FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[Pat Coleman]

I would rather UST/SJU play independent schedule than see what grotesque abomination a spending cap would become.

The other day Old Dominion (0-3, recently went from FCS to FBS) beat #13 Virginia Tech.

Can you imagine Finlandia coming within 70 of SJU? I'm starting to believe that there should be another division for enrollment driven programs, or certain programs (the WIAC in its entirety, UST, SJU, UMHB) should consider whether this level is the right fit anymore.

Well, everyone has different goals for their football programs as well. The vast majority of people in this board follow teams where the goal should be to win the national title, but that isn't a reasonable goal for everyone and most institutions do not consider that a goal. There are plenty of other ways to measure success for a Division III athletics program.

[wm4]

I'm starting to believe that there should be another division for enrollment driven programs, or certain programs (the WIAC in its entirety, UST, SJU, UMHB) should consider whether this level is the right fit anymore.

This is exactly what I've advocated.  D3 is 250 teams, the top 30 or so of which are very different from the rest (read: more competitive).  I say you go D3A and D3B, each with their own playoff.  D3A would be encouraged to schedule more competitive games, wouldn't be dinged for a loss in these games, and would have an 8 or 16 team playoff at the end of the year.  D3B would be 10 game season, 32 making the playoffs (more access, hello), and a traditional championship. 

[USTBench]

I would rather UST/SJU play independent schedule than see what grotesque abomination a spending cap would become.

The other day Old Dominion (0-3, recently went from FCS to FBS) beat #13 Virginia Tech.

Can you imagine Finlandia coming within 70 of SJU? I'm starting to believe that there should be another division for enrollment driven programs, or certain programs (the WIAC in its entirety, UST, SJU, UMHB) should consider whether this level is the right fit anymore.

Well, everyone has different goals for their football programs as well. The vast majority of people in this board follow teams where the goal should be to win the national title, but that isn't a reasonable goal for everyone and most institutions do not consider that a goal. There are plenty of other ways to measure success for a Division III athletics program.

I understand that, but there comes a point where there's other factors to consider: like safety of the athletes or institutional embarrassment.

I'm not saying teams like Martin Luther should make a National Championship a goal, but if the perennial power in your conference and frequent playoff participant loses a game 98 to 0, you shouldn't be playing at the same level as UST or SJU.

UST and SJU played a game that featured two former Big 10 quarterbacks in front of 37,000 people and there is a real world possibility one of them will end up playing St. Scholastica in the first round of the playoffs again. A school that doesn't even have their own stadium and can't come within 98 of the second best team in the MIAC, playing in a NCAA playoff game a year later is beyond ridiculous (and they ALMOST made it into the playoffs last year).

I don't care how many times Alabama plays UTEP or Charlotte or Kent State, they're not hanging 98 on them. 

[miac952]

The MIAC could use spending limits or such to preserve parity in the conference but that will doom the AQ to one-and-done. No, it's an issue that is bigger than the MIAC.

That would be a tough pill to swallow, if you looked at MAC and Carleton's endowments. They can share some of the cake too!

[OzJohnnie]

Perhaps the NCAA must consider new organising models as it looks like single division for all sports rules are too restrictive and lead to these sorts of distortions. Maybe considering relegation/promotion models on a sport by sport basis like with the English soccer leagues is a possibility.

Regardless, the one size fits all model created in the 70’s (?) is starting to break. The variety of schools and aptitude to invest in various programs is struggling to fit in the current division model.

[wm4]

Perhaps the NCAA must consider new organising models as it looks like single division for all sports rules are too restrictive and lead to these sorts of distortions. Maybe considering relegation/promotion models like with the English soccer leagues is a possibility.

Regardless, the one size fits all model created in the 70's (?) is starting to break. The variety of schools and aptitude to invest in various programs is struggling to fit in the current division model.

The model comes back to center if you have elite coaches at top programs moving onward and upward.  Exhibit A is Liepold leaving UWW and what's happened since he left.  But these guys are staying, making good coin at their schools and/or have decided that this lifestyle works for them. 

[MiacMan]

I'm starting to believe that there should be another division for enrollment driven programs, or certain programs (the WIAC in its entirety, UST, SJU, UMHB) should consider whether this level is the right fit anymore.

This is exactly what I've advocated.  D3 is 250 teams, the top 30 or so of which are very different from the rest (read: more competitive).  I say you go D3A and D3B, each with their own playoff.  D3A would be encouraged to schedule more competitive games, wouldn't be dinged for a loss in these games, and would have an 8 or 16 team playoff at the end of the year.  D3B would be 10 game season, 32 making the playoffs (more access, hello), and a traditional championship.

WM4 -Spot on here:

There needs to be a sub-division of D3. Not with spending limits but with Roster limits say 75 as a starting place.  Simply put (and I've been here) a small roster of 50 even sub-50 can compete against a roster of up to 75. Once you get over that 75 number the depth is too overwhelming. Your special teams get absolutely destroyed. Your twos are nowhere near the caliber of the larger roster schools so you have to keep your ones on the field longer and eventually they get fatigued and then injured. You play these teams like UST and SJ2 and get beat by 70+ nobody wants any part of it and it makes recruiting nearly impossible. It is very much a safety concern here as well. 40-50 guys going against 130+ has injuries written all over it both physically and mentally.

[miac952]

Perhaps the NCAA must consider new organising models as it looks like single division for all sports rules are too restrictive and lead to these sorts of distortions. Maybe considering relegation/promotion models on a sport by sport basis like with the English soccer leagues is a possibility.

Regardless, the one size fits all model created in the 70's (?) is starting to break. The variety of schools and aptitude to invest in various programs is struggling to fit in the current division model.

Good summary. The model is struggling at all levels too. D1 has built into three quasi-tiers. You have the newly consolidated Power 5's, the next level conferences, and the FCS level. Even with that though, you get results like Bama - Ole Miss and Michigan - Nebraska. And those are inner-conference against respected football powers. It's not perfect, but it has adjusted to market forces in the last decade.

If the MIAC were to lose 1-2 members St. Scholastica would be the most logical. They participate in the majority of sports, expand the footprint, are close from a facilities standpoint, and could instantly compete in a number of sports like baseball and hockey. I suppose St. Mary's might be in that group considering stepping out as well. They don't have football and have had little success in any other sports over the last decade. Wonder if the MIAC could ever chase a DII school down to DIII. CSP, Augie, etc.?

[AO]

If the MIAC were to lose 1-2 members St. Scholastica would be the most logical. They participate in the majority of sports, expand the footprint, are close from a facilities standpoint, and could instantly compete in a number of sports like baseball and hockey. I suppose St. Mary's might be in that group considering stepping out as well. They don't have football and have had little success in any other sports over the last decade. Wonder if the MIAC could ever chase a DII school down to DIII. CSP, Augie, etc.?

Augustana (SD.) is much more likely to move up to D1 than move down to D3.   

Maybe the Hamlines and Carletons are tired of getting run over by the MIAC powers, but I really don't think anybody in the UMAC wants the Tommies or Johnnies to leave for another division.  This isn't high school, we don't have to divide into 10 classes until every team has a chance at a title every year.

[MIAC23]

Perhaps the NCAA must consider new organising models as it looks like single division for all sports rules are too restrictive and lead to these sorts of distortions. Maybe considering relegation/promotion models on a sport by sport basis like with the English soccer leagues is a possibility.

Regardless, the one size fits all model created in the 70's (?) is starting to break. The variety of schools and aptitude to invest in various programs is struggling to fit in the current division model.

Good summary. The model is struggling at all levels too. D1 has built into three quasi-tiers. You have the newly consolidated Power 5's, the next level conferences, and the FCS level. Even with that though, you get results like Bama - Ole Miss and Michigan - Nebraska. And those are inner-conference against respected football powers. It's not perfect, but it has adjusted to market forces in the last decade.

If the MIAC were to lose 1-2 members St. Scholastica would be the most logical. They participate in the majority of sports, expand the footprint, are close from a facilities standpoint, and could instantly compete in a number of sports like baseball and hockey. I suppose St. Mary's might be in that group considering stepping out as well. They don't have football and have had little success in any other sports over the last decade. Wonder if the MIAC could ever chase a DII school down to DIII. CSP, Augie, etc.?

Augie will be DI in a couple years.

[57Johnnie]

If the MIAC were to lose 1-2 members St. Scholastica would be the most logical. They participate in the majority of sports, expand the footprint, are close from a facilities standpoint, and could instantly compete in a number of sports like baseball and hockey. I suppose St. Mary's might be in that group considering stepping out as well. They don't have football and have had little success in any other sports over the last decade. Wonder if the MIAC could ever chase a DII school down to DIII. CSP, Augie, etc.?

Augustana (SD.) is much more likely to move up to D1 than move down to D3.   

Maybe the Hamline's and Carleton's are tired of getting run over by the MIAC powers, but I really don't think anybody in the UMAC wants the Tommies or Johnnies to leave for another division.  This isn't high school, we don't have to divide into 10 classes until every team has a chance at a title every year.

Spot on AO
The MIAC is 98 years old. It started with:
Carleton, Gustavus, Hamline, Mac, SJU, St. Olaf and STC at the time.
Schools have come and gone and come back again and left again.
It will even survive having to pay to watch JOHNNIE home games online.

[miac952]

Perhaps the NCAA must consider new organising models as it looks like single division for all sports rules are too restrictive and lead to these sorts of distortions. Maybe considering relegation/promotion models on a sport by sport basis like with the English soccer leagues is a possibility.

Regardless, the one size fits all model created in the 70's (?) is starting to break. The variety of schools and aptitude to invest in various programs is struggling to fit in the current division model.

Good summary. The model is struggling at all levels too. D1 has built into three quasi-tiers. You have the newly consolidated Power 5's, the next level conferences, and the FCS level. Even with that though, you get results like Bama - Ole Miss and Michigan - Nebraska. And those are inner-conference against respected football powers. It's not perfect, but it has adjusted to market forces in the last decade.

If the MIAC were to lose 1-2 members St. Scholastica would be the most logical. They participate in the majority of sports, expand the footprint, are close from a facilities standpoint, and could instantly compete in a number of sports like baseball and hockey. I suppose St. Mary's might be in that group considering stepping out as well. They don't have football and have had little success in any other sports over the last decade. Wonder if the MIAC could ever chase a DII school down to DIII. CSP, Augie, etc.?

Augie will be DI in a couple years.

Figured as much with the investments in the new football stadium and sports complex. Feels like DII is no-mans land. More schools will have to make a tough choice to move up or down.

[USTBench]

Perhaps the NCAA must consider new organising models as it looks like single division for all sports rules are too restrictive and lead to these sorts of distortions. Maybe considering relegation/promotion models on a sport by sport basis like with the English soccer leagues is a possibility.

Regardless, the one size fits all model created in the 70's (?) is starting to break. The variety of schools and aptitude to invest in various programs is struggling to fit in the current division model.

Good summary. The model is struggling at all levels too. D1 has built into three quasi-tiers. You have the newly consolidated Power 5's, the next level conferences, and the FCS level. Even with that though, you get results like Bama - Ole Miss and Michigan - Nebraska. And those are inner-conference against respected football powers. It's not perfect, but it has adjusted to market forces in the last decade.

If the MIAC were to lose 1-2 members St. Scholastica would be the most logical. They participate in the majority of sports, expand the footprint, are close from a facilities standpoint, and could instantly compete in a number of sports like baseball and hockey. I suppose St. Mary's might be in that group considering stepping out as well. They don't have football and have had little success in any other sports over the last decade. Wonder if the MIAC could ever chase a DII school down to DIII. CSP, Augie, etc.?

Regarding the state of the Power 5, Group of 5 and FCS, sure there are occassional blowouts, but 90% of the schools at that level have made a concerted effort from an administrative standpoint to compete. In my mind, there is absolutely no reason to move from FCS to FBS Group of 5 (Similarly, I don't believe there is any reason to move from Division III to Division II, you're adding nothing but cost, academics suffer, the atmosphere resembles an abandoned Sears parking lot, and it comes with all of the headaches of Division I logistics. Division II is dumb). NDSU and Montana realize there's no benefit to going to FBS, they get way more positive press being FCS powers than they would get as dominant Group of 5 teams playing in the Who-Gives-a-S**t Bowl. Appalachian State, Old Dominion, Coastal Carolina and Georgia Southern are in the midst of learning that lesson, and Marshall is well schooled in that lesson. Moving up is not without its pitfalls, and where it makes the most sense is going from Division II to Division 1: SDSU, USD, NDSU, SDSU and most recently, Northern Alabama, are all great fits for their football tradition and relative DII success.

McMurry was hasty in their decision to move to Division II and did so with lukewarm administrative support and they found themselves back to where they started and even worse once they pulled the plug on that experiment. I think with the combination of dwindling numbers in HS football, and the kids that do decide to play (or are allowed to play) getting bigger, faster and more skilled, college administrations can no longer afford to be one-foot-in-the-door with their football programs, or the gaps will widen to the absurd levels we're currently seeing at the Division III level.

Sure, as you alluded to, Alabama trounced Ole Miss BADLY. But Ole Miss wasn't a half second slower and 20lbs smaller across the board. They got dominated schematically and psychologically, and LOOKED awful on paper. But Ole Miss will most likely be competitive with Alabama next year, and will make changes from an administrative standpoint to ensure that happens. Ole Miss won't lose to Alabama by 50+ for a straight decade as is happening with the top tier of the MIAC and bottom tier of the MIAC.

BIG change is coming and while I wish we could bottle up time, the inevitable is going to happen at some point. I wish schools could flagship certain sports and move up or down a division based on institutional commitment, but the NCAA in their infinite wisdom has decided not to let that happen. As it stands, the kids at Hamline and Carleton have no business playing the kids at SJU or UST, and at some point in the near future that will come to a head. UST throwing 9 times in a game and running fullback dives for entire quarters is not going to prepare them, or their team, for a quarterfinals and beyond playoff push, and Hamline doesn't need that level of institutional humiliation year-in and year-out. It's good for nobody.

Schools in Division III are also not going to commit themselves to the kind of weekly nationwide travel required of schools playing an independent football schedule. Maybe you can swing it a for a few years like MAC and Wesley did, but the powers-that-be aren't going to be too keen on fitting the bill for a 60+ student athletes, plus coaches, administrative personnel and trainers to fly hither-and-yon 5 or 6 times a year. That leaves SJU, UST and UMHB and other schools looking to make the financial sacrifice to compete with Mount Union a choice. Stay put and hope for a competitive football game 3 or 4 times a year, or double down and move up. Division II is an awful fit, and the problem with the FCS Pioneer League is that it's mostly schools that have flagshipped basketball and field non-scholarship football. UST and SJU are in a tough spot, but if they're smart, they'll meet and make a decision together, but either way, they'll have to make a decision.

Everyone's counter-argument usually involves other non-revenue generating sports being dominant (Gustavus tennis). Which I understand, but if you commit to moving up a level, you usually have to cut sports (as UND found out the hard way), or you just get a different caliber of athlete.

Change is hard when you love the tradition, but the present state of the MIAC most likely won't survive another 5 years of this level of lopsidedness.

[miac952]

Football participation numbers shrinking bring up a good point Bench. Mike Grant has noted that youth football participation is down 30-40% in grades 4-8 in EP. That is reflected elsewhere as well. I have heard from a couple of other HS coaches I know well, that Grant isn't exaggerating by any means. They don't have exact numbers to point to like EP, but they are facing the same circumstances. If the pool shrinks, the numbers will erode even further for some of these smaller college programs.

[CobberHawkeye]

Took a look a the 93 games on the D3FB scoreboard for 9/22.

Average margin of victory: 23.6 pts

Games decided by
1 score       31 (33.3%)
2 scores       7  ( 7.5%)
3 scores     15  (16.1%)
4 scores     14  (15.1%)
5+ scores   26  (28.0%)

Comparing D2 scores (why not)

78 games on 9/22

Average margin of victory: 17.8 pts

Games decided by
1 score       26 (33.3%)
2 scores     19  (24.4%)
3 scores       9  (11.5%)
4 scores     13  (16.7%)
5+ scores   11  (14.1%)