that UMHB has gone in the last 5-10 years? 

5)  Under the ongoing operations of the ASC, as it will likely be constituted without McMurry, Mississippi College, Texas Lutheran (and Schreiner), what is the likelihood that I can win the football AQ in a conference with UMHB? 

6)  If I see very little prospect of winning the AQ in the ASC, why not create my own football-playing conference with like-minded institutions?

These questions sound a lot like the reason as to why TAMU left the Big12. Were these other institutions excited for UMHB to join the ASC back in the 90's?

Now that UMHB has become a power in the conference, should other schools just pick up and leave because we have become a force?

Should we have left and given up when it was tough to get over HSU, Wesley, MU, or Whitewater?

[umhb2001]

Ralph: While I've perched [rusticated?] amongst the Pennsylvania Dutch Volk since 1967, as you may recall, I have a connection with two DIII venues in Texas (one gave me a diploma, the other a paycheck for three years), and I follow their activities, academic and athletic.

Hence, I was struck by your thoughtful post about UMHB. As I view it, UMHB has indeed done "something" to the ASC. I'm not certain what this is -- "destabilization," in your words, or something else -- but whatever it is has not, in my opinion, over the years been beneficial.

As an institution, UMHB, of course, can do what it wishes to do in athletics, subject to the constraints of law and NCAA regulations. My question, however, is why it wishes to do so in a conference wherein  its competing venues do not (apparently) have the wherewithal or the inclination to match it in funding, mission, and drive for success.

Why should UMHB be, as it feels and sounds, "hated, maligned, and criticized" for wanting to be good in athletics? How does this suddenly go against DIII and the ASC? My question for Keith, Pat, or any of the other D3 sages, is how to the WIAC and  OAC teams feel being with UWW and MU? Do they feel that these institutions no longer subscribe to the "principles" of the conference? Are they looking to pick and move to a different conference?

I obviously don't know everything, and I'm probably a little defensive to my own school, so I'm sorry if I'm speaking out of place. These are just questions I have that pop in my mind as I read these posts. Thanks for the talk.

[crufootball]

Agreed umhb2001.

I think we are selling the drive and passion of the rest of the ASC short and putting (dare I say it) too much focus on football. UMHB has for the past 8 years dominated the ASC, however there have been challengers almost every year and they have never dominated the nation in the sport. While they are typically average to above average in other sports, almost all of our conference championships have come from football or men's and women's golf and we have no DIII National Championships.

On the flip side, there are numerous other ASC programs that have dominated sports at the conference level and won national championships. Would we want to create special conference in women's soccer because HSU has dominated it almost the entire length of the ASC or the same could be said of UT-Tyler in tennis for both genders? Also who is to say that other schools don't have plans to make improvements to their facilities, who would have thought that a few years ago that UMHB would have a stadium of such scale?

This is going to be a huge issue that both the ASC and SCAC will have to deal with eventually and I would hope that as a D3 school they wouldn't let one sport be the sole driver.

[Ralph Turner]

But this is Texas!  Yes track is big in Texas...Texas Clyde Littlefield Relays... 29 Division II NCAA Championships at Abilene Christian, but not every ASC school sponsors track.  (McMurry's Coach Barbara Crousen is the only woman in the history of the NCAA to lead a men's team to a national championship, regardless of classification, and she has done it twice... 2008 and 2012.)

What did UMHB do to shake any vestige of being a "women's college"?  They hired Coach Fred to start football.  Football is king in Texas.  Will there be a nicer facility in the south for football than UMHB's?  The only place that I can think that might compare might be Perkins at UWW or the Johnnies' home field in Minnesota.  (There might be some fields with more history and tradition, kinda like Fenway Park...)

How about being competitive in football?  Having sat thru more than a few 70-something drubbings by UMHB I can understand when you just want to go onto the field and just be close.  Win your conference.  Playoffs are gravy!  That might be the mindset of some colleges in the ASC, especially since the new SCAC is a viable alternative model for D-III athletics.

As for UMHB facilities, you have to throw Mayborn in there too!  Do Schreiner or TLU have anything to compare?  ETBU? Concordia TX? LeTU?

If you are going to add football, do you want to add the sport into an established conference like the ASC with 2 strong programs (UMHB or LaCollege)? Or does the chance to get a new program going against a beatable Austin College and Texas Lutheran and newcomer Southwestern and maybe a Centenary make more sense.

The challenge for the ASC is to entice someone to add football; (UT-Tyler?  Ozarks? UT-Dallas? CTX? LeTU?) or find an affiliate; (I cannot think of one.) or add a new program to D-III from the NAIA, a 5-yr process from this point.  (SWAG?  Texas College?  Wayland Baptist?)

[Toby Taff]

Ralph,

I think the thing that offends me most about the idea that UMHB's commitment to athletics has harmed the ASC is the underlying innuendo that it has done so at the expense of  academics. Having been associated with the school since the early 80s when my brother started as a student, I would say just the opposite has occurred. When I first applied to UMHB in 1989 the minimum SAT score for admission was 750. 750! The school was mostly female; It's primary majors were ed, music and nursing (still one of the top programs); my chosen degree area, religion, was just a step above Sunday School; and campus was a ghost town on weekends because of average at best facilities and a large commuter population.

UMHB today is a very different place. Academic standards have increased. Acceptance involves more than a mirror test for signs of life. There is an active campus community with top notch facilities. There is more gender diversity. Programs that were good have gotten better, and programs that were academically weak are now quality programs. Along with the new sports facilities, there have been additions to the science building, a new nursing building, a new art building, a new business building, and a new Student Union.

I personally credit Dr Bawcom's hard work as the reason for  the changes. His leadership meant worlds to UMHB and set the table for the successes UMHB has had, and participation in the DIII model has provided a conduit for much of that change. UMHB's philosophy has been about fully integrating students into campus life, and DIII athletics has been an important part of that. Why would that cause anyone a problem?

[TxFight]

I will say this for atleast one institution in the ASC, East Texas Baptist.  The tigers are by no means afraid of playing UMHB on a yearly basis.  As an institution they are striving to reach a level of success in all sports that UMHB has achieved in football.  The institution is not just content to go .500 every year.  It wants to win and it wants to win on a big scale.  If anything UMHB has helped to make that drive, not hurt it. 

[Ron Boerger]

I don't know if anyone is throwing the academics card around so much, Toby, as the program's incredible (and well-earned) success combined with the new facilities that are going to shoot the moon for possibly the entire division.   It's a daunting combination and not one that many D3 college administrators/ADs have the desire (admin)/resources(ADs) to overcome.

[Ralph Turner]

I don't know if anyone is throwing the academics card around so much, Toby, as the program's incredible (and well-earned) success combined with the new facilities that are going to shoot the moon for possibly the entire division.   It's a daunting combination and not one that many D3 college administrators/ADs have the desire (admin)/resources(ADs) to overcome.

+1!  Resources, endowment, financial deep pockets, mission/vision!  Is there any school in the conference who has the same combination of those four factors as does UMHB?

I am asking the question about UMHB and the ASC for the remaining 11 members (and 5 football playing members) of the conference.  To have an AQ you have to have at least 6 other schools who are close to being on the same page!

My other comments were directed as a hypothetical exercise for schools in the "New SCAC".

TU, Southwestern, Colorado College, Austin College and UDallas are now joined by Centenary, TLU and Schreiner.  I have placed in bold every school that has had an arrangement with the TIAA/ASC over the last 40 years.  The underscored schools have football programs with Southwestern coming on line!

[Warren Thompson]

It's a daunting combination and not one that many D3 college administrators/ADs have the desire (admin)/resources(ADs) to overcome.

Perhaps it's a good thing that there aren't many other UMHB-like venues in DIII.

[crufootball]

It's a daunting combination and not one that many D3 college administrators/ADs have the desire (admin)/resources(ADs) to overcome.

Perhaps it's a good thing that there aren't many other UMHB-like venues in DIII.

Why would that be a good thing? Don't D3 athletes deserve to play in the best facilities that their school can afford?

[Warren Thompson]

It's a daunting combination and not one that many D3 college administrators/ADs have the desire (admin)/resources(ADs) to overcome.

Perhaps it's a good thing that there aren't many other UMHB-like venues in DIII.

Why would that be a good thing? Don't D3 athletes deserve to play in the best facilities that their school can afford?

You missed my point (or perhaps I failed to make it clear). Going the UMHB route is simply impossible for a good many [most?] DIII institutions. The "best" facilities they can afford are likely far-removed from what UMHB offers its athletes and attempting to imitate UMHB would likely be disastrous.

[umhb2001]

It's a daunting combination and not one that many D3 college administrators/ADs have the desire (admin)/resources(ADs) to overcome.

Perhaps it's a good thing that there aren't many other UMHB-like venues in DIII.

I'm not really sure what your beef is. Do you hate UWW and MU for their success? I think UWW has been great in football and basketball. Should they be booed for being great? I don't like that we haven't beat them, but I don't want to leave because of that. I'm really confused at the hatred for UMHB. They've worked hard to achieve what they have done. I'm not saying other schools have to be like UMHB, be your self, create your own dynamics, be great at what you do. Don't hate. I don't like the Yankees, but, man, they've done what they had to do to be productive. Someone please explain this to me.

You didn't respond to my previous response to your post, either.

[umhb2001]

It's a daunting combination and not one that many D3 college administrators/ADs have the desire (admin)/resources(ADs) to overcome.

Perhaps it's a good thing that there aren't many other UMHB-like venues in DIII.

Why would that be a good thing? Don't D3 athletes deserve to play in the best facilities that their school can afford?

You missed my point (or perhaps I failed to make it clear). Going the UMHB route is simply impossible for a good many [most?] DIII institutions. The "best" facilities they can afford are likely far-removed from what UMHB offers its athletes.

They just started offering this. When I came in 97, we didn't have this stuff. They have worked hard at raising the funds. Why is that bad? Drayton McLane wanted to do this, his arm wasn't twisted. Other schools have the funds or could get the funds if they wanted to.