Future of Division III

[sac]

How many scholarship equivalents do male lacrosse programs receive in D-I?

The strong student-athlete might get a very competitive merit-based financial aid package to a D-III vs a less-desirable aid package, including the "athletic scholarship" for a D-I.

I don't know if this is old information........

The NCAA allows each division 1 lacrosse program 12.69 scholarships for men and 12 for women. In division 2 there are 10.8 scholarships for men and 9.9 for women.

There are 54 division 1 and 30 division 2 colleges that offer lacrosse scholarships for men. That's a total of 1,009.26. There are 77 division 1 colleges and 29 division 2 colleges that offer scholarships for women, a total of 1,211

These scholarships can be given out partially.

[Ralph Turner]

Applicants to D-II

...
Applicants for the 2009-10 class of membership candidates also include six institutions from Ohio (Cedarville, Malone, Mount Vernon Nazarene, Notre Dame College, Ursuline and Walsh). Two institutions from the Dakotas (Minot State from North Dakota and University of Sioux Falls from South Dakota) also applied.

The Division II Membership Committee will review applications during its July 7-9 meeting in Indianapolis. Successful applicants will enter a two-year candidacy period and must complete at least one provisional year before achieving active status.

Following are the applicants for the 2009-10 class:

Academy of Art University (San Francisco, California)

California State University, San Marcos (San Marcos, California)

Cedarville University (Cedarville, Ohio)

Malone University (Canton, Ohio)

McKendree University (Lebanon, Illinois)

Minot State University (Minot, North Dakota)

Monroe College (New York, New York)

Mount Vernon Nazarene University (Mount Vernon, Ohio)

Notre Dame College (Cleveland, Ohio)

Simon Fraser University (Burnaby, British Columbia)

University of Sioux Falls (Sioux Falls, South Dakota)

Ursuline College (Pepper Pike, Ohio)

Walsh University (North Canton, Ohio)

William Jewel College (Liberty, Missouri)

Young Harris College (Young Harris, Georgia)

The NAIA just lost a huge chunk of Ohio!

[Mr. Ypsi]

I noticed Simon Fraser on the list - would they be the first Canadian school in the NCAA?

If so, can we expect the NACAA (North American in stead of National)?

[hickory_cornhusker]

I noticed Simon Fraser on the list - would they be the first Canadian school in the NCAA?

If so, can we expect the NACAA (North American in stead of National)?

Yes, they would be the first Canadian school to join the association. Division II is only taking 10 members so there is no guarantee Simon Fraser is getting in, although the Great Northwest Athletic Conference comissioner would like to see Simon Fraser join the Division II and probably his conference. (They would fit right in the gap between the Pacific Northwest and the Alaska schools.)

I don't think the NCAA will change. The NBA didn't change when they added Toronto and Vancouver nor did the American League or National League when they allowed Canadian teams. The NHL has always had Canadian teams and has continued to use the word "National."

[Ralph Turner]

I noticed Simon Fraser on the list - would they be the first Canadian school in the NCAA?

If so, can we expect the NACAA (North American in stead of National)?

Yes, that was actually the headline on that story.  It thought the Simon Fraser angle was the sizzle and the meat was the NAIA schools (including Cal State San Marcos, Sioux Falls, Minot State ND, McKendree and William Jewell).

[Mr. Ypsi]

I noticed Simon Fraser on the list - would they be the first Canadian school in the NCAA?

If so, can we expect the NACAA (North American in stead of National)?

Yes, that was actually the headline on that story.  It thought the Simon Fraser angle was the sizzle and the meat was the NAIA schools (including Cal State San Marcos, Sioux Falls, Minot State ND, McKendree and William Jewell).

My monitor is not the greatest - I didn't realize your opening on the earlier post was a link to the article until your last post.

[Ralph Turner]

I noticed Simon Fraser on the list - would they be the first Canadian school in the NCAA?

If so, can we expect the NACAA (North American in stead of National)?

Yes, that was actually the headline on that story.  It thought the Simon Fraser angle was the sizzle and the meat was the NAIA schools (including Cal State San Marcos, Sioux Falls, Minot State ND, McKendree and William Jewell).

My monitor is not the greatest - I didn't realize your opening on the earlier post was a link to the article until your last post.

Yeah, sorry for the inconvenience.   

I usually try to underline those words that are actually links.

[HSCTiger74]

I noticed Simon Fraser on the list - would they be the first Canadian school in the NCAA?

If so, can we expect the NACAA (North American in stead of National)?

Yes, that was actually the headline on that story.  It thought the Simon Fraser angle was the sizzle and the meat was the NAIA schools (including Cal State San Marcos, Sioux Falls, Minot State ND, McKendree and William Jewell).

Actually, Simon Fraser is also currently an NAIA member in many of their intercollegiate sports. 

[cush]

These two articles could be related:

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/20090603/SPORTS02/906030350/1001/SPORTS


http://news.bostonherald.com/business/general/view.bg?articleid=1175836

[Ralph Turner]

About the SCAC, in a lacrosse blog, no less... 

http://www.laxmagazine.com/blogs/coyne/060809_scac


Pull quote

Depending on who you listen to, the conference president's summer meeting, which is scheduled for June 11 in Atlanta according to the league calendar, could result in one of three results for the burgeoning men's (and soon to be women's) lacrosse league.

1. Status quo with the conference holding its current form;

2. A transition to a divisional structure, with the conference broken into East and West entities in order to mitigate rising travel coast for a league that stretches from Georgia to Colorado;

3. The league collapses under the weight of its travel burdens, its member institutions splintering into newly formed conferences or joining existing leagues, dooming the eight lacrosse programs to independent status for the foreseeable future.

Thankfully, the second option appears to be the likely choice for the presidents.

[ronk]

Basic question of how DIII basketball recruiting works in general:

Do the prospects submit financial aid forms and the schools meet up to 100% of the prospects' needs up to the limit of the school's resources for aid?
Can the school priortize its resources so that,for example, 50% goes to #1 prospect, 30% to #2, 20% to #3, etc.?

What are the general guidelines and what are the discretionary areas? 

[Mr. Ypsi]

Basic question of how DIII basketball recruiting works in general:

Do the prospects submit financial aid forms and the schools meet up to 100% of the prospects' needs up to the limit of the school's resources for aid?
Can the school priortize its resources so that,for example, 50% goes to #1 prospect, 30% to #2, 20% to #3, etc.?

What are the general guidelines and what are the discretionary areas? 

I won't guarantee actual practice, but the d3 philosophy is that athletic ability can take NO account in scholarship decisions.  And they do (at least theoretically) monitor that student athletes get no more (or less) aid than students in general.  I believe the cut-off for compliance is +/- 4% between athletes and general students; whether or not that is monitored overall or sport-by-sport I don't know.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Basic question of how DIII basketball recruiting works in general:

Do the prospects submit financial aid forms and the schools meet up to 100% of the prospects' needs up to the limit of the school's resources for aid?
Can the school priortize its resources so that,for example, 50% goes to #1 prospect, 30% to #2, 20% to #3, etc.?

What are the general guidelines and what are the discretionary areas? 

I won't guarantee actual practice, but the d3 philosophy is that athletic ability can take NO account in scholarship decisions.  And they do (at least theoretically) monitor that student athletes get no more (or less) aid than students in general.  I believe the cut-off for compliance is +/- 4% between athletes and general students; whether or not that is monitored overall or sport-by-sport I don't know.

I got to thinking about that last phrase; either way has potential problems.

If overall athletes v. other students, a school could award de facto athletic scholarships in sports they emphasize, and mask it by 'cheating' athletes in other sports.  On the other hand, with sport-by-sport analysis, some rosters are so small that they may be way out of line for perfectly legitimate reasons.

I would hope they assess compliance both ways, with allowance given for legitimate variation in individual sports.  Anyone know how the assessment is actually done?

[ronk]

  So, if a prospect is recruited by all 8 UAA schools, for example, he couldn't be offered more than 4% above the non-athletes at the same school, but could get more at a different UAA school, if that school offered its nonathletes more,also. The differentator is how each school treats all its applicants, financial aid-wise. Otherwise, the prospect chooses for non-financial reasons among the UAA schools-bball program,coaching,academics,etc. Am I reading your  response correctly?

[Mr. Ypsi]

  So, if a prospect is recruited by all 8 UAA schools, for example, he couldn't be offered more than 4% above the non-athletes at the same school, but could get more at a different UAA school, if that school offered its nonathletes more,also. The differentator is how each school treats all its applicants, financial aid-wise. Otherwise, the prospect chooses for non-financial reasons among the UAA schools-bball program,coaching,academics,etc. Am I reading your  response correctly?

By this point I'm beginning to go on a lot of what I assume, rather than what I know!  (I hope someone more in the know will jump in. )  I AM sure that the rules don't apply to individual athletes (at least as far as a school can justify the award) - there are many d3 athletes on 100% scholarship (deservedly so, due to academic prowess or need).  The 4% (?) rule is an average of athletes vs. non-athletes.  (So far as I know, there is no rule that a school, endowment permitting, couldn't give everyone a better deal than its competitors; just no favoritism for athletes.)

The question I raised was whether the assessment is athletes overall vs. non-athletes, or sport-by-sport athletes vs. non-athletes.  If the former, a school could 'game' the system by favoring certain sports at the expense of others.  (COULD Mount Union 'buy' football titles this way?  I hasten to add I do NOT believe they do, but COULD a rogue school do this?)  If the latter, some athletes in small roster sports might suffer in order to meet compliance (what if a basketball team has 3-4 players who quite deservedly have 100% scholarships due to academics or need?  Must the others get stiffed?)

Could someone who knows the actual NCAA procedures please jump in here!