FB: Presidents' Athletic Conference

[Scots13]

KC has been an MIAA member since 1896
TMC has been a member of the PAC since 2004.

Maybe that's why the MIAA website says they are the oldest college sports conference...

[WashJeff68]

Could also be why they were cut more slack than TMC

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

One all-sports championship hardly constitutes kicking PAC rear-end.    Guess it's a moot point now.

While it may have only been one sport... let's admit it was a massive violation... first ever basketball championship to be vacated in Division III and it certainly garnered a LOT of attention as a result. It wasn't like it was a "smaller" sport that barely anyone noticed.

[Scots13]

Noted, but in my opinion, it was a bigger headline because of the person involved and the previous institution. Not saying it wouldn't have been news without said family in the mix, but it certainly didn't hurt. Look at the E&H thing a few years ago--a football player from Appalachian State transferred and was apparently promised housing and financial aid from coaches/FinAid office. Granted E&H didn't win the Stagg Bowl, but I guarantee a significantly smaller D3 population knows about the latter.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Noted, but in my opinion, it was a bigger headline because of the person involved and the previous institution. Not saying it wouldn't have been news without said family in the mix, but it certainly didn't hurt. Look at the E&H thing a few years ago--a football player from Appalachian State transferred and was apparently promised housing and financial aid from coaches/FinAid office. Granted E&H didn't win the Stagg Bowl, but I guarantee a significantly smaller D3 population knows about the latter.

When a national title is taken away... by default a larger audience is aware no matter who is involved. When an entire season of wins (30+) is stripped away... a larger audience is going to be aware.

I understand your point, but a lot of violations by smaller or less successful programs occur all of the time in all three divisions of the NCAA (have you seen the fallout today from the Kalamazoo violations last year?). I would garner those are not as well known because the programs are not as successful. While certainly there was a name people knew in the mix (though, I think less care about the "family" name than most), the biggest reason the story was big was because one of the best programs this decade (well before Moss arrived) lost an undefeated season and title. What exactly did E&H lose that makes people remember it? That is the biggest difference in these cases.

Heck... bet many missed the York (N.Y.) men's basketball case recently.

[Ralph Turner]

KC has been an MIAA member since 1896
TMC has been a member of the PAC since 2004.

..and helped the PAC earn a Pool A bid in football, and move out of Pool B by the 2007 season.

This was before the PAC picked up Geneva and St Vincent.

Crestview Hills KY is 300 miles west of Pittsburgh. IMHO, the benefits to adding TMC are apparent.
Now the PresAC doesn't need the hassle of an isolated school 5 hours away.

[ADL70]

CWRU schedules for 2018 & 2019  PAC goes to full 9-game conf sched.  Looks like Spartans picked up CMU's 2018 game with Rocheter, as TArtans had two non-conf games set for 2018.

http://athletics.case.edu/sports/fball/future

[SaintsFAN]

Ouch. That's a tough way to run a program. Even temporarily.

They've done it before and were a playoff team during one of these years under Dean Paul.  Short-term, they'll be okay.  The players they have in the program and coming in will continue to be impressive.  For the other sports, there are plenty of schools within a 3 hour drive of Cincinnati, outside of MSJ, of course.  Short-term, they'll be okay. 

is wally_wabash right? Who knows. I suspect decisions such as this are not easy and there are as many agendas as there are players. When TMC joined the PAC it was a win win. TMC got a conference and the PAC got an automatic bid to the football playoffs.  Now TMC has no conference and the PAC still has a plethora of teams.

They have a plethora of teams, but PAC is losing a very strong (top 15) football program.  This will hurt the overall strength of the conference. 

I think most of us had that thinking at least in the back of our minds when the announcement was made, but for the sake of TMC had hoped they had a different home more or less lined up. It will be difficult to fill schedules in many sports, and the people that will really suffer are the student athletes. The vast majority of whom probably played no role in any of this...

As an attractive free agent, I expect them to field an offer or two in D3 and stay in the division. 

When a national title is taken away... by default a larger audience is aware no matter who is involved. When an entire season of wins (30+) is stripped away... a larger audience is going to be aware.

I understand your point, but a lot of violations by smaller or less successful programs occur all of the time in all three divisions of the NCAA (have you seen the fallout today from the Kalamazoo violations last year?). I would garner those are not as well known because the programs are not as successful. While certainly there was a name people knew in the mix (though, I think less care about the "family" name than most), the biggest reason the story was big was because one of the best programs this decade (well before Moss arrived) lost an undefeated season and title. What exactly did E&H lose that makes people remember it? That is the biggest difference in these cases.

Heck... bet many missed the York (N.Y.) men's basketball case recently.

the NCAA were receiving multiple "anonymous tips" about this player.  If the player's name was Smith, there wouldn't have been an investigation.

[E.115]

CWRU schedules for 2018 & 2019  PAC goes to full 9-game conf sched.  Looks like Spartans picked up CMU's 2018 game with Rocheter, as TArtans had two non-conf games set for 2018.

http://athletics.case.edu/sports/fball/future

Thanks.  Great find.

I am happy to see previous UAA foe Rochester back on the schedule...and interesting to consider this will be least  traveling distance-wise the team will have done in probably several previous decades.

[SpartanMom_2016]

.......the people that will really suffer are the student athletes. The vast majority of whom probably played no role in any of this...

Isn't this the problem throughout the entire NCAA?  After all if the player in question had simply been allowed to transfer to the program of her choice (likely Kentucky) none of this would have happened.  The NCAA is an institution that has rules that are disrespectful to players in so many ways.

Why should the first school she played for control the rest of her college career?  If she wanted out she should have been allowed to transfer.  NCAA gives these coaches tremendous power over student athletes.  A student athlete receives their scholarship for the year and fulfills their service.  I don't think schools should be allowed to control anything after the school year ends.

Why can't players make money from things like appearances and photo shoots?  Other students are allowed to get jobs related to their skills.

How can an institution strip away wins?  It is totally disrespectful to the other players involved in those games.  The games were played and this young lady was not the only one on the court.

I agree that TMC broke the rules but there has to be a better way to punish a program than punishing students who were not involved in the infraction. 

[jknezek]

Isn't this the problem throughout the entire NCAA?  After all if the player in question had simply been allowed to transfer to the program of her choice (likely Kentucky) none of this would have happened.  The NCAA is an institution that has rules that are disrespectful to players in so many ways.

Why should the first school she played for control the rest of her college career?  If she wanted out she should have been allowed to transfer.  NCAA gives these coaches tremendous power over student athletes.  A student athlete receives their scholarship for the year and fulfills their service.  I don't think schools should be allowed to control anything after the school year ends.

Agreed. Players should be tied to the school they compete at for the academic year in which they competed or for the amount of time they received a guaranteed scholarship. Scholarship granting schools should have the ability to grant 1-4 year guaranteed scholarships, and they should be able to have an approved transfer list only if the student is still under guaranteed scholarship and has not finished his/her degree.

Why can't players make money from things like appearances and photo shoots?  Other students are allowed to get jobs related to their skills.

I agree on this except you can see the potential for abuse right? Powerful booster promises a 5 star X number of dollars, per year, based on a single signed item or photo shoot. It's essentially pay to play. The NCAA shouldn't be in position of trying to judge if the pay is appropriate to the job performed. The NCAA has enough trouble enforcing simple rules. This would be a nightmare, so I understand why they fight against this even though it makes perfect sense.

How can an institution strip away wins?  It is totally disrespectful to the other players involved in those games.  The games were played and this young lady was not the only one on the court.

I agree that TMC broke the rules but there has to be a better way to punish a program than punishing students who were not involved in the infraction.

Here's where we really disagree. It's a team game. Isn't that what we always hear? You win as a team, you lose as a team. Therefore you skirt the rules as a team as well. Especially when there are coaches involved who should know better. There isn't another way to handle this.

** yes I amended this. I didn't like the connotation of the wording of my original post in relation to the facts of the TMC case.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

When a national title is taken away... by default a larger audience is aware no matter who is involved. When an entire season of wins (30+) is stripped away... a larger audience is going to be aware.

I understand your point, but a lot of violations by smaller or less successful programs occur all of the time in all three divisions of the NCAA (have you seen the fallout today from the Kalamazoo violations last year?). I would garner those are not as well known because the programs are not as successful. While certainly there was a name people knew in the mix (though, I think less care about the "family" name than most), the biggest reason the story was big was because one of the best programs this decade (well before Moss arrived) lost an undefeated season and title. What exactly did E&H lose that makes people remember it? That is the biggest difference in these cases.

Heck... bet many missed the York (N.Y.) men's basketball case recently.

the NCAA were receiving multiple "anonymous tips" about this player.  If the player's name was Smith, there wouldn't have been an investigation.

No and no.

There was one anonymous tip. It is revealed when you read the report. Just one tip with follow up information from the same individual.

Secondly, I can point to a lot of other investigations from the NCAA per players named "Smith" that garnered pretty severe penalties. You don't have to look very far. Baruch and York (N.Y.) in just the last year. Emory and Henry football a few years ago. Kalamazoo in the last few years (including the MIAA's penalties against them revealed in the last week or two).

Yes, the player was more famous and wasn't exactly kept secret by the NCAA report. Yes, the report seemed to point a lot of time on her and who she was and her background, but don't confuse for a minute that because of who she was the school was suddenly in hotter water than others. Yes, they lost a national championship and no one has had that happen in basketball... but then again, no team that has gone undefeated and won a national title has had an investigation reveal major penalties that warranted vacating games from that season, either. Just because it happened to TMC doesn't mean the NCAA (Division III itself to be clear) hasn't been harsh with other schools who didn't have famous players.

An even better example of this would be TCNJ and their women's basketball program not that long ago. Those ripple effects are still being felt and it ended up pointing to even bigger problems on the entire campus/department. The name on the back of the jersey just made the story juicier, it didn't change the outcome or the verdict (or penalty).

[SpartanMom_2016]

I agree on this except you can see the potential for abuse right? Powerful booster promises a 5 star X number of dollars, per year, based on a single signed item or photo shoot. It's essentially pay to play. The NCAA shouldn't be in position of trying to judge if the pay is appropriate to the job performed. The NCAA has enough trouble enforcing simple rules. This would be a nightmare, so I understand why they fight against this even though it makes perfect sense.

I do see the potential for abuse but as a parent of two athletes and one non athlete I see a tremendous disparity between athletes and non athletes in this regard.  My middle son is a student studying music.  He has a scholarship.  He gets paid to play all the time.  He gets paid to give lessons.  They should figure out a way.  There shouldn't be such a disparity.

Here's where we really disagree. It's a team game. Isn't that what we always hear? You win as a team, you lose as a team. Therefore you skirt the rules as a team as well. Especially when there are coaches involved who should know better. There isn't another way to handle this.

The thing is I really do see this as ore of a coaching and institutional failure and less of a failure of the player.  That is why I hate to see the other players punished.  I agree in principle that the players win and lose as a team but when the people who really should know better aren't really affected as much as the student athletes I have problems with  the resolution. 

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

While I agree that a punishment can hurt the players, I am not exactly sure how else to send a message in a lot of these cases. There is "Show of Cause" for administrators and coaches which essentially would kill a career (especially depending on how many years that SOC is up for), but that is the nuclear option of sorts. There has to be steps before that and there aren't a lot of steps that doesn't ultimately hurt a team.

We have seen post-season bans, we have seen vacated games (which honestly doesn't really do anything), we have seen practice time and other items taken away... but they ultimately always impact the team even if a coach is suspended for a period of time.

I agree, it sucks that current players take the hit for past teams, but how else would a punishment work? You have to send a message to the coach, the program, the department, and administrators that the transgression will not be tolerated. Not much you can do retroactively to send that message.

And by the way, same thing happens in the "real world" at jobs if the rules are broken. Doesn't matter if the employee was there or not when it happened and if they were involved. Weird analogy I admit, but it isn't like people aren't affected by bad decisions in the past all of the time. It helps send the message to everyone.

[jknezek]

I do see the potential for abuse but as a parent of two athletes and one non athlete I see a tremendous disparity between athletes and non athletes in this regard.  My middle son is a student studying music.  He has a scholarship.  He gets paid to play all the time.  He gets paid to give lessons.  They should figure out a way.  There shouldn't be such a disparity.

Except your son actually does the lessons. We saw how many examples of athletes "working" a summer job or something else in the past for a booster company where they never showed up or never did anything if they did? It's too hard to police, but if you don't police it, then it is too easy to just run around the rules. The NCAA is stuck in an untenable position that they insist on defending. There simply is too much money in big-time college sports and the rules to try and keep it out of players hands filter down to small-time college sports.

The thing is I really do see this as ore of a coaching and institutional failure and less of a failure of the player.  That is why I hate to see the other players punished.  I agree in principle that the players win and lose as a team but when the people who really should know better aren't really affected as much as the student athletes I have problems with  the resolution.

I don't disagree, but if you play games with an ineligible player, then those games have to be forfeited. That's the whole point of having eligible versus ineligible players. We had the same thing happen to us once when I was a kid in club soccer. Our team was playing U13 and we had a kid that moved to town from Panama. The documentation he had provided showed one birth date. A year later he had documentation with a a different birth date. One before the cut-off, the latter after. We forfeited the previous season and our championship because he was declared ineligible. I don't even think he knew which date was correct. But he was ineligible. Were we all "punished?" Yes. Was that right? I don't know. But it wasn't right to play with a player that shouldn't have been playing. That wasn't fair to the other teams.

Whose to say TMC's opponents didn't lose a kid that couldn't afford to stay in school or who had to take the year off for injury but might have stayed if she had been able to stay at a coach's house or could have stayed in school if she could have borrowed the coach's car? That's the hypothetical that underlines the rule. It's supposed to be everyone on the same playing field, and the coach, who should have known better, influenced that playing field.