Are the Purple Powers bad for D3?

[Mr. Ypsi]

I don't care whether the residents of Curdistan (thanks, Greg - great term!) have changed to FISH.  I proudly grew up as a FIB and have now been a troll to Yoopers for over 4 decades!

[D O.C.]

1.) Has the rate of growth of division III attendance increased or decreased and in what direction?
      2.) Has the rate of growth of attendance at the Stagg Bowl declined over the last seven years?
      3.) Has the rate of growth of DIII schools participating in Football over the last seven years declined?
      4.) Has the rate of growth of the number of athletes participating in DIII programs declined over the last seven years?
       5.) Has the rate of growth of the amount of media coverage of DIII football games declined over the last seven years?

6.) Has d3football.com dropped off in hits during the playoffs the last 4 years?

[Gray Fox]

      6.) Has d3football.com dropped off in hits during the playoffs the last 4 years?

The question was not "Are the Purple Powers bad for D3football.com?"

[dahlby]

In defense of D O.C., I believe the topic heading listed reads "Are the Purple Powers bad for D3?"

But, from "the glass is half full perspective, one could ask, "How have the Purple Powers helped D3?"
And, how has the domination of the Purple Powers affected the D3 boards?

[zach]

1.) Has the rate of growth of division III attendance increased or decreased and in what direction?
      2.) Has the rate of growth of attendance at the Stagg Bowl declined over the last seven years?
      3.) Has the rate of growth of DIII schools participating in Football over the last seven years declined?
      4.) Has the rate of growth of the number of athletes participating in DIII programs declined over the last seven years?
       5.) Has the rate of growth of the amount of media coverage of DIII football games declined over the last seven years?

6.) Has d3football.com dropped off in hits during the playoffs the last 4 years?

Questions 1,2,3,4 are unfair to use someone to judge on due to economy. Schools are cutting programs left and right. Athletics being cut is not only caused by purple powers if they are caused at all. And attendance will be lowered because people have less money to travel to go to the games. 5 and 6 are both not fair to use either. Think about 2004,  Youtube wasn't even around yet. To find out the score of a FCS  football game you had to wait 3 days for someone to update the website. The growth of the internet and blogs as drastically increased media coverage in the past 7 years. An increase in media coverage does not mean it was caused by the purple powers.

[Pat Coleman]

Thank you r².  All but your last sentence hasn't really been discussed here.  It's a lot of what I've been thinking as I perused the discussion.  Another metric might be: "Have views of D3Football.com declined?"

+k

They were even this year compared to last year. Because of the new design, comparisons to previous years are not exactly apples-to-apples.

[mattvsmith]

Greg,

I'm glad you didn't lace your comments with pejoratives and 'whistle-words'. It's not about being PC, it's about opportunity.

Had you attended Hobart, you would know that I am fully justified in using "pejoratives and whistle-words". If anything, I was being more than gracious and charitable to those who control the political climate at my alma mater. Indeed, my comments were certainly more gracious than anything they ever said to me or about members of my gender.

In short, take your presumed moral high ground, and stick it in your lowest orifice.

[smedindy]

My point is that I want my daughters to have the opportunity my sister didn't have, and that's not PC BS, that's fairness.

[frank uible]

The cold fact is that most or all of the money to pay for the women's programs has to come from current or future taxpayers, the endowments, gifts to the colleges, tuitions or other student fees, the men's programs or the colleges' other revenues since the women's programs themselves are not producing any or nearly enough of it. There ain't no free lunch - whether one calls the process fair or unfair. Someone's ox has to be gored.

[wabash4ever]

Back on the topic of The Purple Powers, while they may be frustrating for the majority of DIII programs, they are not bad for DIII. Those teams create an obstacle against which all other potential contenders must measure themselves and eventually overcome to be champions, including my beloved Wabash College, while providing a marquee rivalry that has boosted DIII's prestige in the mind's of other sports fans.  I attended Wabash's 2002 and 2011 quarterfinal games at Mt. Union and can attest that the ability to measure yourself against that team and, at least this year, entertain a hope of beating them make DIII much more interesting.

The Purple Powers knocked Wabash out of the playoffs 3 times in the past decade, but the continued excellence of those programs has given Wabash something to aspire towards. When Wabash first started making the playoffs regularly, we treated the playoffs similar to the NFL's Pro Bowl; something to enjoy after we played the Monon Bell, our Super Bowl in this analogy, against Depauw. After a decade of measuring ourselves against Mt. Union, Whitewater and our conference rival Wittenberg, Wabash's football program has advanced to the point that, while the Monon Bell Game is still extraordinarly important, the playoffs are as well. I'm not sure those advancements would have been as fully possible without the prestige and example established by the Purple Powers.

I am willing to listen to an argument that UWW has an unfair advantage due to its enrollment, but Mt. Union has a relatively small student body by DIII standards. Remember, however, that without UWW we would have had an undisputed Mt. Union dynasty these past 15 years.

As far as other advantages, I will never hold active recruiting against any program, be it in DI or DIII. A successful football tradition can be an important part of any school's prestige. Recruiting the best student-athletes is part of that process no matter from where they come. Likewise, a student athlete who values the ability to play football at the highest levels but is unable to obtain an athletic scholarship is well within his rights to choose Mt. Union or UWW based on their football prestige.

I know there is a lot of frustration about the continued dominance of Mt. Union and UWW, but that rivalry raised the level of competition and prestige for DIII over the past decade. Just imagine how exciting it will be if your school, be it North Central, Trinity, Wittenberg, Wesley or (please) Wabash, is the one to knock them off and seize a national championship. Just as long as it's not Depauw, I'll be happy for you.

[Knightstalker]

The supposed advantage that state schools like the WIAC and NJAC have with larger enrollments and lower tuition is offset by these conferences imposing roster limits on the football teams.  Imagine what Rowan would have been like or what UWW would be if they had 150-200 or more on their rosters.

[AO]

My point is that I want my daughters to have the opportunity my sister didn't have, and that's not PC BS, that's fairness.

Let's say title IX was repealed.  What do you think the effects would be?  Would they cut womens teams or reduce their expenses to match the value of the team to the school?  If title IX is not repealed should schools like Wabash or NFL teams be required to support an equal number of female athletes to even up the "opportunity" numbers?

The supposed advantage that state schools like the WIAC and NJAC have with larger enrollments and lower tuition is offset by these conferences imposing roster limits on the football teams.  Imagine what Rowan would have been like or what UWW would be if they had 150-200 or more on their rosters.

Maybe St. John's could have stayed within 50 of St. Thomas this year if only they could have had 300 on the roster instead of their usual 180.

[frank uible]

An eleven man roster can produce a dominating team if the eleven are the right eleven.

[badgerwarhawk]

Nah - you're speaking with your heart on this one not your head.

UWW was a sub .500 program prior to the last seven years of going 75-5. Like a switch was flipped. It is suspicious to non-fans (albeit envious) of that team - - most non-fans would look at the records on paper of the prior 7 years, then look at the last 7 years and likely say: That's odd.

No offense intended but whatever you are using it isn't math.  Admittedly I didn't research season records back to 1913 when the first one I know of is available because I don't think going back that far is really relevant to the discussion.  However I did research UW-WHITEWATER'S season records for the twenty five year period preceding the 2005 season (1980-2004).  During that stretch the WARHAWKS overall record is 167 wins 88 losses (.655).  We've had exactly three losing seasons in that stretch, 1985, 1989 and 1999.

In the seven seasons preceding 2005 our overall record was 39-30 (.565)

Again, admittedly, that's a pace considerably less than the past seven seasons but it is also a pace considerably better than "sub-500."   

This information was readily available had you taken the time to look for it rather than jumping to an assumption which had no basis in reality.  Also if you take the time to look you will find that there have only been two seven year stretches since 1913 in which the WARHAWK program has performed at a sub .500 pace, 1942-49 (no games were played 1943-45) and 1950-56. 

Actually in the end I did research the program's history back to 1913. 
 

[emma17]

Nah - you're speaking with your heart on this one not your head.

UWW was a sub .500 program prior to the last seven years of going 75-5. Like a switch was flipped. It is suspicious to non-fans (albeit envious) of that team - - most non-fans would look at the records on paper of the prior 7 years, then look at the last 7 years and likely say: That's odd.

No offense intended but whatever you are using it isn't math.  Admittedly I didn't research season records back to 1913 when the first one I know of is available because I don't think going back that far is really relevant to the discussion.  However I did research UW-WHITEWATER'S season records for the twenty five year period preceding the 2005 season (1980-2004).  During that stretch the WARHAWKS overall record is 167 wins 88 losses (.655).  We've had exactly three losing seasons in that stretch, 1985, 1989 and 1999.

In the seven seasons preceding 2005 our overall record was 39-30 (.565)

Again, admittedly, that's a pace considerably less than the past seven seasons but it is also a pace considerably better than "sub-500."   

This information was readily available had you taken the time to look for it rather than jumping to an assumption which had no basis in reality.  Also if you take the time to look you will find that there have only been two seven year stretches since 1913 in which the WARHAWK program has performed at a sub .500 pace, 1942-49 (no games were played 1943-45) and 1950-56. 

Actually in the end I did research the program's history back to 1913. 

Thanks for doing the research BW. The other bogus claim is "Mt Union regularly draws more than 5,000 fans.