FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[wm4]

Thinking out loud ...

I wonder how much of this MIAC brouhaha  is a symptom of "helicopter parenting" and "victimhood culture" that is all the rage today. Student's today grew up in the age of mom and dad always arms length away, ready to swoop in and solve every dispute or slight or boo-boo. Students didn't learn how to self-adjudicate with their peers, instead they run to a 3rd party authority or administration at the drop of a hat to solve the problem. Add in a little glorification of the victim and you've got a recipe ripe for let's kick UST out via the administrators versus let's get a little tougher and figure out how to win and stand on our own two feet. I realize this fight was brought about by the Presidents, but they're the helicopter parents (demographically speaking) who raised/created the kids now in school. Makes sense that the parenting reflexes are also reflected in the institutions these men and women now lead.

In many ways athletics is the ultimate meritocracy - the cream rises to the top. While academia has increasingly become the land of victimhood, where heterodox ideas are no longer debated (and defeated if found lacking), but preemptively banned for being scary and dangerous and having the potential to hurt feelings. The playground is where you are forced to get better, to practice, to improve, in a word, to compete. Academia (I realize this is a broad generalization) has increasingly become the place where equality is the greatest good. We must root out all microaggressions, flatten all perceived advantages, level every playing field, etc. The problem is this doesn't prepare students for graduation and the dog eat dog world that awaits them.

Cards on the table, Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder is whispering in my memory.

UST & Caruso & 97-0 are the ultimate microaggressions. They must be adjudicated, pulled down to a level of equality. Rather than getting beat by the better kid on the neighborhood basketball court, going home and practicing, to return months later with a more competitive game, many (leaders) in the MIAC are complaining to the Neighborhood Watch that UST shouldn't be allowed to play on that court any more. Why? Because they built a really nice basketball hoop on the driveway of their 4,000 sq ft home (complain the parents living in 4,500 sq ft homes with pools in the back yards). Overly simplified, I know. But I think there are broader cultural trends at play in this.

The point was made a few days ago about the different categories that lead to advantages in athletics. Without looking, prestige, funding, financial aid, facilities, culture, etc. What's ignored is that Bethel blows up this argument. One of the smallest endowments in the MIAC. Comparatively some of the least inspiring facilities (cue people complaining about the grass field). Limited financial aid packages, against her peers. An athletic budget $1.5 million less than Augsburg! Coach J is the X-factor. Except that they've now found a similar X-Factor for baseball, basketball, track, etc. Hat's off to Bethel's coaching staffs, who've found a way to win in spite of significant "disadvantages" and less institutional/budgetary support. The difference is the Athletic Department got creative about its value prop to prospective student athletes. If Bethel has found a way to thrive in the MIAC, there's no school in the league that can't do likewise. But first you've got to actually value competition and be motivated to shoot some hoops in the driveway before you return to the playground.

No way this Tweet from UST football a couple weeks ago was just coincidence

https://twitter.com/UST_Football/status/1114511063368777728

[AO]

Completely agree.. It's the same reason why these "Super-Teams" are being formed in sports (here's looking at you NBA) now. Everyone wants to be popular and win, but very few are willing to put in the time it takes to win... Not completely related, but felt the need to vent.

I think the elite D3 programs do a lot of great things from coaching to player development, but I don't think there's any question they remain great because players (and their helicopter parents) flock to winning teams.  Helicopter parents aren't as interested in sending their kids to a school that needs to build up their program. 

There is no doubt the other MIAC presidents are guilty of the same overprotective helicopter parenting, but I don't think the lesson needs to be "get better".  The lesson is that most of the time, the better team is going to win regardless of your own effort or improvement. 

[jamtod]

Completely agree.. It's the same reason why these "Super-Teams" are being formed in sports (here's looking at you NBA) now. Everyone wants to be popular and win, but very few are willing to put in the time it takes to win... Not completely related, but felt the need to vent.

I think the elite D3 programs do a lot of great things from coaching to player development, but I don't think there's any question they remain great because players (and their helicopter parents) flock to winning teams.  Helicopter parents aren't as interested in sending their kids to a school that needs to build up their program. 

There is no doubt the other MIAC presidents are guilty of the same overprotective helicopter parenting, but I don't think the lesson needs to be "get better".  The lesson is that most of the time, the better team is going to win regardless of your own effort or improvement.

We should be fine with that, right? I'm not expecting UST's quiz bowl team to knock off Carleton or for UST to beat Carleton in Ultimate Frisbee or Olaf in quidditch anytime soon or Gustavus in tennis.

[OzJohnnie]

I think it's money related and has little, if anything, to do with parenting philosophy.  The liberal arts education is under severe pressure with the combined trends of unsustainable student debt behaviours ($1.56 trillion in student loan debt, 50% more than credit card debt in the US.  Almost 1 in 8 people are now in default on their student loans and the ROI, if you even finish school, is really unattractive).  Additionally, STEM degrees are growing (over 1 in 5 degrees is now STEM) while liberal arts degrees are barely hanging on (less than 1 in 6 and declining).  And if it isn't STEM then it is business and other professional degrees or online courses.  The traditional liberal arts degree is under pressure from two angels: affordability and mass relevance.

I think schools are fighting over identity much more than the success of any football program.  They are fighting over relevance is a rapidly changing education landscape.  Football is just the immediate issue that can relieve some pressure, but it's not a cure.

[USTBench]

Thinking out loud ...

I wonder how much of this MIAC brouhaha  is a symptom of "helicopter parenting" and "victimhood culture" that is all the rage today. Student's today grew up in the age of mom and dad always arms length away, ready to swoop in and solve every dispute or slight or boo-boo. Students didn't learn how to self-adjudicate with their peers, instead they run to a 3rd party authority or administration at the drop of a hat to solve the problem. Add in a little glorification of the victim and you've got a recipe ripe for let's kick UST out via the administrators versus let's get a little tougher and figure out how to win and stand on our own two feet. I realize this fight was brought about by the Presidents, but they're the helicopter parents (demographically speaking) who raised/created the kids now in school. Makes sense that the parenting reflexes are also reflected in the institutions these men and women now lead.

In many ways athletics is the ultimate meritocracy - the cream rises to the top. While academia has increasingly become the land of victimhood, where heterodox ideas are no longer debated (and defeated if found lacking), but preemptively banned for being scary and dangerous and having the potential to hurt feelings. The playground is where you are forced to get better, to practice, to improve, in a word, to compete. Academia (I realize this is a broad generalization) has increasingly become the place where equality is the greatest good. We must root out all microaggressions, flatten all perceived advantages, level every playing field, etc. The problem is this doesn't prepare students for graduation and the dog eat dog world that awaits them.

Cards on the table, Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder is whispering in my memory.

UST & Caruso & 97-0 are the ultimate microaggressions. They must be adjudicated, pulled down to a level of equality. Rather than getting beat by the better kid on the neighborhood basketball court, going home and practicing, to return months later with a more competitive game, many (leaders) in the MIAC are complaining to the Neighborhood Watch that UST shouldn't be allowed to play on that court any more. Why? Because they built a really nice basketball hoop on the driveway of their 4,000 sq ft home (complain the parents living in 4,500 sq ft homes with pools in the back yards). Overly simplified, I know. But I think there are broader cultural trends at play in this.

The point was made a few days ago about the different categories that lead to advantages in athletics. Without looking, prestige, funding, financial aid, facilities, culture, etc. What's ignored is that Bethel blows up this argument. One of the smallest endowments in the MIAC. Comparatively some of the least inspiring facilities (cue people complaining about the grass field). Limited financial aid packages, against her peers. An athletic budget $1.5 million less than Augsburg! Coach J is the X-factor. Except that they've now found a similar X-Factor for baseball, basketball, track, etc. Hat's off to Bethel's coaching staffs, who've found a way to win in spite of significant "disadvantages" and less institutional/budgetary support. The difference is the Athletic Department got creative about its value prop to prospective student athletes. If Bethel has found a way to thrive in the MIAC, there's no school in the league that can't do likewise. But first you've got to actually value competition and be motivated to shoot some hoops in the driveway before you return to the playground.

No way this Tweet from UST football a couple weeks ago was just coincidence

https://twitter.com/UST_Football/status/1114511063368777728

Haha. I was thinking of that Tweet as I read Hazzben's post.

Though I am partial to my sweet GOT analogy, Hazzben's post is probably as spot on of a post as I've read in a long time. UST beat Bethel 45-14 in 2015; 27-6 in 2016; and 58-13 in 2017. Not once did I hear of the Bethel administration, coaching staff, players or posters on this board complain about UST's unfair advantage of (insert something about money or facilities or enrollment). They went back to the proverbial driveway, and, as anything but luck would have it, beat UST 21-15 in 2018. Furthermore, despite the fact that the 2018 score indicated the game was close, I didn't get the impression at any point during that game that Bethel wasn't firmly in control.

I imagine UST will tweak what it can in hopes that it can improve on 8-2 and make the playoffs, and Bethel will do what it can to sustain 2018's success into 2019. I also imagine GAC and Concordia will make the requisite adjustments. As long as SJU has Erdmann I envision them as a MIAC frontrunner and strong Stagg Bowl candidate. Not every football program I just mentioned has the same level of coaching, facilities or administrative support, but they do have one thing in common, and that's a desire to compete with one another, and have all demonstrated an ability to do so.

Macalester left the MIAC before UST evolved into what it is today, and this seems like a rather hamfisted way of booting the easiest target in hopes of opening the door to let Mac (the original loser) return, so as to dilute the conference enough so that the Coalition of Losers each have one more opportunity to get a win. If this happens, I shall refer to the MIAC as the Safe Space Conference.

Say what you want about UST and its academic prowess, but for every Kofi Annan Macalester produces, they produce 5 smug baristas.

Also: What in the hell is the point of letting your endowment grow to a billion dollars? What are you hording the money for? Give kids scholarships, grow your departments, compete in athletics, improve your facilities, reach out to your alumni.

[GoldandBlueBU]

Say what you want about UST and its academic prowess, but for every Kofi Annan Macalester produces, they produce 5 smug baristas.

Also: What in the hell is the point of letting your endowment grow to a billion dollars? What are you hording the money for? Give kids scholarships, grow your departments, compete in athletics, improve your facilities, reach out to your alumni.

That Mac comment is HILARIOUS.  I have a Mac co-worker, and she's certainly capable, but has more than enough smug to go around.  Also, she references her education /  time at Macalester in giving examples probably more than I've heard from any other co-worker reference their alma in my time working here.

Re: endowment - I'm not positive on this at all, but I'm sure D3-StatsandInfo - AKA - AO can correct if needed.  Isn't the endowment "untouchable" to some extent in terms of the principle balance?  I know that schools can use the interest / earnings, but I thought that they couldn't touch the principle, which can grow due to donations flowing directly into it, which while Mac can certainly solicit donations to it, can't stop someone from choosing to direct dollars to that fund, so to some extent, the growth might be out of their hands.

[johnnie_esq]

I think it's money related and has little, if anything, to do with parenting philosophy.  The liberal arts education is under severe pressure with the combined trends of unsustainable student debt behaviours ($1.56 trillion in student loan debt, 50% more than credit card debt in the US.  Almost 1 in 8 people are now in default on their student loans and the ROI, if you even finish school, is really unattractive).  Additionally, STEM degrees are growing (over 1 in 5 degrees is now STEM) while liberal arts degrees are barely hanging on (less than 1 in 6 and declining).  And if it isn't STEM then it is business and other professional degrees or online courses.  The traditional liberal arts degree is under pressure from two angels: affordability and mass relevance.

I think schools are fighting over identity much more than the success of any football program.  They are fighting over relevance is a rapidly changing education landscape.  Football is just the immediate issue that can relieve some pressure, but it's not a cure.

Bingo.  While Hazzben's post refers to a larger shift in society, the issue here is really premised in perceived identity, and the MIAC is seeking to establish a brand as to its own identity.  It's also seeking to clarify within the schools why they offer athletics: is it to draw students and for the enjoyment or convenience of students, or is it to win and be successful? 

Note that having nice facilities can be necessary for both priorities.

[AO]

Say what you want about UST and its academic prowess, but for every Kofi Annan Macalester produces, they produce 5 smug baristas.

Also: What in the hell is the point of letting your endowment grow to a billion dollars? What are you hording the money for? Give kids scholarships, grow your departments, compete in athletics, improve your facilities, reach out to your alumni.

That Mac comment is HILARIOUS.  I have a Mac co-worker, and she's certainly capable, but has more than enough smug to go around.  Also, she references her education /  time at Macalester in giving examples probably more than I've heard from any other co-worker reference their alma in my time working here.

Re: endowment - I'm not positive on this at all, but I'm sure D3-StatsandInfo - AKA - AO can correct if needed.  Isn't the endowment "untouchable" to some extent in terms of the principle balance?  I know that schools can use the interest / earnings, but I thought that they couldn't touch the principle, which can grow due to donations flowing directly into it, which while Mac can certainly solicit donations to it, can't stop someone from choosing to direct dollars to that fund, so to some extent, the growth might be out of their hands.

Nothing is untouchable, each college creates their own guidelines about how to spend the endowment but you're right that most only spend about 5% of the endowment every year.  For places like Macalester and Harvard that's enough money to pay for about a third of all operating expenses they have in a year.  The principal is there for a rainy day but there haven't been many rainy days lately.

[OzJohnnie]

The MIAC's admins' problem?  They don't share beer.

https://www.upi.com/Science_News/2019/04/19/Ancent-Peruvian-microbrewery-sour-ale-helps-explain-longevity-of-the-Wari-empire/5291555690303/

[MUC57]

The MIAC's admins' problem?  They don't share beer.

https://www.upi.com/Science_News/2019/04/19/Ancent-Peruvian-microbrewery-sour-ale-helps-explain-longevity-of-the-Wari-empire/5291555690303/

OzJohnnie

I just don't know how you do it. After weeks of discussion, you've discovered the reason for the problem. I rate your observation right up there with "E = mc2". Excuse me while I go pour a cold one.
Go Oz!  🍺

[Mr. Ypsi]

The MIAC's admins' problem?  They don't share beer.

https://www.upi.com/Science_News/2019/04/19/Ancent-Peruvian-microbrewery-sour-ale-helps-explain-longevity-of-the-Wari-empire/5291555690303/

They sorta do, but it is sour grapes rather than sour ale.

[hazzben]

I think it's money related and has little, if anything, to do with parenting philosophy.  The liberal arts education is under severe pressure with the combined trends of unsustainable student debt behaviours ($1.56 trillion in student loan debt, 50% more than credit card debt in the US.  Almost 1 in 8 people are now in default on their student loans and the ROI, if you even finish school, is really unattractive).  Additionally, STEM degrees are growing (over 1 in 5 degrees is now STEM) while liberal arts degrees are barely hanging on (less than 1 in 6 and declining).  And if it isn't STEM then it is business and other professional degrees or online courses.  The traditional liberal arts degree is under pressure from two angels: affordability and mass relevance.

I think schools are fighting over identity much more than the success of any football program.  They are fighting over relevance is a rapidly changing education landscape.  Football is just the immediate issue that can relieve some pressure, but it's not a cure.

I don't think they're mutually exclusive Oz. No doubt for some schools money & enrollment is a huge part of this. But that doesn't jive for Olaf, Mac, Carleton, and even GAC.

[OzJohnnie]

Of course, you're right hazzben.  But even with a huge endowment a school has to grow and drive enrolment. The endowment isn't a personal retirement fund for the administrators; they've got to achieve some sort of institutional advancement and that requires development of the program.

[Gregory Sager]

The point was made a few days ago about the different categories that lead to advantages in athletics. Without looking, prestige, funding, financial aid, facilities, culture, etc. What's ignored is that Bethel blows up this argument. One of the smallest endowments in the MIAC. Comparatively some of the least inspiring facilities (cue people complaining about the grass field). Limited financial aid packages, against her peers. An athletic budget $1.5 million less than Augsburg! Coach J is the X-factor. Except that they've now found a similar X-Factor for baseball, basketball, track, etc. Hat's off to Bethel's coaching staffs, who've found a way to win in spite of significant "disadvantages" and less institutional/budgetary support. The difference is the Athletic Department got creative about its value prop to prospective student athletes. If Bethel has found a way to thrive in the MIAC, there's no school in the league that can't do likewise. But first you've got to actually value competition and be motivated to shoot some hoops in the driveway before you return to the playground.

Bethel doesn't "blow up the argument". Bethel is the exception that proves the rule. Yes, college sports are to some degree a meritocracy of athletic performance, but anybody who asserts that that's exclusively what they are, or perhaps even primarily what they are, is either naive as to what goes into putting a team on the field or the court or is blinded by their own biases. D3 conferences don't even offer a level playing field within themselves, let alone does D3 as a whole.

The ability and the will to direct sufficient resources towards an athletic program or programs -- be it facilities, coaching salaries, recruiting budget, what have you -- are going to have a major effect upon the outcome on the scoreboard. They're not always determinative, of course; it's still possible in D3 to play the role of the 2015 Kansas City Royals, the quintessential small-market baseball team that won the World Series. What's more, it's possible for a D3 program to remain nationally prominent over a stretch of multiple seasons despite having limited resources; great current examples of the moment include Concordia (IL) in baseball and St. Joseph's (ME) in men's soccer. But college sports is in large part -- and we could debate just how large a part it is -- a matter of resource availability and allocation, and that includes the D3 level.

Of course, you're right hazzben.  But even with a huge endowment a school has to grow and drive enrolment. The endowment isn't a personal retirement fund for the administrators; they've got to achieve some sort of institutional advancement and that requires development of the program.

In institutional terms, re: football (or any other sport), "development of the program" means successfully recruiting and retaining student-athletes. It doesn't mean winning, although winning obviously helps with both recruiting and retention. Wins and losses don't appear on the school's accounting ledger or as line items in the annual budget. The bottom line, in other words, is enrollment, not success on the field or court.

Also, a few of you are bandying about endowment size as some sort of justification for the thesis that the richer schools in the MIAC ought to be investing in football resources. I'm not sure that everybody who is talking about endowments understands how they work. A very large percentage of donations to college and university endowments is in the form of restricted gifts; that is to say, these donations are given to a school for specifically directed purposes, such as to fund a scholarship to students from a Lutheran background, or to aid in the building of a new science center, or to endow a faculty chair in the political science department. That money can't simply be shunted willy-nilly over to the athletic department, much less to the football program in particular.

From what I've read and been told, there are two exceptions to this. One is if the school has a variance power clause over that specific gift (which is rare, because variance power is a relatively new development in higher-education charitable giving, and because I would imagine that a lot of donors would balk at making a gift to a school if the donor was aware that a variance power clause might be used on that gift). The other exception, in most states, is for the institution to approach the state's attorney general and petition for a hearing before a judge to obtain approval of the redirection of the gift. This is not a path that inevitably leads to the school's desired outcome, either. Here's an example from Inside Philanthropy of when it backfired on Yale:

In most states, the language of the statute regarding the release of donor restrictions addresses restrictions that have become "obsolete," "inappropriate," "impracticable," or "impossible."  Determining this is not as easy as one might think.

There was once a famous Ivy League university which held a nearly 200-year-old endowment, the income from which was to be used for scholarships for Baptist students. In the 1960s, when the university stopped asking a student's religion on its application form, complying with this endowment's scholarship restriction became "impossible." The university approached the state attorney general, who agreed that a change was likely appropriate and a date was set to appear before a Judge.

The university argued that it could no longer comply with the terms of the endowment and that it wanted to spend the endowment's annual income within the regular scholarship program. The judge, however, questioned how the university could be so sure that the donor from two centuries ago was primarily interested in subsidizing the education of students to that university vs. subsidizing the education of Baptist students at any university. If the donor was, in fact, most interested in the education of Baptists, then releasing the religious restriction on this scholarship money appeared inappropriate to the judge. The university countered that it was inappropriate to ask the religious preferences of its applicants and students in this day and age.

The judge asked the attorney general to poll other institutions of higher education in the area and ask if any of them could and would administer a scholarship program directed toward Baptist students as beneficiaries. When the attorney general came back to the court with the news that there was, indeed, another higher education institution willing to provide specific scholarship funds to Baptist students, the judge ordered the $30 million endowment transferred to the other institution. Needless to say, this was not the ruling that the Ivy League university anticipated.

[gbpuckfan]

Not entirely related but interesting in this context:

EAU CLAIRE, Wis. (Blugolds.com) – The New Jersey Athletic Conference (NJAC) announced on today that the State University of New York at Oneonta, the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, UW-La Crosse and UW-Whitewater will join the conference as affiliate members in the sport of men's tennis beginning in the 2019-20 academic year. With the additions, the NJAC will feature eight men's tennis sponsoring institutions in 2019-20, including four full-member programs in Ramapo College, Rutgers University-Camden, Rutgers University-Newark, and The College of New Jersey in addition to the four new affiliate member programs.