Future of Division III

[smedindy]

I think if Doug Bennett has an issue with Earlham athletes not participating around campus in other activities then he needs to address that problem within his own house.

Around each campus, there are issues with certain groups that don't mesh with the rest of the campus. Athletes always seem to be the lightning rod but there are certainly other campus groups that silo themselves.

What I find funny is still that one of the conferences fitting the D-4 criteria was the WIAC and not the SCAC.

[frank uible]

Certainly any college alone should have the capacity to draw the line for itself. Why should a college have the right to attempt to draw the line for another college?

[joehakes]

There seems to be a basic assumption that athletic programs are at odds with the goals and objectives of the academic side of the institution.  If you look at most college's mission statement, it will champion the production of the "whole" individual.  Athletics, in the proper light, is a tremendous teaching tool of values.  That should be part of what education is.

Maybe the President of Earlham should be more concerned that his drama production folks aren't spending enough time participating in athletics.   

Until the membership survey is distributed, completed and evaluated, there won't be much to hang one's hat on as far as movement one way or the other.

[johnnie_esq]

There seems to be a basic assumption that athletic programs are at odds with the goals and objectives of the academic side of the institution.  If you look at most college's mission statement, it will champion the production of the "whole" individual.  Athletics, in the proper light, is a tremendous teaching tool of values.  That should be part of what education is.

Maybe the President of Earlham should be more concerned that his drama production folks aren't spending enough time participating in athletics.   

Until the membership survey is distributed, completed and evaluated, there won't be much to hang one's hat on as far as movement one way or the other.

I think you make some key points here. 

1.) The leaders of the movement are NOT anti-athletics, but they are for the limitation of athletics on their campuses.  If a hockey team plays three games per week, all on the road, meaning the team misses three days of classes, does that fulfill the educational mission of the school?  While this scenario doesn't happen frequently now (though some athletic endeavors aren't too far removed from this), the movement is concerned it will occur.  And experience from the D-I and D-II levels seems to indicate that it is not out of the realm of possibility.

2.) The survey will really tell us what is actually being felt by the institutions.  Until the results come in it is difficult to know if critical mass has been reached or failed to be reached, and what the actual desires for schools are.  Until that data is collected-- likely, in late Spring, nothing can or will happen. 

[Mr. Ypsi]

There seems to be a basic assumption that athletic programs are at odds with the goals and objectives of the academic side of the institution.  If you look at most college's mission statement, it will champion the production of the "whole" individual.  Athletics, in the proper light, is a tremendous teaching tool of values.  That should be part of what education is.

Maybe the President of Earlham should be more concerned that his drama production folks aren't spending enough time participating in athletics.   

Until the membership survey is distributed, completed and evaluated, there won't be much to hang one's hat on as far as movement one way or the other.

I think you make some key points here. 

1.) The leaders of the movement are NOT anti-athletics, but they are for the limitation of athletics on their campuses.  If a hockey team plays three games per week, all on the road, meaning the team misses three days of classes, does that fulfill the educational mission of the school?  While this scenario doesn't happen frequently now (though some athletic endeavors aren't too far removed from this), the movement is concerned it will occur.  And experience from the D-I and D-II levels seems to indicate that it is not out of the realm of possibility.

2.) The survey will really tell us what is actually being felt by the institutions.  Until the results come in it is difficult to know if critical mass has been reached or failed to be reached, and what the actual desires for schools are.  Until that data is collected-- likely, in late Spring, nothing can or will happen. 

Since I do not personally know any of the 'leaders of the movement', I will not speculate as to their motivations (though I have known many in academia are are very 'anti athlethics' and would love to purge 'dumb jocks' [and they meant athletes in general, not the occasional Andy Katzenmoyers] from the 'sacred halls').  But by singling out athletics (even recognizing that a single article can't cover everything, and athletics is the focus here), that conclusion is difficult to avoid.

You omitted comment on Joe's middle paragraph; aside from the 'balance' issue he directly addressed, I think the unstated 'elephant in the room' is that drama (or other extracurriculars) are viewed as more 'worthy' than athletics.  In my 32+ years in academia I encountered more students who reached the verge (or beyond!) of flunking out because of over-emphasis on dramatics, political activism, various campus clubs (or partying, of course, but we won't go there!) than athletics.  In fact, I cannot recall a single student who ever flunked out because of athletics (though several who did so because they ignored their coaches' pleas, ignored the available support services, etc.).

[joehakes]

Mr Y,

That is my point exactly, that athletics is, in many cases, unfairly blamed for a lot of evils.  When was the last time you heard that a party with a bunch of history majors got out of hand?  They sometimes do, but no one would think to identify a group in that way. 

I don't know that people consciously think in these terms, but it is ingrained by tradition on college campuses.  And anyone who has worked on a college campus knows that tradition is the strongest law of all.

[wilburt]

There seems to be a basic assumption that athletic programs are at odds with the goals and objectives of the academic side of the institution.  If you look at most college's mission statement, it will champion the production of the "whole" individual.  Athletics, in the proper light, is a tremendous teaching tool of values.  That should be part of what education is.

Athletics in the proper light is a tremendous teaching tool.  The issue with Division III is what is the "proper light"?  Are some schools headed in the direction of offering a fine academic program for its athletes, or are they offering a fine athletic program for its students?

To me it's clearly an identity issue with the Presidents.

[old ends]

This not a DIV III Link, but NCAA got it's hand slapped.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601079&sid=am9m8LxuCMOA&refer=home

http://www.latimes.com/sports/printedition/la-sp-ncaa31jan31,1,2968923.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

enjoy

[Knightstalker]

Athletics in the proper light is a tremendous teaching tool.  The issue with Division III is what is the "proper light"?  Are some schools headed in the direction of offering a fine academic program for its athletes, or are they offering a fine athletic program for its students?

To me it's clearly an identity issue with the Presidents.

To me it seems that a President would have to be pretty narrow minded to not try to figure out how to combine the two.

As to what Mr. Yspi said above about students flunking out due too outside activities, I agree.  I have first hand experience as a music major how much time these plays and other artistict endeavors take.  There is a reason that some drama, art and music majors take five or six years to graduate.  I personally had to withdraw from some classes because I could dedicate the time to them.  This was especially true for the spring semester when we did out yearly musical.  Pit band takes a lot of time, add a week of performances, including two a day for three days and it can hurt you.  I also had the misfortune of having a couple of professors who thought their mid level elective classes were more important than my major.  Luckily at NJCU the administration supports the arts and the athletic program.  They do a very good job of providing an atmosphere where students are exposed to and get to participate in many different experiences.

They may be a small underfunded state liberal arts university that does not have Ivy like admission standards, but they do a very good job of fulfilling their mission.  They provide a reasonably affordable quality educational experience to their recruiting base, many of who are the first generation in their family to attend college, or to attend college in this country.

[Mr. Ypsi]

wilburt,

I understand what you are saying (or at least I think I do), but I honestly don't see the conflict UNLESS the 'powers that be' really do think atletics is 'lesser' than other chosen pursuits.  I taught at a 'lesser' d1 (Eastern Michigan, about as lesser as you can go in football, though it had it's times in the top 25 in basketball, and dominated the MAC in swimming and track, and once placed second in the country in baseball).  While I believe the problem exists at a few 'elite' athletic programs, I never saw it at EMU (athletes were students; students were athletes).

When the Earlham president's column first came out, I posted that I saw Archibald MacLeish's J.B. with QB Henne, AA OL Jake Long (and I forgot to include all-Big 10 DB Jamarr Adams) in the cast.  This was soon after the 'debacle' against App. St. and the 'stomping' by Oregon St. and several letters to the editor angrily questioned why they hadn't been studying game films - to UM's credit, they totally ignored those morons.  If such 'elite' athletes in a multi-million dollar athletic program can have a 'well-rounded' experience (with no repercussions from coaches), I question whether there is really any problem (except in the minds of presidents, or others, who question the merit of athletics in an academic setting).

Other than the unwieldy size of d3, are we really dealing with a problem, or a problem premised on bias against athletics?

[Gregory Sager]

Yikes!  The presidents of Southwestern and Earlham certainly seem "two peas in a pod", but the pod apparently doesn't hold 148 more peas!

Succinctly and elegantly put, Chuck.

[Gregory Sager]

How about moving the state schools up to the much smaller DII?

Given how successful they've been in D3, the public venues would likely not put up with that.

Plus, the whole philosophy behind the NCAA is that it is a voluntary organization whose member schools self-select their level of competition. The NCAA can no more force UW-Stevens Point and Rowan to join D2 than it can force Rice or Vanderbilt to go D3. Every school chooses in what division it wishes to place its membership.

That is my point exactly, that athletics is, in many cases, unfairly blamed for a lot of evils.  When was the last time you heard that a party with a bunch of history majors got out of hand?

Joe, on behalf of myself and the other history and English majors under your charge who found ways to be surreptitiously "out of hand" when you were the resident director of Burgh Hall during your North Park days, we thank you in retrospect for your misplaced trust in our geeky inoffensiveness.

[joehakes]

I had never lived in a dorm before and they put me in charge??  I had no clue of what the English, history, chemistry, you-name-it majors were doing. But any time an athlete acted up I heard about it.

Anything you want to confess, Greg?  I think that the statute of limitations is long gone on those days. 

[wilburt]

wilburt,

I understand what you are saying (or at least I think I do), but I honestly don't see the conflict UNLESS the 'powers that be' really do think atletics is 'lesser' than other chosen pursuits. 
****
Other than the unwieldy size of d3, are we really dealing with a problem, or a problem premised on bias against athletics?

Well let me just say this. I think to a certain extent that the "powers that be" do think that athletics is lesser than other chosen pursuits.   As I have stated before what is the proper role of athletics in a college community?

Given that 99.5% of Division III athletes know they are not going to be professional athletes, but they will more than likely become "professionals" in their academic related endeavors (ie biologist, chemist, engineer, actors, educators) and for those who choose to go on to graduate or professional school (doctors, lawyers, PhDs etc.)  If that is the case, then why do we need "redshirting" all of a sudden in Division III?  Why do we need extended seasons (practice or otherwise) in some sports for Division III?  Are these schools trying to enhance the athlete's athletic experience under the guise of trying to become more competitive in Division III competition? If so, to what purpose?  Is it as Ralph argues to compete for the athletic tuition dollar?

I am not talking about isolated examples that you point out and others at various colleges where student-athletes are getting a well rounded college experience. I am talking about the "overall direction" of Division III that has many College Presidents concerned that Division III is sliding down a slippery slope towards a Division 2.5.

I say this as a former Division III athlete from the 1980s. 

[Ralph Turner]

Good morning, Wilburt,
Please give us some specifics.

Well let me just say this. I think to a certain extent that the "powers that be" do think that athletics is lesser than other chosen pursuits.   As I have stated before what is the proper role of athletics in a college community?

Given that 99.5% of Division III athletes know they are not going to be professional athletes, but they will more than likely become "professionals" in their academic related endeavors (ie biologist, chemist, engineer, actors, educators) and for those who choose to go on to graduate or professional school (doctors, lawyers, PhDs etc.)  If that is the case, then why do we need "redshirting" all of a sudden in Division III?

Currently in the D-III of 2008, "redshirting" is not practiced.  The conference which seems to have been impacted most by this decision is the WIAC.  They are a putative "D-IV" by voting patterns, just like the MWC, the Centennial, the NCAC and the CCIW.

Why do we need extended seasons (practice or otherwise) in some sports for Division III?

Which season is too long for your liking now, in the D-III of 2008? How many weeks, how many games and how many playoff bids do you propose to cut?  Concerning playoff bids, the current playoff bid ratio is 1:6.5 so as to allow more Pooll C bids.  Do you wish to eliminate all Pool C bids?  (The D-IV's are complaining about how big the playoffs are with respect to bracket size since increasing the number of playoff bids in 2005-06.  I have not heard one "D-IV" president advocate cutting the access ratio, i.e., the number of bids, to the playoffs.)

Are these schools trying to enhance the athlete's athletic experience under the guise of trying to become more competitive in Division III competition? If so, to what purpose?  Is it as Ralph argues to compete for the athletic tuition dollar?

Let me re-focus the last question.  In Adrian's case and the case of so many other schools, it is the "tuition dollars" of students who wish to continue in D-III athletics.  "Half" of these are women, for which intercollegiate athletics as we see now did not exist in my days at college, pre-Title IX.  In Michigan, they can go to Eastern Michigan and not compete in non-scholarship intercollegiate athletics, or they can go to Adrian and "do D-III".  That is expanding choices for students.

I am not talking about isolated examples that you point out and others at various colleges where student-athletes are getting a well rounded college experience. I am talking about the "overall direction" of Division III that has many College Presidents concerned that Division III is sliding down a slippery slope towards a Division 2.5.

I say this as a former Division III athlete from the 1980s. 

Thank you for your responses.