FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[sjusection105]

I think that's definitely the case.  Mac might've improved further...maybe not?  GC plus UST's "built in" advantages were the formula.  I actually think it's pretty cool that he's stuck around.  Hard to believe that he hasn't had the chance (likely chances) to move on to something bigger.  It doesn't seem to be a super common trait for the competitive coach type to forego career advancement in favor of providing a stable platform for the family.

Family conditions are the reasons. Wife's health issues & a young family, in my opinion, are the factors in staying at UST.

[miac952]

... I think this all basically comes down to Coach C. Plain and Simple.

What if --- Caruso had stayed at MAC? Would MAC now be getting the boot instead of St. Thomas? Why, or why not?

Blame it on Mac. The ruin everything. First they bail on the conference for football, then they follow that by hiring and bringing Darth Vader to the area. 

[jknezek]

Promotion and Relegation is nice in theory, when it's actually a part of the system. But that's not how things work in collegiate athletics. We can argue the merits of it all we want, but to just pick and choose where you're going to apply that isn't fair to UST. As has been noted, this is nearly unprecedented (Wheaton basketball 50 years ago being the only analogous situation.) UST wasn't promoted to another league. They were involuntarily removed, and have been forced to scramble for a new conference and possibly division. It's one thing if every team understands that if you're good, you'll get moved up. It's also the goal to get moved up. For better or worse, that's not how the system works in US sports. And it's also not at all what the Presidents were trying to accomplish. They weren't doing UST a solid by "promoting them," they were kicking them to the curb.

And it's not fair to the other schools who want to pursue excellence. Someone stated that obviously the presidents have had discussions with SJU so that they know what's in and out of bounds. How on earth would we know that? I don't have any confidence at all that's been clearly communicated. It's a huge assumption. And to make the Supreme Court Pornography analogy, that's literally as subjective as it gets. It's not just that the Presidents didn't do themselves or the league any favors by how they've handled this. They've also done nothing to assure people that they won't do it again, in similarly ham fisted fashion.

So what do you suggest the MIAC presidents should have done if they didn't want to play with UST anymore? That is the bottom line. Not "suck it up and do it." That's not what presidents do. They make decisions and take actions that they think are best for their school. This was not some spur of the moment decision either. This was a long time coming. You think this wasn't discussed over the years? You think UST was blindsided by this? Neither the other Presidents nor UST have claimed that or given any indication that this was a sudden shock. And given the pretty well known grumblings, do we think UST's administration was being willfully ignorant that their peers were increasingly unhappy?

I used Pro/Rel not as an example of what should have happened, we are much too involved in the mighty dollar in our sports to start that system now, but as a demonstration that most of the world doesn't deal with these scenarios. They have better ideas to prevent it from happening. We don't. Like it or not, DIII is the current lowest rung of the NCAA ladder. There is no option other than moving conferences, which brings up the next point.

The alternatives here were to force the MIAC teams that did not want to associate with UST to associate with them, which is naive, or to have UST leave or the others leave. Other than the unrealistic but prevalent opinion on this board that the majority should have just shut up and taken their beatings in a way they don't feel is beneficial, they did provide the "fence sitters" an option. You remain, we'll leave. The fence sitters got off the fence and decided that wasn't a good idea, so for the good of the many, the one was eliminated. And it wasn't really all that close, was it? UST needed 5 schools to stand up for them. Not a majority, just a significant minority. And they couldn't even do that.

Is UST in a scramble? Somewhat they are, though they have been given 2 years to make it less a scramble and more of a transition. It's not like they were booted on short notice. I think that is pretty fair, actually. The other Presidents must know that they have consigned their teams to some serious beatings over the next 2 years. I love people that say Caruso should be taking this out on the other schools' student athletes by running up the score. Why? What did those athletes have to do with this? Nothing.

As for those who want to pursue excellence, of course they can. Just don't expect your peers to be thrilled if your excellence comes at their expense. You may need to find a different home for your excellence, though I do think that is extremely unlikely. This is the culmination of 30 years of dominance and change. If SJU dominates for the next 30 years and wins 60%+ of all conference championships over the next decade or two, maybe they do need to be cognizant of unhappiness among their peers. Maybe by then the presidents will turn over and it won't matter. Maybe half the schools in the MIAC will have closed or given up athletics or become online only institutions. 

Regardless these presidents don't need to do anything to assure you of anything. They are private institutions. They know what has happened and they have talked among themselves. If SJU's president wasn't smart enough to bring up the same concerns that us knuckledraggers have come up with on this board, then the school kind of gets what it deserves for having an idiot as president. Since I don't believe Dr. Hemesath is an idiot, I'm not real concerned that the question wasn't asked. It just wasn't answered for you.

I see very little ham fisted about this. The motion was put forward, put on a schedule, discussed, a compromise was reached before a vote was even taken. A statement was made. You may not like the result or the statement, but it wasn't ham fisted. The publicity storm has basically passed, though a few 100-00 beatings in college football may get some more snickers out of the pundits this fall at times. But UST got something out of it as a going away present and the majority got the solution they thought best. That seems like a pretty sophisticated and relatively amicable resolution of a contentious issue. I wish more of this country's contentious issues could be resolved with both sides getting something and a lack of acrimonious finger pointing by the people in charge.

Finally, of course the Supreme Court analogy is as subjective as it comes. That was the whole point! If one of our greatest adjudicating public bodies could get stuck on that opinion, it's a valid opinion to have at times. Not everything can be reduced to black and white nor should be.

[hazzben]

You make a false dichotomy. As if the only option was to boot UST or dissolve the league. I'm not going to go look it up. But the question was asked, is UST's all sports dominance unusual. There were something like a half dozen examples given out of other D3 schools having this kind of stranglehold on the competition. None have been forced out of their conference. And it was done in an underhanded way. I've heard that from multiple (not one or two or three) people involved at various institutions. Just because the rumblings were going on for a few years and UST wasn't blindsided doesn't mean it still doesn't stink.

And yeah, UST couldn't muster the support. In no small part because schools like SJU, Bethel, GAC, and Concordia were straight up threatened with an ultimatum. Concordia's president may have written a nice note, but it doesn't reflect the feelings of his football coach and athletic department.

Finally, this is all an academic exercise for you. You're more than welcome to our board to weigh in. But for us, this is our conference, and our Alma Maters that have stakes in this. So yeah, the MIAC can make decisions and remain more or less silent. But for teams that have wanted to pursue excellence, it matters a whole lot. A former Cobber AD and SJU alum has straight up said 'don't think SJU isn't in peril down the road.' Sure, as private institutions, they don't have to say a thing. But as a stakeholder in one of those private institutions, you better believe I care and I want more clarity. And there are plenty of media members and stakeholders who agree.

Bottom line, the MIAC moved the goal posts on UST. And they can offer all the assurances in the world to SJU, Bethel, Concordia, et. al. but there is nothing stopping them from moving the goal posts again. So yeah, maybe SJU's Prez got some reassurances. That and $5 at starbucks can get him a latte.

And no, subjective just doesn't cut it. I played in a 76-2ish game against Carleton. We had 5th and 6th string freshman running backs scoring 40+ yard touchdowns. And as Coach J was on the sidelines telling the RB's to fall down if they broke into the open field again, a frosh DB took an INT back 96 yds for the final score. I had an acquaintance playing for Carleton who let it be known they were pissed and felt it was unsporting. What they didn't realize is we were doing all we could not to make it ugly.  But yeah, you're right, we should be ok with subjective measures of what is unsportsmanlike, or too good, or too much risk of injury.

I don't disagree UST got some good PR. But for anyone who cares about competing and excellence, this stinks. I'm the last person to root for UST and they don't need me to come to their aid. My beef going forward is the MIAC is weaker than it was. And teams that want to be great appear to do so at their own peril. At least, they better not be great for long time or in too many sports.

[PurpleReign]

Perhaps this was already discussed, but does the MIAC go forward with a shorter football schedule, or do they need to schedule three nonconference games?

[jknezek]

You make a false dichotomy. As if the only option was to boot UST or dissolve the league. I'm not going to go look it up. But the question was asked, is UST's all sports dominance unusual. There were something like a half dozen examples given out of other D3 schools having this kind of stranglehold on the competition. None have been forced out of their conference. And it was done in an underhanded way. I've heard that from multiple (not one or two or three) people involved at various institutions. Just because the rumblings were going on for a few years and UST wasn't blindsided doesn't mean it still doesn't stink.

It's not a false dichotomy. Those were the options presented. Remove UST or lose enough schools that the conference was in trouble. And I never said it doesn't stink. I'm not really a fan myself of what happened, but I can see both sides. I'm not responding to whether UST's sports dominance is unusual. That wasn't my original response and none of my response since have gone that route. I'm simply looking at what happened. As for underhanded, I have no info on that either way. However, announced in a meeting, discussed, decision made before being voted on is not an underhanded procedure. I could see the block coming in presenting a fait acompli, as in vote out UST or we are gone, being considered underhanded. Or it could just be a wise tactic. That's a matter of opinion.

And yeah, UST couldn't muster the support. In no small part because schools like SJU, Bethel, GAC, and Concordia were straight up threatened with an ultimatum. Concordia's president may have written a nice note, but it doesn't reflect the feelings of his football coach and athletic department.

Well... yes. That was the option presented. It's funny how you say it wasn't a binary choice above, but then complain that it was a binary choice here. A group of schools didn't want to play UST. That group was big enough to present an option you see as an ultimatum. I see it as simply a choice between two bad options. There is nothing wrong with that.

Finally, this is all an academic exercise for you. You're more than welcome to our board to weigh in. But for us, this is our conference, and our Alma Maters that have stakes in this. So yeah, the MIAC can make decisions and remain more or less silent. But for teams that have wanted to pursue excellence, it matters a whole lot. A former Cobber AD and SJU alum has straight up said 'don't think SJU isn't in peril down the road.' Sure, as private institutions, they don't have to say a thing. But as a stakeholder in one of those private institutions, you better believe I care and I want more clarity. And there are plenty of media members and stakeholders who agree.

You can want it. I don't blame you. I just think the Presidents aren't obligated to give it you. They made a public statement with their reasons. You choosing not to accept them, or thinking it isn't fleshed out enough, is different then "hamfisted", "cowardly", "incompetent" and other adjectives I've seen thrown around.

Bottom line, the MIAC moved the goal posts on UST. And they can offer all the assurances in the world to SJU, Bethel, Concordia, et. al. but there is nothing stopping them from moving the goal posts again. So yeah, maybe SJU's Prez got some reassurances. That and $5 at starbucks can get him a latte.

Yes. They did move the goal posts. I'm not saying it's a good thing. I never said SJU's Pres got answers, I just said I'm sure he asked the questions. Considering I doubt he was ever in favor of this decision, it probably didn't matter. But I'm sure he asked because any smart man would.

And no, subjective just doesn't cut it. I played in a 76-2ish game against Carleton. We had 5th and 6th string freshman running backs scoring 40+ yard touchdowns. And as Coach J was on the sidelines telling the RB's to fall down if they broke into the open field again, a frosh DB took an INT back 96 yds for the final score. I had an acquaintance playing for Carleton who let it be known they were pissed and felt it was unsporting. What they didn't realize is we were doing all we could not to make it ugly.  But yeah, you're right, we should be ok with subjective measures of what is unsportsmanlike, or too good, or too much risk of injury.

Who is talking about subjective sportsmanship? I'm not touching sportsmanship. We were talking about dominance. And what does dominance entail. Recognizing long term dominance is where I put the Supreme Court quote, not short term sportsmanship.

I don't disagree UST got some good PR. But for anyone who cares about competing and excellence, this stinks. I'm the last person to root for UST and they don't need me to come to their aid. My beef going forward is the MIAC is weaker than it was. And teams that want to be great appear to do so at their own peril. At least, they better not be great for long time or in too many sports.

I agree with all of this. But none of it changes the reasons the Presidents made the decision they made. Again, I'm not supporting their decision. I never have. I can see both sides though.

[jamtod]

Some have assumed that MAC would come back to the MIAC in 2 years for football, but I don't think that's a foregone conclusion, considering they left when UST was still pretty mediocre.

[TheChucker]

Some have assumed that MAC would come back to the MIAC in 2 years for football, but I don't think that's a foregone conclusion, considering they left when UST was still pretty mediocre.

I can't speak from a Mac perspective, but their current football schedule seems pretty competitive and interesting. I'll bet Mac isn't interested in coming back.

[TheChucker]

I ran across this very good old NY Times article from 2007 which was written about the (then) impending split in D3.

Interesting quote from the article summing it up: "The status quo in Division III is not a workable option," said John Fry, the chairman of the Division III President's Council and the president of Franklin and Marshall College in Pennsylvania. "We must have fundamental change in the structure of the division. The tent has been stretched far enough."

After reading about the D3 climate a dozen years ago, I'm surprised that more issues like the MIAC's haven't already occurred several times over since then.

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/13/sports/othersports/13ncaa.html

[Gregory Sager]

Promotion and Relegation is nice in theory, when it's actually a part of the system. But that's not how things work in collegiate athletics. We can argue the merits of it all we want, but to just pick and choose where you're going to apply that isn't fair to UST. As has been noted, this is nearly unprecedented (Wheaton basketball 50 years ago being the only analogous situation.)

Not entirely true. It was Wheaton's total dominance in basketball and football that precipitated that school's removal from the league. Those were the two sports that mattered back then.

[USTBench]

Jknezek suggests the inside baseball on this fiasco was UST saw this coming for a long time and this was mutually beneficial way for UST to win the PR battle, while a majority of the MIAC got what they wanted, a conference without UST.

This could very well be true in part, but my mole inside (a different MIAC institution) suggests UST leaked this story to Reusse in order to control the narrative, which is a pretty savvy move. There is no way the COL thought this would become a national story, the best reaction may well have been the bunker mentality and wait for this thing to blow over, but they were caught with their pants around their ankles when Reusse started going off.

UST has studied a move up numerous times, sure, but nobody believes Division II is their aspiration and there is no way to move to where they truly want to be (Division 1) without a 7 year pit stop in the abandoned tire plant that is the NSIC. Additionally, the NSIC isn't going to extend an invitation to UST if they know UST's ambition is to fly out the door in 2028. Also, alums aren't going to fly in from all over the country to watch UST play MSU-Mankato, or bother leaving Tiffany's on homecoming for a game against UM-Crookston or Minot State. The best thing for UST is if they could somehow utilize this ouster to parlay a petition to the NCAA to jump to Division 1, but that would require the NCAA to use common sense, which is not something they're known for. These hurdles are the reason UST never left the MIAC in the first place. UST was successful, had a marquee match-up to look forward to every year, in addition to homecoming.

Living in the I-29 corridor I've seen how the transitions have affected 4 different institutions over the last 15 years, but they were all large state-run flagship universities or land grant schools with similar enrollments. I am truly fascinated to see how Augustana negotiates their transition to Division 1 because they are more aligned with UST than NDSU, UND, USD and SDSU. 

UST is in a really tough spot. If by some miracle the NCAA grants UST the ability to jump to Division 1 it will most likely come with serious conditions. I can't see how UST could possibly flagship a sport like football for Division 1 without cutting at least 2 men's sports to be Title IX compliant. However, if UST was to do that, the most natural geographic fit (the Summit League) for sports other than football, might not be so inclined to extend an invitation, as they are desperate for men's teams in 4 sports: baseball, track and field, swimming and diving and soccer, as they only boast 6 men's teams in each of those sports.

Then there's the issue if UST would even be able to handle such a transition with scholarship football without having to resort to a makeshift "conference-of-convenience" like UND and USD played in with the Great West. That would mean aligning with Augustana, North Alabama and a few other D2 teams that have moved up.

The easiest solution would be to see if the Pioneer League would extend an invitation for football, but I don't think non-scholarship football is UST's ambition, either. That would most likely solve some Title IX issues, but then you're left with the question of what to flagship: hockey or basketball? I am not sure what Esten's involvement in bringing hockey to Penn State was, but he was probably somewhat involved. That was an $80 million fundraising drive, but Penn State is backed with hundreds of thousands more donors than UST and Penn State is part of the Big 10, which has a significant amount of television money. I just don't know how enthusiastic the UST alumni base is going to be about raising money to build an arena so they can play Michigan Tech.

So, hypothetical of hypotheticals, if UST by some miracle gets the nod to go to Division 1, what makes the most sense is cutting men's hockey and baseball, but hockey is probably their greatest leverage outside of the conference ouster for a petition to transition to Division 1, as Division 1 hockey could sure use more teams and the NCAA, at least on their website, doesn't even acknowledge Division 2 hockey.

UST is going to have to cut sports, build facilities with lukewarm alumni support, spend tens of millions and be on some sort of probation either for 5, 7 or possibly even 12 years depending on what the NCAA allows. It's going to be awful, and every familiar foe and rival will be replaced by some shoulder shrug school from a prairie town most UST alums have never heard of or would dare visit until UST reaches the pinnacle of their ambition.

This decision has essentially doomed UST to a decade plus long purgatory that SJU will soon be cast into. Adversity can make strange bedfellows, but I think if SJU/CSB was smart, they'd start talking about making a transition with UST, so at least both (all) schools have something to look forward to for the next decade and change.

[art76]

This decision has essentially doomed UST to a decade plus long purgatory that SJU will soon be cast into. Adversity can make strange bedfellows, but I think if SJU/CSB was smart, they'd start talking about making a transition with UST, so at least both (all) schools have something to look forward to for the next decade and change.

Bench, you seem to be pretty savvy concerning the different conferences in the area. I posited in an earlier post that perhaps the top 4 teams in the MIAC "simply" take their ball and form an entirely new Division 3 conference? From where you sit, is there any chance something like this could be done?

[Mr.MIAC]

The MIAC shouldn't be viewed as a monolith. If it were one, UST wouldn't have gotten the boot. The MIAC didn't have options; each member school had a different set of options, which were assessed in relation to unique circumstances and interests. Let's take a school like St. Olaf--you know, the one who started this whole thing after losing 97-0 to UST in football a few years back. If St. Olaf felt it couldn't keep up with UST, it could have: 1) made a real attempt to improve; 2) dissolved its NCAA athletic programs in favor of club sports; 3) kept its more competitive NCAA athletic programs and made the rest club sports; 4) kept all of its NCAA athletic programs and moved to a less competitive conference; 5) kept all of its NCAA athletic programs and become independent; or 6) conspired to in effect hold some MIAC schools hostage and force UST's ouster. Which of these options smacks of cowardice?

[Gregory Sager]

You make a false dichotomy. As if the only option was to boot UST or dissolve the league. I'm not going to go look it up. But the question was asked, is UST's all sports dominance unusual. There were something like a half dozen examples given out of other D3 schools having this kind of stranglehold on the competition.

That's not quite true, either. A number of examples have been cited of D3 schools that have dominated the all-sports results of their leagues for at least as long as UST has been dominating the MIAC's -- Washington & Lee in the ODAC, Johns Hopkins in the Centennial, MIT in the NEWMAC, Claremont-Mudd-Scripps in the SCIAC, and Wartburg in the ARC are the ones that have been cited. But it's important to note than in only one other case besides UST has the dominant school ruled the roost to the point where it was annually winning over half of the league's championships in a given school year, as UST has been doing, and that's Claremont-Mudd-Scripps in the SCIAC. And even that's not a good comparison for St. Thomas and the MIAC, because the SCIAC is fairly sui generis among D3 leagues for several reasons (total geographic isolation, two athletics departments within a single five-school consortium of affiliated and adjacent colleges, the Caltech anomaly, etc.). And even CMS's dominance of the SCIAC doesn't quite measure up to UST's in the MIAC on a sport-by-sport basis.

In other words, St. Thomas's all-sports dominance is unusual -- not because it's the only school in D3 that wins all-sports trophies (real or fictional) with monotonous regularity, but because it wins those trophies by such lopsided amounts through winning titles in most of the sports that its league sponsors.

[Texas Ole]

This decision has essentially doomed UST to a decade plus long purgatory that SJU will soon be cast into. Adversity can make strange bedfellows, but I think if SJU/CSB was smart, they'd start talking about making a transition with UST, so at least both (all) schools have something to look forward to for the next decade and change.

I am guessing SJU has at least begun discussions about this process particularly with UST.  I don't know if SJU will look to make the jump, but they have to be interested.  Adding two schools can be easier.