FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[Mr.MIAC]

I asked a few folks here in St Bart's if they'd heard of the MIAC. They had no clue what I was talking about. Whether UST stays or goes, there are bigger issues in life.

[OzJohnnie]

I asked a few folks here in St Bart's if they'd heard of the MIAC. They had no clue what I was talking about. Whether UST stays or goes, there are bigger issues in life.

What's St Bart's?

[Mr.MIAC]

I asked a few folks here in St Bart's if they'd heard of the MIAC. They had no clue what I was talking about. Whether UST stays or goes, there are bigger issues in life.

What's St Bart's?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Barthélemy

[MUC57]

I asked a few folks here in St Bart's if they'd heard of the MIAC. They had no clue what I was talking about. Whether UST stays or goes, there are bigger issues in life.

What's St Bart's?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Barthélemy

Oz

You ask some people the time of day and they tell you how to build a watch.

Rev

That certainly answers the question. 

[Mr.MIAC]

I asked a few folks here in St Bart's if they'd heard of the MIAC. They had no clue what I was talking about. Whether UST stays or goes, there are bigger issues in life.

What's St Bart's?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Barthélemy

Oz

You ask some people the time of day and they tell you how to build a watch.

Rev

That certainly answers the question. 

I got the point of his question. Just being helpful for those who might be unaware. People here find it interesting that we follow an athletic conference when there's so much going on in the world. I think that's a valid position.

[MUC57]

Rev

Just having fun with ya. That was very informative. I had never heard of the island before, but now I have. Thanks! Have an exotic island drink for me! Merci. 

[Caz Bombers]

Oz, interesting to get opposing opinions from rivals. Yours conflicts a bit from some that have strongly expressed dismay at from the SJU football alumni base today on Twitter. A few going as far to say SJU should threaten to walk with UST. Concordia alums have also been vocal critics as well of the this trajectory.

What I am curious of from SJU is what about the slippery slope? The team was steps way from beating MHB last year. Basketball, minus the NCAA tourney is strong too. Think of this season for hoops and football with UST in it. It would have been quite boring. The rivalries lost. That to me would be the biggest loss in all of this.

I'm a free thinker, man.

I've come to believe this is a question over the MIAC's purpose.  What may have started as a sporting affiliation has, due to the evolution in the college business model, become a threat to institutional survival if we're talking about enrolment poaching.

This conversation has reminded me of this scene from the movie Rush.  UST is Niki Lauda.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjyIrLKgbbA

I am reminded of this post because Niki Lauda passed away today at age 70.

[Miacman4040]

I get a kick out of the most recent Star Tribune article's comments section. Most commenters seem supportive of UST, but those who aren't tend to talk about enrollments and academic requirements. They say that UST is too large and doesn't focus on recruiting for academic excellence. UST supporters quickly counter by talking about how enrollment numbers don't matter at the college level because coaches aren't recruiting from the student body, and then cite all sorts of things meant to show UST's academic prowess, most notably employment rates and starting salaries after college.

Everyone seems to be missing the point. STO et al. don't have a problem with UST's enrollment just because it provides a larger pool of potential recruits.  They have a problem because the larger enrollment allows UST to match and/or supersede them athletically AND academically, which is its current trajectory.

Let's compare STO and UST. There's currently a two-point difference between the median ACTs at STO and UST. STO has roughly 3K undergraduates; 1.5K achieved a 29 or better on the ACT. UST has roughly 6K undergraduates; roughly 1.5K achieved a 29 or better on the ACT. In other words, these two schools have the same number of academically potent students on campus.

That being said, UST's larger enrollment affords it the opportunity to recruit students gifted in other ways (athletics) without greatly impacting its overall academic selectivity. STO's smaller enrollment offers far less leeway, and I don't see it being able and/or wanting to expand student numbers anytime soon. Places like STO with smaller enrollments can't accept many athletes with lower ACT scores without significantly diminishing their overall selectivity. Because of the larger enrollment, places like UST can recruit a sufficient number of less academically potent athletes and still remain highly selective.

There's nothing wrong with the way UST is positioned; nor is there a problem with it recruiting stellar athletes with less that optimal academic credentials. Doing so doesn't mean that it's less academic either. All the Ivy League schools do the same thing, as their athletes tend to have far lower academic qualifications than the other students on campus. STO et al. have a problem with UST because they don't have the same advantages.

Reworded - Because St Thomas is much bigger than other schools, it can recruit low-academic athletes that the rest of the MIAC can't because they can't get accepted into the rest of the MIAC schools. Most MIAC schools can't afford to expand, and those that can would destroy their small and selective approach that has become their (highly successful) calling card. The issue here isn't the rest of the MIAC failing to be as "great" of institutions as St Thomas, its that St Thomas has grown out of the league and is using this growth to beat the other schools into submission by eliminating the academic requirements most D3 private schools have.

Side note, spare me the sympathy for the death of the Tommie-Johnnie game, which only increases media coverage for the two schools and not the league as a whole, and is a major influx of cash that other D3 schools will never have. If you think it's fair that St Thomas and St Johns get to play annually at places like Target Field, and think that this isn't a ridiculously unfair recruiting advantage, than you probably went to either St Thomas or St Johns.

[jamtod]

I get a kick out of the most recent Star Tribune article's comments section. Most commenters seem supportive of UST, but those who aren't tend to talk about enrollments and academic requirements. They say that UST is too large and doesn't focus on recruiting for academic excellence. UST supporters quickly counter by talking about how enrollment numbers don't matter at the college level because coaches aren't recruiting from the student body, and then cite all sorts of things meant to show UST's academic prowess, most notably employment rates and starting salaries after college.

Everyone seems to be missing the point. STO et al. don't have a problem with UST's enrollment just because it provides a larger pool of potential recruits.  They have a problem because the larger enrollment allows UST to match and/or supersede them athletically AND academically, which is its current trajectory.

Let's compare STO and UST. There's currently a two-point difference between the median ACTs at STO and UST. STO has roughly 3K undergraduates; 1.5K achieved a 29 or better on the ACT. UST has roughly 6K undergraduates; roughly 1.5K achieved a 29 or better on the ACT. In other words, these two schools have the same number of academically potent students on campus.

That being said, UST's larger enrollment affords it the opportunity to recruit students gifted in other ways (athletics) without greatly impacting its overall academic selectivity. STO's smaller enrollment offers far less leeway, and I don't see it being able and/or wanting to expand student numbers anytime soon. Places like STO with smaller enrollments can't accept many athletes with lower ACT scores without significantly diminishing their overall selectivity. Because of the larger enrollment, places like UST can recruit a sufficient number of less academically potent athletes and still remain highly selective.

There's nothing wrong with the way UST is positioned; nor is there a problem with it recruiting stellar athletes with less that optimal academic credentials. Doing so doesn't mean that it's less academic either. All the Ivy League schools do the same thing, as their athletes tend to have far lower academic qualifications than the other students on campus. STO et al. have a problem with UST because they don't have the same advantages.

Reworded - Because St Thomas is much bigger than other schools, it can recruit low-academic athletes that the rest of the MIAC can't because they can't get accepted into the rest of the MIAC schools. Most MIAC schools can't afford to expand, and those that can would destroy their small and selective approach that has become their (highly successful) calling card. The issue here isn't the rest of the MIAC failing to be as "great" of institutions as St Thomas, its that St Thomas has grown out of the league and is using this growth to beat the other schools into submission by eliminating the academic requirements most D3 private schools have.

Side note, spare me the sympathy for the death of the Tommie-Johnnie game, which only increases media coverage for the two schools and not the league as a whole, and is a major influx of cash that other D3 schools will never have. If you think it's fair that St Thomas and St Johns get to play annually at places like Target Field, and think that this isn't a ridiculously unfair recruiting advantage, than you probably went to either St Thomas or St Johns.

If it's truly about enrollment, then why didn't this happen 20 years ago? UST undergrad enrollment has not changed significantly since then. Academic standards have actually improved in that time as well so it's not a matter of UST scraping the bottom of the barrel to get athletes.

And also, maybe Augsburg and Hamline should get the boot since they have lower academic standards.

[TheChucker]

I get a kick out of the most recent Star Tribune article's comments section. Most commenters seem supportive of UST, but those who aren't tend to talk about enrollments and academic requirements. They say that UST is too large and doesn't focus on recruiting for academic excellence. UST supporters quickly counter by talking about how enrollment numbers don't matter at the college level because coaches aren't recruiting from the student body, and then cite all sorts of things meant to show UST's academic prowess, most notably employment rates and starting salaries after college.

Everyone seems to be missing the point. STO et al. don't have a problem with UST's enrollment just because it provides a larger pool of potential recruits.  They have a problem because the larger enrollment allows UST to match and/or supersede them athletically AND academically, which is its current trajectory.

Let's compare STO and UST. There's currently a two-point difference between the median ACTs at STO and UST. STO has roughly 3K undergraduates; 1.5K achieved a 29 or better on the ACT. UST has roughly 6K undergraduates; roughly 1.5K achieved a 29 or better on the ACT. In other words, these two schools have the same number of academically potent students on campus.

That being said, UST's larger enrollment affords it the opportunity to recruit students gifted in other ways (athletics) without greatly impacting its overall academic selectivity. STO's smaller enrollment offers far less leeway, and I don't see it being able and/or wanting to expand student numbers anytime soon. Places like STO with smaller enrollments can't accept many athletes with lower ACT scores without significantly diminishing their overall selectivity. Because of the larger enrollment, places like UST can recruit a sufficient number of less academically potent athletes and still remain highly selective.

There's nothing wrong with the way UST is positioned; nor is there a problem with it recruiting stellar athletes with less that optimal academic credentials. Doing so doesn't mean that it's less academic either. All the Ivy League schools do the same thing, as their athletes tend to have far lower academic qualifications than the other students on campus. STO et al. have a problem with UST because they don't have the same advantages.

Reworded - Because St Thomas is much bigger than other schools, it can recruit low-academic athletes that the rest of the MIAC can't because they can't get accepted into the rest of the MIAC schools. Most MIAC schools can't afford to expand, and those that can would destroy their small and selective approach that has become their (highly successful) calling card. The issue here isn't the rest of the MIAC failing to be as "great" of institutions as St Thomas, its that St Thomas has grown out of the league and is using this growth to beat the other schools into submission by eliminating the academic requirements most D3 private schools have.

Side note, spare me the sympathy for the death of the Tommie-Johnnie game, which only increases media coverage for the two schools and not the league as a whole, and is a major influx of cash that other D3 schools will never have. If you think it's fair that St Thomas and St Johns get to play annually at places like Target Field, and think that this isn't a ridiculously unfair recruiting advantage, than you probably went to either St Thomas or St Johns.

If it's truly about enrollment, then why didn't this happen 20 years ago? UST undergrad enrollment has not changed significantly since then. Academic standards have actually improved in that time as well so it's not a matter of UST scraping the bottom of the barrel to get athletes.

And also, maybe Augsburg and Hamline should get the boot since they have lower academic standards.

I believe UST did a study in the early 2000s for potentially moving up and there's been rumblings and speculation ever since (example link below) so this whole issue has simmered for about 15+ years behind the scenes. I can only speculate that other schools expected UST to move on its own at some point but it never has...so now we have the current situation.

https://www.tommiemedia.com/opinions/st-thomas-athletics-should-compete-at-the-division-i-level/

[miac952]

I get a kick out of the most recent Star Tribune article's comments section. Most commenters seem supportive of UST, but those who aren't tend to talk about enrollments and academic requirements. They say that UST is too large and doesn't focus on recruiting for academic excellence. UST supporters quickly counter by talking about how enrollment numbers don't matter at the college level because coaches aren't recruiting from the student body, and then cite all sorts of things meant to show UST's academic prowess, most notably employment rates and starting salaries after college.

Everyone seems to be missing the point. STO et al. don't have a problem with UST's enrollment just because it provides a larger pool of potential recruits.  They have a problem because the larger enrollment allows UST to match and/or supersede them athletically AND academically, which is its current trajectory.

Let's compare STO and UST. There's currently a two-point difference between the median ACTs at STO and UST. STO has roughly 3K undergraduates; 1.5K achieved a 29 or better on the ACT. UST has roughly 6K undergraduates; roughly 1.5K achieved a 29 or better on the ACT. In other words, these two schools have the same number of academically potent students on campus.

That being said, UST's larger enrollment affords it the opportunity to recruit students gifted in other ways (athletics) without greatly impacting its overall academic selectivity. STO's smaller enrollment offers far less leeway, and I don't see it being able and/or wanting to expand student numbers anytime soon. Places like STO with smaller enrollments can't accept many athletes with lower ACT scores without significantly diminishing their overall selectivity. Because of the larger enrollment, places like UST can recruit a sufficient number of less academically potent athletes and still remain highly selective.

There's nothing wrong with the way UST is positioned; nor is there a problem with it recruiting stellar athletes with less that optimal academic credentials. Doing so doesn't mean that it's less academic either. All the Ivy League schools do the same thing, as their athletes tend to have far lower academic qualifications than the other students on campus. STO et al. have a problem with UST because they don't have the same advantages.

Reworded - Because St Thomas is much bigger than other schools, it can recruit low-academic athletes that the rest of the MIAC can't because they can't get accepted into the rest of the MIAC schools. Most MIAC schools can't afford to expand, and those that can would destroy their small and selective approach that has become their (highly successful) calling card. The issue here isn't the rest of the MIAC failing to be as "great" of institutions as St Thomas, its that St Thomas has grown out of the league and is using this growth to beat the other schools into submission by eliminating the academic requirements most D3 private schools have.

Side note, spare me the sympathy for the death of the Tommie-Johnnie game, which only increases media coverage for the two schools and not the league as a whole, and is a major influx of cash that other D3 schools will never have. If you think it's fair that St Thomas and St Johns get to play annually at places like Target Field, and think that this isn't a ridiculously unfair recruiting advantage, than you probably went to either St Thomas or St Johns.

Never mind the fact UST admission standards have climbed steadily over the last decade putting their ACT & class rank scores just behind the C.O.L ringleader in Northfield. Also never mind the fact that UST keeps admissions firewalled from athletics. Facts don't appear to be a strong suit of yours 4040. That doesn't bode well for the reputation of the "selective" school you attended. Maybe if Carleton took the $ they dedicate to Quidditch and Frolf and instead paid a reasonable amount for coaches and shoulder pads that don't need duct tape, they could have their own version of Tommie - Johnnie. The woe is me attitude from Northfield is tiresome.

[jamtod]

I get a kick out of the most recent Star Tribune article's comments section. Most commenters seem supportive of UST, but those who aren't tend to talk about enrollments and academic requirements. They say that UST is too large and doesn't focus on recruiting for academic excellence. UST supporters quickly counter by talking about how enrollment numbers don't matter at the college level because coaches aren't recruiting from the student body, and then cite all sorts of things meant to show UST's academic prowess, most notably employment rates and starting salaries after college.

Everyone seems to be missing the point. STO et al. don't have a problem with UST's enrollment just because it provides a larger pool of potential recruits.  They have a problem because the larger enrollment allows UST to match and/or supersede them athletically AND academically, which is its current trajectory.

Let's compare STO and UST. There's currently a two-point difference between the median ACTs at STO and UST. STO has roughly 3K undergraduates; 1.5K achieved a 29 or better on the ACT. UST has roughly 6K undergraduates; roughly 1.5K achieved a 29 or better on the ACT. In other words, these two schools have the same number of academically potent students on campus.

That being said, UST's larger enrollment affords it the opportunity to recruit students gifted in other ways (athletics) without greatly impacting its overall academic selectivity. STO's smaller enrollment offers far less leeway, and I don't see it being able and/or wanting to expand student numbers anytime soon. Places like STO with smaller enrollments can't accept many athletes with lower ACT scores without significantly diminishing their overall selectivity. Because of the larger enrollment, places like UST can recruit a sufficient number of less academically potent athletes and still remain highly selective.

There's nothing wrong with the way UST is positioned; nor is there a problem with it recruiting stellar athletes with less that optimal academic credentials. Doing so doesn't mean that it's less academic either. All the Ivy League schools do the same thing, as their athletes tend to have far lower academic qualifications than the other students on campus. STO et al. have a problem with UST because they don't have the same advantages.

Reworded - Because St Thomas is much bigger than other schools, it can recruit low-academic athletes that the rest of the MIAC can't because they can't get accepted into the rest of the MIAC schools. Most MIAC schools can't afford to expand, and those that can would destroy their small and selective approach that has become their (highly successful) calling card. The issue here isn't the rest of the MIAC failing to be as "great" of institutions as St Thomas, its that St Thomas has grown out of the league and is using this growth to beat the other schools into submission by eliminating the academic requirements most D3 private schools have.

Side note, spare me the sympathy for the death of the Tommie-Johnnie game, which only increases media coverage for the two schools and not the league as a whole, and is a major influx of cash that other D3 schools will never have. If you think it's fair that St Thomas and St Johns get to play annually at places like Target Field, and think that this isn't a ridiculously unfair recruiting advantage, than you probably went to either St Thomas or St Johns.

Never mind the fact UST admission standards have climbed steadily over the last decade putting their ACT & class rank scores just behind the C.O.L ringleader in Northfield. Also never mind the fact that UST keeps admissions firewalled from athletics. Facts don't appear to be a strong suit of yours 4040. That doesn't bode well for the reputation of the "selective" school you attended. Maybe if Carleton took the $ they dedicate to Quidditch and Frolf and instead paid a reasonable amount for coaches and shoulder pads that don't need duct tape, they could have their own version of Tommie - Johnnie. The woe is me attitude from Northfield is tiresome.

I'm sure 4040 is very smart and got an excellent education from Carleton.
However, I'm also certain that heavy consumption of the sour grapes in Northfield clouds a person's judgment.

[wm4]

Reworded - Because St Thomas is much bigger than other schools, it can recruit low-academic athletes that the rest of the MIAC can't because they can't get accepted into the rest of the MIAC schools. Most MIAC schools can't afford to expand, and those that can would destroy their small and selective approach that has become their (highly successful) calling card. The issue here isn't the rest of the MIAC failing to be as "great" of institutions as St Thomas, its that St Thomas has grown out of the league and is using this growth to beat the other schools into submission by eliminating the academic requirements most D3 private schools have.

Side note, spare me the sympathy for the death of the Tommie-Johnnie game, which only increases media coverage for the two schools and not the league as a whole, and is a major influx of cash that other D3 schools will never have. If you think it's fair that St Thomas and St Johns get to play annually at places like Target Field, and think that this isn't a ridiculously unfair recruiting advantage, than you probably went to either St Thomas or St Johns.

My man, welcome to the board, but you've gotta get your facts correct.  Nothing could be further from the truth. 

[jamtod]

Let's contemplate this schedule for a second:
UST in the WIAC with out of conference matchups against St John's AND Bethel. While the alums focus on Tommie-Johnnie, the football program for years has indicated that the true biggest rivalry on the schedule is Bethel.

I'm not sure that both St John's and Bethel could stay on the schedule if we moved conferences, but it's fun to think about. Those 2 plus Whitewater, Oshkosh, Platteville, an improving LaCrosse. UST could end up with 5 losses with that schedule.

[Capn34]

Seriously, someone argues that Johnnie-Tommie at Target Field is an unfair advantage.  Let Carleton and STO schedule their game their, they wouldn't get much more than they normally do.  SJU and UST should not have to apologize for passionate fan bases.  I would say that SJU fans traveling helps out the CoL teams get more money when they come to town.