MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[formerd3db]

Big changes are afoot in our neighborhood NAIA conference. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in terms of local small-college recruiting.

It appears many of the local NAIA schools will be operating under NAIA Division II guidelines which limit scholarships to 6 rather than the 11 that Division I schools are allowed to offer. Call me crazy, but it seems the fewer scholarships area NAIA schools can offer, the better for local NCAA D3 member institutions. Over the years, I've seen several CCIW schools lose kids to NAIA schools who, through their permitted scholarships, can often offer significant cost savings to recruits. It would seem the less often this advantage can be extended, the better for non athletic scholarship offering NCAA D3 schools.   

Interesting discussion, you guys.  Many other of our colleagues have discussed this general topic several times on the other various boards.  I assume, then, that the NAIA II schools split those 6 scholarships to "1/2 scholarships" so that each member of the team (12 players) then have a half athletic scholarship similar to what the NCAA Div. II football schools do.  The latter schools, as you know, are now only permitted 36 full athletic scholarship grants, so most of them split those in half (with some portions even to 1/3) so that most everyone has a "1/2 ride", again with perhaps a few players having a 1/3 scholarship.

As we've also discussed at times - the NAIA and NCAA Div. II schools being in the same regions as many of the DIII schools has certainly had an effect on recruiting for the latter for the simple reason of the cost of a college education in this era.  Unless a family can afford a DIII school and/or the student-athlete is set on attending a particular school for a specific academic program and/or they get enough academic and/or community scholarships and/or financial need grants, then it is an easy decision in most situations for them i.e. their going to accept the athletic scholarship offer even if it is not a "full ride".  Of course, each person and their family has to make their decision on what is best for them and in considering all the options, advantages/disadvantages that are "in play".

[formerd3db]

Big changes are afoot in our neighborhood NAIA conference. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in terms of local small-college recruiting.

Gregory:

I didn't take the time to check on this, yet will ask you the question anyway, so please forgive me.  Anyway, do those Chicago area NAIA basketball schools play the NAIA schools here in Michigan that have athletic scholarships (such as Cornerstone, Concordia, Siena Heights, etc.,)?  Just curious.  I can't imagine they don't as the travel distance is certainly feasible for the non-conference portion of their schedules.

[Pat Coleman]

Schools can divvy up those six scholarships as they wish, I believe, so it's possible for a player to get a full scholarship and someone else 1/8th or less, or any combo in between.

[formerd3db]

Pat:

Thanks for the info.

Also, what is your opinion on this?  We all know the reason(s) for NCAA Div. I limitations on football scholarships to 85 with the 30 additional Preferred Walk-ons limit.  However, while it is understandable that the same reason(s) are intended to be applied to Div. II football programs, why do you think the NCAA made the limit much lower at 36 (remember, it used to be 42)?  That doesn't make sense to me because some of the tuition levels at the DII schools are essentially the same (or near so) of the DI schools.  Obviously, the DII schools have less potential for revenue funding of their programs as compared to the huge DI schools, yet at the same time, if those DII schools want to have the scholarship football programs and are willing to put out the $ for that (which I dare say most of them want to anyway and have the various means to do that - or they obviously wouldn't continue their programs), then what difference does it make if they wanted to offer the same i.e. 85 full rides like their DI counterparts? In reality, it doesn't nor shouldn't matter in that regard.  However, all that said, most likely I'm missing something here i.e. I missed the reasoning/rationale given by the NCAA 4-5 years ago or so when they made the decision to reduce the DII football scholarship limit.  I am curious as to your opinion, thoughts, reasoning on this - thanks.

[Pat Coleman]

Pat:

Thanks for the info.

Also, what is your opinion on this?  We all know the reason(s) for NCAA Div. I limitations on football scholarships to 85 with the 30 additional Preferred Walk-ons limit.  However, while it is understandable that the same reason(s) are intended to be applied to Div. II football programs, why do you think the NCAA made the limit much lower at 36 (remember, it used to be 42)?  That doesn't make sense to me because some of the tuition levels at the DII schools are essentially the same (or near so) of the DI schools.  Obviously, the DII schools have less potential for revenue funding of their programs as compared to the huge DI schools, yet at the same time, if those DII schools want to have the scholarship football programs and are willing to put out the $ for that (which I dare say most of them want to anyway and have the various means to do that - or they obviously wouldn't continue their programs), then what difference does it make if they wanted to offer the same i.e. 85 full rides like their DI counterparts? In reality, it doesn't nor shouldn't matter in that regard.  However, all that said, most likely I'm missing something here i.e. I missed the reasoning/rationale given by the NCAA 4-5 years ago or so when they made the decision to reduce the DII football scholarship limit.  I am curious as to your opinion, thoughts, reasoning on this - thanks.

It probably wouldn't surprise you to hear me say that I think too many football scholarships are given out in general. But there are obviously maximums in place for a good reason, and the thought of a D-II school hoarding players by giving out 85 full rides seems to negate the whole concept of divisions. Did I misread your post?

[ball]

Another season of CCIW basketball has come and gone, and another year has passed without a national championship for Carthage College...

While National Championships are fine recruiting tools, Carthage may have something more desirable in attracting quality Men's Basketball players--

http://www.carthage.edu/miss-america/

(unless, of course, a prospective student is between Carthage and Elmhurst...)

[formerd3db]

Pat:

Thanks for the info.

Also, what is your opinion on this?  We all know the reason(s) for NCAA Div. I limitations on football scholarships to 85 with the 30 additional Preferred Walk-ons limit.  However, while it is understandable that the same reason(s) are intended to be applied to Div. II football programs, why do you think the NCAA made the limit much lower at 36 (remember, it used to be 42)?  That doesn't make sense to me because some of the tuition levels at the DII schools are essentially the same (or near so) of the DI schools.  Obviously, the DII schools have less potential for revenue funding of their programs as compared to the huge DI schools, yet at the same time, if those DII schools want to have the scholarship football programs and are willing to put out the $ for that (which I dare say most of them want to anyway and have the various means to do that - or they obviously wouldn't continue their programs), then what difference does it make if they wanted to offer the same i.e. 85 full rides like their DI counterparts? In reality, it doesn't nor shouldn't matter in that regard.  However, all that said, most likely I'm missing something here i.e. I missed the reasoning/rationale given by the NCAA 4-5 years ago or so when they made the decision to reduce the DII football scholarship limit.  I am curious as to your opinion, thoughts, reasoning on this - thanks.

It probably wouldn't surprise you to hear me say that I think too many football scholarships are given out in general. But there are obviously maximums in place for a good reason, and the thought of a D-II school hoarding players by giving out 85 full rides seems to negate the whole concept of divisions. Did I misread your post?

No, not at all Pat; you did not mis-read my post.  I was just presenting some thoughts in general on the whole issue and, if fact, I agree with you.  As much as you and I (along with everyone else here of course) love college football, I am of that camp (albeit perhaps small) that would support the elimination of football (athletic) scholarships as almost occurred several years ago in the NCAA.  Of course, we'll hear the whining from some who will say that will prohibit and/or severely limit those kids from lower socioeconomic backgrounds from access to a college education (via means of sports), however, that is simply not true.  There are legit and feasible ways for them to obtain financial aid just like everyone else (non-athletes and, of course, particularly DIII) and certainly programs could be fashioned for that to make it possible for all by a variety of means.  That (elimination of scholarships) would certainly help reduce the costs of running the football programs tremendously.  Before anyone starts dissing me about that philospophy, I will just respectfully say that I disagree with them - there is, without question, a way to do it (it is being done via DIII and the Ivy League and other non-sccholarship FCS programs).  However, we all will agree, I'm sure, that it will never happen as those pundits who have control and the power to do so, don't have the courage to do so.  We know the reasons why as we've all discussed so I don't have to go into those here.  Suffice to say that I agree with your opinion on this as well.  Again, thanks for sharing that here.  Always (well, almost always,  - although it is for us "who get it" ) - a fun discussion on such topics. 

Best wishes to you and your family for a blessed and enjoyable Easter (and same to everyone else here).

[Gregory Sager]

Big changes are afoot in our neighborhood NAIA conference. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in terms of local small-college recruiting.

It appears many of the local NAIA schools will be operating under NAIA Division II guidelines which limit scholarships to 6 rather than the 11 that Division I schools are allowed to offer.

Not many of them, all of them. The entire CCAC will be NAIA-2 in men's and women's basketball. (The NAIA isn't divided into divisions in any other sport.) Even Robert Morris, which is a national power in NAIA-1, will be moving down to NAIA-2 after spending a final season in NAIA-1 as an independent before rejoining the CCAC in 2013-14. Starting in 2013-14, the nearest NAIA-1 school to CCIW country will be Culver-Stockton College in Canton, MO, near Quincy.

Call me crazy, but it seems the fewer scholarships area NAIA schools can offer, the better for local NCAA D3 member institutions. Over the years, I've seen several CCIW schools lose kids to NAIA schools who, through their permitted scholarships, can often offer significant cost savings to recruits. It would seem the less often this advantage can be extended, the better for non athletic scholarship offering NCAA D3 schools.

I agree. St. Xavier, in particular, is notorious for beating out CCIW programs for players on the recruiting trail. Traditional CCAC powers on the NAIA-1 level such as Robert Morris, SXU, and Olivet Nazarene might have a somewhat harder sell now than they're used to having.

Big changes are afoot in our neighborhood NAIA conference. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in terms of local small-college recruiting.

Gregory:

I didn't take the time to check on this, yet will ask you the question anyway, so please forgive me.  Anyway, do those Chicago area NAIA basketball schools play the NAIA schools here in Michigan that have athletic scholarships (such as Cornerstone, Concordia, Siena Heights, etc.,)?  Just curious.  I can't imagine they don't as the travel distance is certainly feasible for the non-conference portion of their schedules.

Yes, they do. The CCAC and the WHAC play a lot of non-conference games against each other. Since the NAIA allows a 32-game regular season, they have a lot of non-con slots to fill.

As we've also discussed at times - the NAIA and NCAA Div. II schools being in the same regions as many of the DIII schools has certainly had an effect on recruiting for the latter for the simple reason of the cost of a college education in this era.  Unless a family can afford a DIII school and/or the student-athlete is set on attending a particular school for a specific academic program and/or they get enough academic and/or community scholarships and/or financial need grants, then it is an easy decision in most situations for them i.e. their going to accept the athletic scholarship offer even if it is not a "full ride".  Of course, each person and their family has to make their decision on what is best for them and in considering all the options, advantages/disadvantages that are "in play".

As Pat hinted, the financial impact of receiving an NAIA athletic scholie can be a lot less than you think. Because coaches are allowed to subdivide the scholarships however they see fit, and because NAIA-2 only allows a maximum of six full scholarships for basketball -- and a lot of NAIA-2 programs have fewer than six, with some not even offering any at all -- after the pooled scholie money gets divvied up, the total per player is often very paltry. I've talked to NAIA-2 folks who've told me that the kids in this program or that program are getting less than a thousand dollars per year in basketball scholie money.

Of course, that's offset by the fact that NAIA schools are probably cheaper on average than D3 schools, plus players love the prestige of being able to tell people that they're going to school "on a basketball scholarship" -- even if said scholarship is a partial that adds up to only a fraction of the kid's tuition and room & board costs.

[formerd3db]

Excellent points, Gregory.  I agree with what you and Pat relate about NAIA basketball scholarships being a somewhat "non-factor" due to the paultry amount, although, I would also point out, that in reality, even a thousand dollars is really a lot of $ and better than nothing since every little bit does help (most - actually all - parents of college students in that situation would agree, I'm sure ).  I also agree with you that having the opportunity to truthfully say that they are "on an athletic scholarship" is important to many of those people - nothing wrong with that.  On the other hand, it is a little different in attempting to compare this situation with DII NCAA football programs because even a 1/2 scholarship can amount to upwards of $8,000 or even $9,000 and that, indeed, is a lot of $ and significant in regards to the overall costs of some of those schools, for example even in the GLIAC.   

[NCF]

My two cents, speaking from recent experiences. Almost all schools pool their scholarships. One coached offered him more to sign (track) before we even visited and said each year, depending on his performance, the amount could move up "X" number of $$. After we visited and found out the track and football coaches didn't like each other and he would have to choose one over the other, he said no. To take a scholarship, just to say you have one, IMHO can be a bad move. The player has to know a school is the right place fo him/her before the sign or make a commitment. And to address formerd3db on the issue of eliminating athletic scholarsips-I have to agree, at least for awhile, as there are too many non-students receiving athletic money, not graduating or even worse getting a degree in "(fill in the blank) studies" all in the name of the almighty $$$ that comes with a successful program.One very real problem I see right around the corner is the federal money programs drying up and becoming non-existent. Then you will see more students faced with taking out huge loans,that they will be saddled with for years. It is time for schools to stop looking the other way or lowering their standards for athletes. Time to get off the soapbox.

[TitansIWU]

Forgive my ignorance on this subject, but I am curious about it.

If a coach really wants a player to go to a CCIW school, can that athlete be given any preference in earning some sort of academic scholarship over a non athlete?

I am not sure if that happens or not... anyone know anything about it?

[NCF]

Forgive my ignorance on this subject, but I am curious about it.

If a coach really wants a player to go to a CCIW school, can that athlete be given any preference in earning some sort of academic scholarship over a non athlete?

I am not sure if that happens or not... anyone know anything about it?

In order to be awarded an academic scholarship at North Central, and there are three levels, you must have a certain GPA. The scholarships range from around 11,000 and 16,500 and are renewable for four years as long as you maintain a certain GPA. I don't think a coach can get an athlete one of those awards without tghe student having the grades. I would think many other D3's would operate in the same manner, but maybe someone from another school can explain their school's policy.

[sac]

Yes, they do. The CCAC and the WHAC play a lot of non-conference games against each other. Since the NAIA allows a 32-game regular season, they have a lot of non-con slots to fill.

I only counted about a dozen this past season which surprised me.  St. Francis accounted for about a half dozen of those games.  The NAIA-II regular season is 30 games, not 32.  For the WHAC that means finding 12 non-conference games which they fill mostly with MIAA's, a bunch of MCC's and a number of out of division schools from Michigan and Ohio.

Next year the WHAC goes to 12 teams with the addition of Lawrence Tech and Marygrove from the Detroit area which I presume means they'll have fewer non-con games.  I've also heard the WHAC isn't done expanding and it would seem a couple of these CCAC schools might be there for the taking.

Six out of 10 of the WHAC schools are located in the Eastern half of Michigan closer to Detroit or  in Ohio, so traveling over to Chicago is a pretty long haul.  Next year that number goes to 8.

[Just Bill]

Forgive my ignorance on this subject, but I am curious about it.

If a coach really wants a player to go to a CCIW school, can that athlete be given any preference in earning some sort of academic scholarship over a non athlete?

I am not sure if that happens or not... anyone know anything about it?

No. That right there is the backbone of D-III. Athletes are treated the same as non-athletes, as much as possible, and especially in the admissions/financial aid process.

Now has it happened in the past? Certainly. Many schools were known for having x number of exceptions which allowed someone who may not otherwise qualify get into school. Others had a reputation for getting athletes a high proportion of open-ended scholarships (like "leadership scholarships").

It probably still goes on to some extent, although, it's a lot harder to do now, since the NCAA mandated that schools open their admissions and financial aid books (in 2008, maybe?). Since that change some schools have been caught not sharing the scholarship money proportionally between athletes and non-athletes and have been sanctioned. Other schools have mysteriously seen their success across the board diminish as their previous practices disappeared under tighter NCAA scrutiny.

You can still slide one or two through, I'm sure. But if a school makes a regular practice of giving special treatment to athletes, they won't get away with it forever. Eventually they'll get caught.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Good description of the situation - +k.

My understanding is that the athlete and non-athlete financial aid cannot differ (on average) by more than +/- 4(?) per cent, or the school has a whole lot of 'splainin' to do.  (Note the '-' part - some d3 schools have gotten in trouble for 'screwing' athletes!)

Nonetheless, if a school really wants a 'stud' athlete, they could no doubt 'screw' other athletes to get him, or simply rely on his situation getting buried in the averages.  Alas, with humans, there is always a way to cheat successfully if one really wants to.  My gut hunch is that such shenanigans are rare and getting rarer, but that is just a gut hunch.