FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[art76]

Art - the revenue sharing idea sounds good in theory. The B1G practices that model with bowl game proceeds and other revenue streams. However, the MIAC is not the B1G.

Let's say SJU hosts Tommie Johnnie and they get a gate of 18,000. We'll ignore the fact a number of those are students that are paying little to nothing to attend. We'll say they make $20 a ticket for the sake of simplicity. So SJU grosses $360,000 on attendance. Add another $100k for concessions and you are up to $460,000. Cut that in half to account for expenses. Splitting $230k amongst the 9 football members not named St Johns nets each school a whopping $26,000! If Carleton College is hard up for a $26k check when it's endowment is pushing towards $1 BILLION something is wrong. Revenue sharing won't solve anything, even for the "poorer" schools in the conference, primarily because their is so little revenue to share, as evidenced from the conferences largest event tabulated above.

952 - I hear you on the money thing - and this was all hashed out here a couple of years ago when the game was at Target Field.

Somehow I wonder how to raise up the "less endowed" in the conference to help level the playing field - pun somewhat intended.

[Miacman4040]

I have enjoyed this board lumping Bethel into the top three athletic schools because they have good football. I would say Gustavus is overall much stronger athletically. Regardless, grouping Bethel with the Tommies and the Johnnies is laughable.

[OldAuggie]

Old Auggie:  I see that Augsburg will soon field a women's wrestling team!

Augsburg To Add Women's Wrestling for 2019-2020

The Augsburg women wrestlers got their first commitment today, World Champion Emily Shilson of Mounds View.

"Shilson was a UWW Cadet World Championships gold medalist in 2018 and a silver medalist in 2017."

"Shilson is a three-time Minnesota state tournament qualifier competing in folkstyle against boys."

https://theguillotine.com/2019/04/college-recruiting-world-champion-shilson-to-augsburg/

[OzJohnnie]

Just to be clear because I realise I'm writing imprecisely.


Anyways, we'll see if I've guess the exciting conclusion to the Game of MIAC properly or if there will be a big twist when it's revealed that the STO president is actually the bastard son of Hubert Humphrey and a throng of drunk Canadians are marching south to kill everyone and burn Caruso on a stake in the middle of Lake Calhoun.

Bde Maka Ska

Oz,
You've been out of touch
http://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-park-board-to-vote-tonight-on-lake-calhoun-name-change/421157163/

That's not the first time those words have been told to me.

[OzJohnnie]

Old Auggie:  I see that Augsburg will soon field a women's wrestling team!

Augsburg To Add Women's Wrestling for 2019-2020

The Augsburg women wrestlers got their first commitment today, World Champion Emily Shilson of Mounds View.

"Shilson was a UWW Cadet World Championships gold medalist in 2018 and a silver medalist in 2017."

"Shilson is a three-time Minnesota state tournament qualifier competing in folkstyle against boys."

https://theguillotine.com/2019/04/college-recruiting-world-champion-shilson-to-augsburg/

I'm glad to see the Auggies expanding their program for the women. As the father of three girls I'm always encouraged when the ladies get more opportunities to excel at hard things.

[Flynntowne]

         There are other ways to "level the playing field" between the football "Haves" and  "Have Nots" in a D3 conference like the MIAC. One way would be to limit the sizes of the rosters on each team. I believe the NESCAC has (or had) a "Rule of 75," which limited football rosters to 75 players after the start of the fall term. Thus, NESCAC teams could have more than 75 players participate in preseason practice, but the rosters had to be trimmed down to 75 players for the season. I realize that the NESCAC doesn't participate in the D3 playoffs – and that its teams don't play non-conference foes. However, MIAC teams with 100+ player rosters (e.g., St. Thomas, St. John's, Bethel, Concordia) are able to "stockpile" players the way Ohio State and Michigan did back in the days of the "Big 2 and Little 8," before scholarships were whittled down to their current 85. In the years since FBS scholarships were reduced, there has been more football parity in the Big Ten (except, of course, for the Gophers). With 75-man roster limitations in the MIAC, coaches would have to be more particular in who they recruited. It would seem to follow that a lot of the players who might have gone to one of the "big roster" MIAC schools in the past might decide to go to a different MIAC school if they weren't heavily recruited, or if it appeared they weren't going to make the 75-man roster at the school of their choice. With some MIAC schools struggling just to field 50-player rosters (e.g., Hamline, Carleton), the additional pool of players available to them might be the "kick in the rear" they needed to put some new-found energy into their recruiting – and to convince their administrations to finally invest some decent dollars into their football programs.
   A variation of the "reduced roster" method of evening things out would be to not restrict the sizes of rosters but, instead, to limit the number of players who could suit up for a home game – say, down to only 60 (that's still more than the MIAC's current travel squad limitation of 55 players). Players who were happy just being on a "big roster" team could still be on the team. The D3 mantra of "participation" could still be observed. (That's the major difference between this method and the "reduced roster" parity method.) And rosters could certainly change for every home game, just as travel rosters could change. However, overall team roster sizes would gradually dwindle in time, as many players wouldn't want to be on a team if it appeared unlikely they would ever get to even suit up for a game – home or away.
   I, personally, wouldn't want to see any of the above "remedies" happen – and I seriously doubt they will happen unless all of D3 implemented the change(s). I only mention them as possible ways to obtain more parity in the MIAC short of expelling one or more of its members and, essentially, breaking up the conference. But, I have to believe there are a lot of people who would love to see one or the other (or BOTH) of the proposed rule changes implemented. I'm wondering if, perhaps, the "anti-Tommie" MIAC school presidents have a "fall back" position or a "bargaining chip" involving one of those remedies – or something similar – as an alternative to booting St. Thomas out of the conference??

[DuffMan]

...(that's still more than the MIAC's current travel squad limitation of 55 players)...

Not that is matters to your point, but currently, the MIAC travel roster limit is 60.

3.6 VISITING TEAM ROSTER LIMIT. The visiting team roster limit for all Conference games shall not exceed sixty (60) players in
uniform on the sideline at the start of the contest. (see MIAC General Code 3.4.6 for definition of Visiting Team Roster Limit and
applicable penalties). (revised 05/13, 05/07, 5/98, 1988)

[DuffMan]

The Augsburg women wrestlers got their first commitment today, World Champion Emily Shilson of Mounds View.

This is a good thing.  There are some phenomenal female wrestlers out there.  Our 5-year old keeps asking us (gotta be like her big bro!), but I hesistate because she's pretty sensitive, and I don't envision it going well.  It could toughen her up, though.    We'll see what next wrestling season brings.

Our son wrestled a girl this season, though I don't know that he was even aware of it.  She was tough.  I talked to her mom for a bit.  Opportunities like this could help keep girls in the sport.

[TheChucker]

         There are other ways to "level the playing field" between the football "Haves" and  "Have Nots" in a D3 conference like the MIAC. One way would be to limit the sizes of the rosters on each team. I believe the NESCAC has (or had) a "Rule of 75," which limited football rosters to 75 players after the start of the fall term. Thus, NESCAC teams could have more than 75 players participate in preseason practice, but the rosters had to be trimmed down to 75 players for the season. I realize that the NESCAC doesn't participate in the D3 playoffs – and that its teams don't play non-conference foes. However, MIAC teams with 100+ player rosters (e.g., St. Thomas, St. John's, Bethel, Concordia) are able to "stockpile" players the way Ohio State and Michigan did back in the days of the "Big 2 and Little 8," before scholarships were whittled down to their current 85. In the years since FBS scholarships were reduced, there has been more football parity in the Big Ten (except, of course, for the Gophers). With 75-man roster limitations in the MIAC, coaches would have to be more particular in who they recruited. It would seem to follow that a lot of the players who might have gone to one of the "big roster" MIAC schools in the past might decide to go to a different MIAC school if they weren't heavily recruited, or if it appeared they weren't going to make the 75-man roster at the school of their choice. With some MIAC schools struggling just to field 50-player rosters (e.g., Hamline, Carleton), the additional pool of players available to them might be the "kick in the rear" they needed to put some new-found energy into their recruiting – and to convince their administrations to finally invest some decent dollars into their football programs.
   A variation of the "reduced roster" method of evening things out would be to not restrict the sizes of rosters but, instead, to limit the number of players who could suit up for a home game – say, down to only 60 (that's still more than the MIAC's current travel squad limitation of 55 players). Players who were happy just being on a "big roster" team could still be on the team. The D3 mantra of "participation" could still be observed. (That's the major difference between this method and the "reduced roster" parity method.) And rosters could certainly change for every home game, just as travel rosters could change. However, overall team roster sizes would gradually dwindle in time, as many players wouldn't want to be on a team if it appeared unlikely they would ever get to even suit up for a game – home or away.
   I, personally, wouldn't want to see any of the above "remedies" happen – and I seriously doubt they will happen unless all of D3 implemented the change(s). I only mention them as possible ways to obtain more parity in the MIAC short of expelling one or more of its members and, essentially, breaking up the conference. But, I have to believe there are a lot of people who would love to see one or the other (or BOTH) of the proposed rule changes implemented. I'm wondering if, perhaps, the "anti-Tommie" MIAC school presidents have a "fall back" position or a "bargaining chip" involving one of those remedies – or something similar – as an alternative to booting St. Thomas out of the conference??

The tuition-driven schools with big rosters like SJU, Concordia and Bethel would never go for it. That's $1-$2 million in revenue they'd give up assuming those players would go elsewhere. They would rather add a JV schedule to accommodate the big rosters (I know Concordia does, I'm assuming the others do too).

[DuffMan]

I have enjoyed this board lumping Bethel into the top three athletic schools because they have good football. I would say Gustavus is overall much stronger athletically. Regardless, grouping Bethel with the Tommies and the Johnnies is laughable.

Perhaps, but this is a football discussion board, and whether it is true or not, it has been presumed that football is the impetus behind these MIAC discussions.  In the past 20 years, Bethel has been much better at football than Gustavus, at times bettering SJU and UST.

[wally_wabash]

What's the philosophy behind the travel roster limit? 

[miac952]

I have enjoyed this board lumping Bethel into the top three athletic schools because they have good football. I would say Gustavus is overall much stronger athletically. Regardless, grouping Bethel with the Tommies and the Johnnies is laughable.

It's no secret that this is about football, and Bethel has done quite well, despite greater handicaps than the coalition. If it wasn't about football, the coalition was sleeping at the wheel in the early 2000's when UST won national titles in softball, baseball, hockey, and women's basketball. That would have been the time to push the issue. The only thing that changed in that time is UST football's rise and the coalition's complete ineptitude to field a football team. Concordia was 5th in the conference last year and beat the bottom 4 teams 181-31. That is gross incompetence fueled by those schools administrators over the last decade.

Thankfully, to date, those administrators appear to be just as incompetent in winning the PR and political game in trying to shoehorn this thing through.

[GoldandBlueBU]

I have enjoyed this board lumping Bethel into the top three athletic schools because they have good football. I would say Gustavus is overall much stronger athletically. Regardless, grouping Bethel with the Tommies and the Johnnies is laughable.

Overall, that's certainly true, but in the sports that probably get the most attention (football, basketball, baseball) BU has won the conference, or been involved in conference championship games multiple times in the past 10 years in each of those sports, which has not been the case for the Gusties.

Given that football has for the most part driven this whole issue, I don't think it's "laughable" to group BU with SJU and UST.

If you were really looking holistically at the MIAC as a sporting group though, yeah, Gustavus is good.  We should probably kick them out of the MIAC, given their dominant history in tennis.  I mean, look at all of those 9-0 losses.  The Gusties certainly could have allowed things to be a little closer. 

https://athletics.bethel.edu/opponent-history/mens-tennis/gustavus-adolphus-college/10/4

[AO]

What's the philosophy behind the travel roster limit?

It's cheaper? 

The tuition-driven schools with big rosters like SJU, Concordia and Bethel would never go for it. That's $1-$2 million in revenue they'd give up assuming those players would go elsewhere. They would rather add a JV schedule to accommodate the big rosters (I know Concordia does, I'm assuming the others do too).

Putting a limit on Bethel's roster would be a much bigger help to Northwestern than any MIAC school.  I say go for it!   

[Gregory Sager]

         There are other ways to "level the playing field" between the football "Haves" and  "Have Nots" in a D3 conference like the MIAC. One way would be to limit the sizes of the rosters on each team. I believe the NESCAC has (or had) a "Rule of 75," which limited football rosters to 75 players after the start of the fall term. Thus, NESCAC teams could have more than 75 players participate in preseason practice, but the rosters had to be trimmed down to 75 players for the season. I realize that the NESCAC doesn't participate in the D3 playoffs – and that its teams don't play non-conference foes. However, MIAC teams with 100+ player rosters (e.g., St. Thomas, St. John's, Bethel, Concordia) are able to "stockpile" players the way Ohio State and Michigan did back in the days of the "Big 2 and Little 8," before scholarships were whittled down to their current 85. In the years since FBS scholarships were reduced, there has been more football parity in the Big Ten (except, of course, for the Gophers). With 75-man roster limitations in the MIAC, coaches would have to be more particular in who they recruited. It would seem to follow that a lot of the players who might have gone to one of the "big roster" MIAC schools in the past might decide to go to a different MIAC school if they weren't heavily recruited, or if it appeared they weren't going to make the 75-man roster at the school of their choice. With some MIAC schools struggling just to field 50-player rosters (e.g., Hamline, Carleton), the additional pool of players available to them might be the "kick in the rear" they needed to put some new-found energy into their recruiting – and to convince their administrations to finally invest some decent dollars into their football programs.
   A variation of the "reduced roster" method of evening things out would be to not restrict the sizes of rosters but, instead, to limit the number of players who could suit up for a home game – say, down to only 60 (that's still more than the MIAC's current travel squad limitation of 55 players). Players who were happy just being on a "big roster" team could still be on the team. The D3 mantra of "participation" could still be observed. (That's the major difference between this method and the "reduced roster" parity method.) And rosters could certainly change for every home game, just as travel rosters could change. However, overall team roster sizes would gradually dwindle in time, as many players wouldn't want to be on a team if it appeared unlikely they would ever get to even suit up for a game – home or away.
   I, personally, wouldn't want to see any of the above "remedies" happen – and I seriously doubt they will happen unless all of D3 implemented the change(s). I only mention them as possible ways to obtain more parity in the MIAC short of expelling one or more of its members and, essentially, breaking up the conference. But, I have to believe there are a lot of people who would love to see one or the other (or BOTH) of the proposed rule changes implemented. I'm wondering if, perhaps, the "anti-Tommie" MIAC school presidents have a "fall back" position or a "bargaining chip" involving one of those remedies – or something similar – as an alternative to booting St. Thomas out of the conference??

The problem is that it's the lack of large rosters that is behind the blowouts of seven touchdowns or more, especially on the road. If you only have sixty players suited up because that's all that you're allowed, it means that you have a first team and a second team in uniform and perhaps half of a third team (when you throw in all of the specialists as well). When the ability level between the two teams is lopsided enough for the better team's starters and second-stringers to be up by, say, five or six touchdowns at halftime -- which seems to be a commonplace in the MIAC -- the coach of the better team is stuck, because he doesn't have enough lower-ability-level players at his disposal to put in to suppress the blowout. His second-stringers -- and perhaps even whatever third-stringers has has with him -- are demonstrably better than the opponent's starters, but the league's rules have prevented him from dressing the sort of players with whom the opponent's regulars can match up. And thus the blowout escalates as the opponent's regulars tire out and/or mentally give up.

The other problem is that, as The Chucker said, tuition-dependent schools need all the warm bodies that they can get on the football team -- especially in an era in which women are applying to attend liberal arts colleges at a two-to-one rate over men.