Is it true, McMurry (Texas) going to DII???

[DIIILuver]

Is it true, McMurry (Texas), going to DII???

[Pat Coleman]

Ralph's silence on the subject spoke volumes, in the grand scheme.

http://www.d3sports.com/notables/2010/12/mcmurry-to-move-to-d2

[Ralph Turner]

The Spring edition of McMurry's Alumni Magazine, the Chieftain, has an article to explain the decision to move to D-II to the McMurry community.

Chieftain 

Please see page 10 for the D-II article.

[scottiedoug]

Couldn't an institution deal with retention and graduation rates in other ways than moving from DIII to DII?  McMurray could currently require academic performance for playing time from its student-athletes. 

This official explanation does not acknowledge that many fans of Big Time Sports just cannot get comfortable with the DIII model and think that the teams and athletes will be "better."  Maybe so, but maybe not, too.

[Ron Boerger]

Thanks for the link, Ralph.  I know this is a challenging situation for everyone.  At the same time,  the article contradicts itself.  For example, there's a sidebar that says "[t]he primary focus for McMurry's decision to make the move to Division II athletics is clearly seen in the potential for a more qualified academic student-athlete" (my emphasis).  On the same page, the article states "The ability to attract more college-ready student-athletes can be improved with a transition to Division II. In order to be eligible for an NCAA Division II athletic scholarship, an incoming freshman must have had a high school GPA of 2.0 in fourteen core courses, and he/she must have scored an 820 on the SAT and/or a 17 on the ACT before that student can begin athletic competition. These minimums are the same for both scholarship and walk-on athletes."

Those supposedly more 'college-ready student-athletes' would never have been admitted to McMurry during the school's time in Division III.  Call it what it is:  a desire to play athletics at a (sometimes arguably) higher level of competition using young men and women with academic backgrounds that would not otherwise qualify them to study at the school, with an increased NCAA-mandated focus to ensure some progress is being made towards a degree.   The gist of the story appears to be that the student athlete recruited for McM during its D3 time had a great deal of dissatisfaction and left the school early and/or did not graduate (37.8% graduation rate in six years or less).  I submit that, if that indeed is the core problem, there may be other underlying issues that a move to Division II will not solve. 

[scottiedoug]

I agree, Ron.

It is irresponsible, maybe worse, to lure young athletes (or anyone else) to a school and take their (parents') money and not provide the academic support necessary to really help them succeed as students.   It can be done, but an institution has to make the effort and commitment.   I am not suggesting anything about McMurry specifically here, as I only know of it through Ralph, a fine ambassador.

[Ralph Turner]

I will cover those issues later tonight and give some background material on the efforts by McMurry to help student-athletes succeed.

However, we parents know that it is up to the student-athlete to do the academic work that is expected of them.

[scottiedoug]

Ralph says:  "However, we parents know that it is up to the student-athlete to do the academic work that is expected of them."

That is true, but the colleges have an obligation to provide close oversight and whatever structured assistance it takes to support the student athletes' efforts, especially if they are high risk because of any number of factors in their preparation for college.   It is exploitative to take their money knowing they may be unprepared (as distinguished from incapable) and expecting them to do things they do not know how to do.

[Ralph Turner]

Ralph says:  "However, we parents know that it is up to the student-athlete to do the academic work that is expected of them."

That is true, but the colleges have an obligation to provide close oversight and whatever structured assistance it takes to support the student athletes' efforts, especially if they are high risk because of any number of factors in their preparation for college.   It is exploitative to take their money knowing they may be unprepared (as distinguished from incapable) and expecting them to do things they do not know how to do.

I will answer those questions when I can get around to them, maybe this weekend.  I am very proud of the efforts that McM has taken to help student-athletes adjust to the rigors of college.

I have three deadlines to meet by Friday pm.  It is good to have a "day job" and a very wonderful day job at that!

[scottiedoug]

I am in no way suggesting that McMurry has not been acting responsibly.  I do think that what we are discussing is an issue within D3, however.

[Ralph Turner]

I am in no way suggesting that McMurry has not been acting responsibly.  I do think that what we are discussing is an issue within D3, however.

Thanks.  I figured this will be almost a case study for someone, including our consultant in the move to D-II, Dr Cedric Dempsey, former NCAA President.