Future of Division III

[Ralph Turner]

Hoops Fan, it is interesting.  I wonder if this clears when the vote comes up in D3.

Most of the programs at the top of the Directors' Cup are close to 16 schools anyway.  The addition of the AQ in numerous sports such as Men and Women's Golf and Women's Tennis at the Conference level makes it much easier to justify the addition of M&W Golf.

As it was in Golf, you were competing for National bids against traditional powerhouse programs.  Now all you have to do it get a good enough team to win your conference.

I like this more egaliatrian conference-based competition.  It generates more excitement locally.  I also think that it makes it easier to get to 8 and 8.

VB/FB, M&W XC, M&W Soccer, M&W Hoops, M&W Tennis, M&W Golf, Baseball/Softball and you have 14 sports, 7 & 7.

Then you can consider M&W Swimming & Diving, or M&W Track, or M&W Lacrosse... Lots of options!

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I was thinking more selfishly for my tiny alma mater.  VB, BB/SB, M&W Soccer, M&W Basketball, M&W Tennis, Cross Country.  They have to be near the bottom in terms of athletic budget and there's no way the student body is even big enough to have football.

They would be forced into the less restrictive division just because of finances.  It seems to me like having more sports would be beneficial to the more "competitive" schools.  The more restrictive division should be for those schools who see athletics as a small component of their overall offering, rather than as a recruiting tool or as a competitive avenue.

[Ralph Turner]

And your school might be among the 175-250 who would vote this thing down.

[CUAfan]

Thing is, if the D3/4 idea actually happens, what benefit is there for an athletic program to be D4 instead of NAIA-1? Might as well go NAIA so you can offer "athletic aid." I forget off-hand if there was a minimum-sport rule in NAIA, which might come into play. If it goes through, I don't think it unreasonable to say that a lot of likely D4 schools would go NAIA.

Besides, as nutty as (for example), the D3 basketball selections are travel-wise, just think about how much worse it will be for schools even lower on the totem pole than D3. The NCAA-powers-that-be just won't care.

[Ralph Turner]

I am unable to access that NCAA webpage to look at the agenda.

I wonder if the NCAA's filters detected too much traffic or what?

Maybe I need to try from another computer...

[Spence]

The way this looks (Division III-AA) it seems like Division III would still exist and there would be 1 of 3 options. To me that's too many, for one, but this has a LONG way to go.

I might be weird, but I like the division the way it is. The advantage that the state schools have is hardly insurmountable at least at this point. Perhaps the goal is to finish off NAIA by giving them options other than the current Division III. I'm not so sure that they wouldn't wind up also bleeding dry Division II in the process. What school would rather pay out full scholarships than join this Division IV, not have to pay scholarships, and still be able to do pretty much everything you can already do in D-II?

Btw, to have 8 men's sports that includes football almost necessitates having probably 10 women's sports to be in Title IX compliance.

[Ralph Turner]

The way this looks (Division III-AA) it seems like Division III would still exist and there would be 1 of 3 options. To me that's too many, for one, but this has a LONG way to go.

I might be weird, but I like the division the way it is. The advantage that the state schools have is hardly insurmountable at least at this point. Perhaps the goal is to finish off NAIA by giving them options other than the current Division III. I'm not so sure that they wouldn't wind up also bleeding dry Division II in the process. What school would rather pay out full scholarships than join this Division IV, not have to pay scholarships, and still be able to do pretty much everything you can already do in D-II?

Btw, to have 8 men's sports that includes football almost necessitates having probably 10 women's sports to be in Title IX compliance.

I like D3 the way it is compared to their proposals.

I also think that the WIAC could match the criteria set by the "Elites".

I really wonder if the vote is ever close.

[Gregory Sager]

Thing is, if the D3/4 idea actually happens, what benefit is there for an athletic program to be D4 instead of NAIA-1? Might as well go NAIA so you can offer "athletic aid." I forget off-hand if there was a minimum-sport rule in NAIA, which might come into play.

No, there isn't, and that's the essential appeal of the organization for a lot of the schools that have remained within it. If you just want to offer men's and women's basketball and, say, a volleyball team and a baseball team, and nothing else, you can do so within the NAIA. One of the charts in the link Ralph provided breaks down the number of programs offered by schools within D2, D3, and the NAIA. It's pretty clear by looking at that chart that a significant number of NAIA members are well below the minimum requirements of both D2 and D3 in terms of athletic programs offered.

I might be weird, but I like the division the way it is.

Ditto! Hey, every school would like to tailor the rules and requirements of intercollegiate athletic competition their own way. Should we break up the NCAA and the NAIA and just have 1,400 different sets of rules? For as much as I complain about the incongruities of D3's tournament selection process in men's basketball, the truth of the matter is that D3 in and of itself is a terrific institution in both the philosophical and competitive senses. I think that D3 is the culmination of a pretty elegant set of compromises, and I'd hate to see it broken into pieces just because some schools feel that they can fine-tune those compromises to even more exacting standards that cater to them in particular. Folks, the perfect is the enemy of the good.

[griz5]

Most people who are at this site probably have someone involved in D3 sports. The problem I have with the D3 rules is the ability for coaches to recruit as many kids as they can for a sport and then weed them out after they arrive on campus.

I would like for D3 schools to provide some minimal assistance (EX. $500 towards room and board or something else). This would show some commitment to the student ath. and the number available could correspond to scholarships in D1. This would at least let the player know what the coach really feels his potential is to make the team.

It would not rule out walkons but would at least require the coach to make some effort to evaluate talent before a kid commits to that school.

The commitment from the player would be that once he signs a letter to attend that school he is no longer eligible to recieve the minimal assistance from another school for that year.

Just my thoughts.

[Ralph Turner]

Most people who are at this site probably have someone involved in D3 sports. The problem I have with the D3 rules is the ability for coaches to recruit as many kids as they can for a sport and then weed them out after they arrive on campus.

I would like for D3 schools to provide some minimal assistance (EX. $500 towards room and board or something else). This would show some commitment to the student ath. and the number available could correspond to scholarships in D1. This would at least let the player know what the coach really feels his potential is to make the team.

It would not rule out walkons but would at least require the coach to make some effort to evaluate talent before a kid commits to that school.

The commitment from the player would be that once he signs a letter to attend that school he is no longer eligible to recieve the minimal assistance from another school for that year.

Just my thoughts.

Griz, thank you for the well-considered post.

Respectfully, that concept is cross-purposes with D3 as I understand it, and it probably more accurately reflects NAIA, D2 and D1.

I am not sure of the orientation materials that D3 makes available, or even requires, but the great majority of D3 athletes are in D3 because they want the education while they are continuing to compete in a sophisticated organization, namely NCAA D3.

I hope that your child is going to that school for the education, and the athletics is the "gravy".  Because grant-in-aid cannot be preferentially be given to athletes, your child cannot get "athletically related monies" from the coach.

I believe that any parent must assume (however hard that may be) that the quality of talent is so level, that a coach cannot predict how any one particular student-athlete will adjust to the myriad of changes that accompany college.

[griz5]

This issue actually does not affect me but every year I see kids who have talked to the coaches and believe the have a chance, even though the coach has talked to 30 other freshmen for 7 or 8 available spots.

We all hope the quality of the school is what made the choice for the student but right or wrong this is not always the case. I would just like to see some way for the kids to know if they have a chance of actually making the team.

In some programs the coaches will simply cast their net and then throw away the non-keepers.

[batteredbard]

That answer is research.
Pulling up the Title iX filing with the US dept of education on the internet shows you how many athletes a school has in each sport. If a school has over 200 athletes on the football team then its easy to see that most of them are not ever starting and percentage wise few are seeing the field at all in varsity competition. I've told parents who have asked me what I knew about such and such school to point blank ask how many freshman were brought in the year before and  how many are still there. Scoping out and comparing the rosters over two or three seasons can show how many names disappear between freshman year and junior year in most sports.

I agree that using a monetary carrott and stick on coaches is counter to the D3 spirit. That said I personally dislike programs that bring in large numbers and sift them through to find a few diamonds. The kids can still stay and get a degree but remember these students are generally in an academic range where they could be going almost for nothing to some public schools in D1. But I don't know of a way to put a stop to it. If that's the way a school operates or allows a coach to operate then eventually the back lash is common word and the pros and cons of that school's teams shift in the eyes of high school athletes.

Going back a step about endowments. Associated Press reported April 5 that Fisk University had been prevented by the Tenn. attorney general from selling  Georgia O'Keefe's 'Radiator Building - Night, New York) for about $18 million less than appraisal to help rebuild the school's endowment. The school also has Marsden Hartley's "Painting No. 3" on the block for the same purpose.

[Ralph Turner]

Radiator Building at Night New York by Georgia O'Keefe

New York Times article on the sale from Fisk's Alfred Stieglitz Collection

Here is the Hartley that I think is in the Stieglitz Collection Landscape #3.  (This was all that my searches on two separate engines could find.  )

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I'll be the voice for the small school again.  Our coaches go after 30 players for 5 slots on the men's basketball team and get three of them to show up and they have to rely on walk ons anyway.  NAIA just isn't an option in New England as there are about three NAIA schools left.

I was in favor of the split when it was more of a big program/small program split.  Obviously the schools that have and spend more money have an advantage and also encounter these sorts of competitive problems in recruiting too many kids or redshirting.  These all seem like things that come with monetary advantage.

I wish they stop couching these things in terms of athletics/academics.  Amherst has just as much money to spend (if not more) than Stevens Point or Whitworth or whoever the culprit of the moment is.  In my opinion it would make more sense to have specific rules for athletic departments over a certain budget.  You might run into problems with schools with really small enrollments spending huge amounts, but I think those would be quite few.

[smedindy]

There is no way here that anyone is 'thrown away'. Sure, people have spent four years in a program and hardly played varsity, and sure, kids have come here, spent their freshman year on the bench or in JV, and decided to stop playing sports, but as long as the kids are willing to keep coming out and work in a sport, there is a spot in the program.

As for D-III - let's just keep it as / is.