D3 means zero discrimination without professonalization

[Gregory Sager]

Well, I see Mr. Sager has thrown out another little missive.   I'll respond on this thread so as not to interfere with the CCIW thread.

Nothing escalates things more than someone who is sure he has superior knowledge and thinking skills insisting on his points in response to another person of similar confidence.  And the snark rachets up in correlation.

I'm escalating? These were your very first words in this conversation:

Mr. Sager, you are completely off-base.

In other words, you ratcheted this up right out of the box.

I never claimed there would be full teams or even majority teams of 25 year olds.  So please, make another argument.  A lot of sloppy reading comprehension and selective parsing.

Oh, come on. Behold:

I won't ever have a problem with on eor two ad if that's the case with NPU, fine, but your argument is specifically argued to allow for a team of all 25 year olds.

None of that suggests some far-reaching endorsement or SYSTEMIC trend beyond usual norms, and I am absolutely certain that D3 Presidents NEVER intended to support anything that would smack of exploitation of D3 in some semi-professional way.  I wonder what the response would be if a school, by mission, filled their athletic teams with a majority of 25-27 year olds.

Exactly...in terms of specific individuals, not as a systemic strategy counter to an institution's norms.  Imagine if Williams filled a D3 college hockey roster with 25 year old semi-pro Canadians, way out of line with the overall student body.  Embracing any student, including an outlier student, to play the lead in a college drama event is so not even close the counter-argument here.

As for NPU, as I already said, if the overall student body is full of older age internationals, then fine, but if there is a concerted strategy to have 25 year old internationals I am really going to be at a loss if some of you think that is competitive advantage in the same vein as seeking recruits with speed, skill, or some other athletic attribute that all coaches would seek.

For the umpteenth time, a D3 team filled with 25-year-olds is patently absurd. It is impossible to construct one, and I'm pretty sure that nobody's ever even tried to construct one, or ever will. It should be a complete non-issue. The fact that you keep harping on the theoretical possibility that it could happen might charitably be written off as some sort of eccentric fixation, except that you keep throwing North Park into the midst of that harping with this stuff about systemic trends and systemic strategies beyond usual norms, and then you followed it up with an insinuation that there might be some sort of "concerted strategy to have 25-year-old internationals" on the NPU soccer team. There isn't, and I've said that repeatedly, because -- say it with me now -- it's impossible to construct a team of 25-year-olds. Heck, even getting two 25-year-olds on the roster at the same time would be a sheer fluke.

I'm not trying to be snarky just for the heck of it. I'm simply exasperated. Why are you arguing so vehemently about an impossibility?

I ACTUALLY endorsed the idea being presented on an INDIVIDUAL basis, and so if that is all that is being claimed as in the letter and spirit of D3, then end of discussion for me.

Well, then. North Park has one -- one -- 23-year-old freshman on the men's soccer team. So if one individual doesn't bother you, then why all the drama?

  My objection is that the argument as presented had to by definition allow for endorsing a majority older team, because the policy as defended was presented as not an oversight or just something of too minimal interest to care about, but rather as a very INTENTIONAL policy matter, and indeed one that is fueled by the very spirit and philosophy of D3 in terms of embracing amateurism and inclusion for all.

There's no "intentional policy matter" here in terms of any school's recruiting. As I said, it's a fool's errand to go out looking for student-athletes in their middle or late 20s. The "intentional policy matter", if that's what you want to call it, insofar as it refers to D3 is a part of the division's overall mission, as I have previously pointed out. As Pat said:

Fact of the matter is, the Division III philosophy specifically references focusing on participation opportunities, and on treating student-athletes the same as the rest of the student body. A 45-year-old wouldn't be prohibited from running for student government or participating in a student dramatic production, so this is in line with that.

Your protest that there's a discernible -- and legislation-worthy -- distinction between an older student running for student government or participating in a student dramatic production, and an older student participating in athletics, is not in keeping with the D3 philosophy. The D3 philosophy is that athletics, and the students that participate in them, are to be treated the same as everything and everybody else ... no better, but no worse, either.

  I don't know how many times I have to say I never objected to the idea of an individual or two....but the argument presented breaks down -- if the argument is supposed to represent something that is a reflection of D3 instead of an idiosyncratic policy gap -- when we start talking about anything that smacks not of a student body which provides access to all activities regardless or age or anything else but instead an actual, intentional pattern, trend, strategy (whatever you want to call it) of a trend or pipeline-building.

And here's where I quote Pat yet again:

Athletic teams are expected to be reflective of the student body. If a student body is filled with a majority of 25-27-year-olds, come on back and let me know, but otherwise, let's stick to realistic hypotheticals.

You countered Pat by saying that your using the let's-recruit-grown-men-as-program-policy hypothetical was only to show a flaw in my argument by taking it to a logical conclusion. But don't you see? That's the very point! What you're suggesting isn't a logical conclusion. It's a chimera, a phantasm, a cultural impossibility. It's the Loch Ness Monster of D3 recruiting strategies. And that's likely one of the reasons why the presidents of D3 institutions have never given a second thought to changing the no-age-requirement policy of the division throughout its four-and-a-half-decade existence.

Then we could start talking about recruits from wherever who are coming almost exclusively so that they can play soccer versus the regular students on the student body who can't walk-on because of the slots awarded to these essentially hired guns.  Instead of inverting the real intent of  these policies to suggest that they actually encourage outlier recruiting let's talk about what the policies truly intend.

That's an interesting argument, although I don't see it as germane to the topic at hand.

BTW, there is no age limit in D1 either....just a certain number of years beyond high school to play.  Here's an interesting little thing I found with one glance below....I'm sure there are many others.

https://theithacan.org/columns/ncaa-age-rule-hurts-younger-college-athletes/

I read that the other day, when this argument first began. I shrugged my shoulders, because somehow it's hard to take a student seriously when she writes, "But is it really fun when someone that could be your parent is on the team?" I've got a more pertinent anecdote than that to relate, because it's based on this website. Earlier in this decade, Carthage had a men's basketball player named Malcom Kelly. He was 22 or 23 when he arrived on campus, because he had served a hitch in the Navy. In fact, that's how he paid for his schooling; he stayed in the Navy Reserve and gave Uncle Sam his summers and selected weekends during the school year, and at one point he had to put his schooling on hiatus for a year when he was called up to active duty.

Malcom Kelly was very, very good. He was a three-time All-CCIW selection, and was twice named to the All-CCIW first team. Now, keep in mind that the CCIW men's basketball board on d3boards.com is one of the most heavily-trafficked pages on the entire site. It's had a third again more posts than the entire soccer section combined of d3boards.com has had, and if you added all the views together of the various soccer boards here it still wouldn't come close to the number of views that the CCIW men's basketball board has had. Keeping that in mind, it's enlightening to realize that in the four years that Malcom Kelly starred on the hardwood for Carthage, not once -- not once -- did any opposing fan (or neutral fan) gripe about his age on the CCIW men's basketball board.

Why? Because we all recognized that he was an outlier, a rarity. Just like the RIT lacrosse player. And just like Deni Cresto. And why bother to raise the issue about one outlier -- especially when you know why he's an outlier, and why those student-athletes in his age bracket will always be outliers.

And that, my friend, is why I again ask why you're making a mountain out of a molehill.

[blooter442]

How long did that take to write?

[Gregory Sager]

Not long, surprisingly. Once I get on a roll ... 

[PaulNewman]

Not long, surprisingly. Once I get on a roll ... 

Mr. Sager, you really are a piece of work....and you consistently "speak" (post) with an arrogant, semi-insulting tone.

Let's review. 

In terms of who started what, I was the THIRD responder.  In response to EB2319's initial comment, you posted "Cry me a river..."  We're all entitled to our opinions.  You then assumed and or distorted posts by that poster and then again Mr.Right suggesting that they obviously don't know the rules  -- "You seem to have forgotten that there is no age limit" [your response].  One can know the rules, and their posts as I read them made clear they did understand, and STILL have an OPINION that something seems inconsistent with the spirit of D3.  EB2319 in fact said that "for me..that's not what D3 is all about" WHILE CONCEDING that many would not agree with him (or her).  Mr.Right said "ridiculous".....you can argue and disagree but he and any of us can express an opinion about what we find ridiculous.

"The umpteenth time..."  Really??

I was very, very clear about my position.  I didn't initiate the idea of a large segment or "full team" of anything.  Indeed, again, EB2319 first said "just don't see how recruiting an international team of grown men is good for D3 soccer."  You used phrases in the thread about "potential pool of recruits" [the JUCO pool I believe], and also cited current roster of 10 Scandinavians, 2 Brazilians, 1 Dutch, 1 China....and btw, all teams with rosters in the 40+ to 60 category ARE NOT because "everybody wants to play for a winner."  You see to be making a ton out of last year's run while lecturing us that NPU's "pattern" or "trend" or aimless recruiting strategy is no different no than it ever was.  You gave a smart-aleky response to nearly every poster....1970s NESCAC, rudy, EB2319, Mr.Right, myself....

I'm not stupid.  I don't think or at least I hope there will not be full teams of 22-23+ year olds who actually recruited instead of just sitting there already in any student body....I said multiple times I have no issue with a couple of 65 year olds from Madagascar.....you and a couple of others defended your points by suggesting intentional policy as opposed to anamoly.....So, aside from likelihood, given your argument, and given 15 foreign players [what are all their ages???] you cited who I assume are not "reservists," it is very reasonable in my OPINION t ask you if you would be OK with the hypothetical.

Have a great day.

[Ejay]

Since I opened Pandora's box on this issue, let me clarify my position.  And for the record, I'm new to the D3 scene so it's not like I'm "after" NPU because of their success. With that said...

I recognize it's not against the rules to field an entire roster of internationals or 25 year olds. It's not what I would do, but if that's what teams want to do, then so be it. As I've said before, "to each their own".  However, I do think it goes against the spirit of rules.  I likened it to the youth coach that purposely under flights his team so they can win a trophy against inferior competition.   

In NPU's case, their roster is 38% international.  Their international student-body percentage.... 4%.  Clearly there is a concerned effort to recruit international players for the sole purpose of playing soccer. To me, that's a D1 or D2 philosophy and not the mission of D3.  Is it legal?  Yes.  Does it smell funny? Absolutely.

Regarding the 24 year old Brazilian freshman, this too smells foul although it's perfectly legal.  Again, not the mission of D3 in my eyes, but I guess I'm wrong.  Do I think 11 of his friends will transfer in next semester? Certainly not. But honestly, it wouldn't shock me if it did happen somewhere, sometime.

I apologize for starting this s*#t storm.  I simply made what I thought was a harmless observation on something I disagreed with - like we all do about other things such as playing styles.  It was never my intention to create a debate or ruffle feathers. 

Moving on...

[PaulNewman]

I do want to concede one point that I've been thinking about and in the spirit of NOT being myopic....there are a wide array of types of D3 schools.  Similar to I believe Flying Weasel once commenting in response to something I wrote that we can't presume all kids/men who play D3 soccer are going to college for similar reasons or with similar goals.

The three schools I'm most familiar with in the Chicago area are a great example....U Chicago, Wheaton and NPU are all very different.

There's the NESCAC and similar making up a large portion of the UNSNWR top 50 LACs, the larger UAAs, the Christian/evangelical colleges, the city-type, often more commuter-style schools, the large university schools (SUNYAC, NJAC, Wisconsin group, etc), the GNAC and CCC schools, the OAC schools, etc, etc....

No doubt how many of us think of D3 and what D3 means are heavily impacted by the type of D3 we are most familiar with, that we attended, and/or that our kids attended.

2-3 three years ago I actually did some posts featuring D3s that I had not been familiar with to broaden my knowledge and perhaps gives others a peak into less talked about schools....Concordia (Wisc) comes to mind, with blurbs about several other Concordia's around the country....Keuka, etc.

[Gregory Sager]

Not long, surprisingly. Once I get on a roll ... 

Mr. Sager, you really are a piece of work....and you consistently "speak" (post) with an arrogant, semi-insulting tone.

Physician, heal thyself. Again, the first words out of your keyboard in this conversation were to call me "completely off-base." If that's not arrogant and semi-insulting, I don't know what is.

Let's review. 

In terms of who started what, I was the THIRD responder.

I never said that you started it. I simply quoted your first words once you decided to jump into the fray with both feet and continue it.

In response to EB2319's initial comment, you posted "Cry me a river..."

You're darned right I did. Now, how about applying some context to that?

Here's how he opened this whole thing up:

It truly saddens me to see the NPU roster.  A 23 year old Brazilian freshman midfielder?  Come on already.  I know not everyone will agree with me, but to me that's not what D3 soccer is about.

Put yourself in my shoes, if you can. I don't know how attached you are to your alma mater (or, more specificially, to your alma mater's sports teams), but it ought to be clear to you and to everybody who posts here that I'm pretty firmly attached to mine. I've been an avid fan of the Vikings since I first arrived at North Park as a freshman almost forty years ago, and an avid supporter of a school that is not only my alma mater but the alma mater of most of my friends, as well as the only institution of higher learning of my denomination. I've been working for the athletic department on the side for a decade and a half, and as the school's sports broadcaster since this decade began. As Falconer said about himself, everybody here knows that I'm a homer.

And now someone comes along and posts, "That's not what D3 soccer is about." In other words, screw you, North Park, because you people don't understand the spirit of D3. Your school may not be cheating according to the NCAA rulebook, but you sure as heck don't belong here if that's the way that you go about your business. Never mind that North Park has been an active and engaged member of D3 since the division's inception in the early '70s, and that the athletic department busts its hump every year, as every good member does, to remain in compliance by doing all of the requisite paperwork and scrupulously following the rules. No, we don't belong in D3 with a team like that, because "that's not what D3 soccer is about."

He then sends a follow-up post that reiterates the insinuation that what NPU is doing isn't good for D3 soccer, along with an erroneous accusation that the Vikings are "an international team of grown men" (they're neither majority-international in terms of residence nor grown men in the sense that it's been used throughout this conversation, i.e., men in the 25-30 age range that constitutes the physiological peak of most athletes), along with saying that it reminds him of youth coaches that cheat by using players ineligible by age under the league's rules.

So here I see that some guy who is hiding behind an anonymous name on a public discussion board is flinging what I consider to be some pretty serious mud at my school and my school's soccer program. How do you think I'm going to react? How am I supposed to react? Frankly, if the worst that you have on me is a snarky "cry me a river," then I consider myself to have been a model of restraint towards EB2319.

Oh, and some of this is just you misreading me. The last post of mine, which you quoted at the top of your post, "Not long, surprisingly. Once I get on a roll ..." was the opposite of arrogant. It was self-deprecation, in agreement with a previous post from blooter in which he poked fun at the Tolstoy-like length of my response to you. (It's not the first time that I've been accused of long-windedness on d3boards.com. Guilty as charged.) But the point is that it should've been obvious to you that I was being self-deprecating rather than arrogant both by the context and by the fact that I put a winking emoji after the statement. The fact that you took it the wrong way either means that you're now assuming the worst of me and are reading my posts in a manner that is colored by that opinion, or maybe I should just cease with trying to engage anyone in humorous banter in the middle of an argument. Thing is, I thought that humorous banter was a way to deflate an argument. So much the sadder, I guess.

We're all entitled to our opinions.

Yes, we are. And if EB2319's opinion is that my school's athletic department doesn't understand what D3 is all about, and if he compares the Vikings to youth-league cheaters, then he's going to read my opinion in return.

  You then assumed and or distorted posts by that poster

No, I didn't. I stuck up for international students in general, and I clarified some points about the class standing and graduation rate of NPU's Swedish and Norwegian soccer players. I thought that EP2319 and I ended our exchange on a good note. He thanked me for clarifying, and said that his questioning NPU was sincere and not simply an attack, and I accepted his word on that.

and then again Mr.Right suggesting that they obviously don't know the rules  -- "You seem to have forgotten that there is no age limit" [your response].

C'mon, that was sheer snark. That should be obvious, as "you seem to have forgotten" is not a phrase typically used literally. It's commonly used as a sarcastic way of suggesting that the listener/reader is well aware of something but chooses to ignore it. I certainly hope that I'm not going to get stuck festooning every post with emojis on the off-chance that a reader might not recognize a commonly-used sarcastic phrase and might actually take it literally.

  One can know the rules, and their posts as I read them made clear they did understand, and STILL have an OPINION that something seems inconsistent with the spirit of D3.

It's clear that Mr. Right and EB2319 disagree with me about that, and we are not going to resolve it. My understanding of how D3 works, based upon everything that I've learned in my (all-too-many) decades of following it, and by closely following the specialist journalists who write and talk about it (particularly Pat Coleman and Dave McHugh), is that the men and women representing the division's various schools are sensitized to the needs and issues raised by the athletic competition of their various schools, and legislatively redress when needed those needs and issues at D3 conventions. In other words, the spirit of D3 is found within the division's rules. That's made plain by the fact that the school representatives at each D3 convention take seriously the eighth point of D3's philosophy statement, as found on the NCAA website:

8. Assure that athletic participants are not treated differently from other members of the student body.

That goes back to what Pat said about a 45-year-old running for a student government position or acting in a play. According to the D3 philosophy statement, if other students are entitled to full participation in whatever the school offers, then student-athletes ought to be entitled to full participation as well. And the no-age-requirement rule is consonant with that. That's what the spirit of D3 is all about.

  EB2319 in fact said that "for me..that's not what D3 is all about" WHILE CONCEDING that many would not agree with him (or her).  Mr.Right said "ridiculous".....you can argue and disagree but he and any of us can express an opinion about what we find ridiculous.

Who said anything about not being allowed to express an opinion? I don't own this website. I don't control who posts here, or what gets posted here.

(con't)

[Gregory Sager]

"The umpteenth time..."  Really??

Figure of speech. You really are determined to make me break out the emojis, aren't you?

I was very, very clear about my position.  I didn't initiate the idea of a large segment or "full team" of anything.

No, but you keep going back to that well as some sort of hypothetical. And the point I've been trying to make is that, since the hypothetical is impossible to achieve in a real-world setting, it's also invalid.

  Indeed, again, EB2319 first said "just don't see how recruiting an international team of grown men is good for D3 soccer."  You used phrases in the thread about "potential pool of recruits" [the JUCO pool I believe],

I don't see anywhere where I've used that phrase. I may have missed it, so, sincerely, if you can spot it, please point it out to me.

I do see where I've used the word "pool" twice:

Exactly. PaulNewman's rant strikes me as being really bizarre. Nobody is going to recruit a team of 25-year-olds in any D3 sport, for the reason I mentioned earlier -- it's simply impossible in our culture for there to be a pool of 25-year-olds willing to be full-time students without full-time jobs that's large enough to warrant recruiting them. Even when you factor in international students -- and, even counting the men's soccer team, the number of international student-athletes at NPU is pretty limited -- the pool of 25-year-olds willing to be college athletes is miniscule. Dave got it exactly right:

And how does ONE individual some how ruin the entire thing and make it "dangerous" for everyone else? The percentage of these individuals in DIII is staggeringly ... STAGGERINGLY ... low. But a rule should be created to stop a tiny number of insanely dedicated and resilient individuals. I only wish I could have still been playing collegiately at 25. I knew I was tapped out at 22... because those freshman were getting better and faster than me.

This is all a case of making a mountain out of a molehill.

... but I don't see anything about jucos in there. In fact, I don't recall jucos coming up in this conversation at all.

and also cited current roster of 10 Scandinavians, 2 Brazilians, 1 Dutch, 1 China....and btw, all teams with rosters in the 40+ to 60 category ARE NOT because "everybody wants to play for a winner."

You're being overly literal again. The phrase "everybody wants to play for a winner" strikes me as being a pretty obvious rhetorical flourish on my part. Of course not every student-athlete who chooses a D3 school does so because the team she or he wants to play for is a winner. That would be a nonsensical assertion, because (among other reasons) otherwise nobody would ever play for a program with a recent tradition of losing.

But choosing a program because it wins is, in fact, a pretty high motivator for an awful lot of student-athletes. That's why it's typical for a coach on the recruiting trail, if he or she coaches a winning program, to lead off with his or her program's accomplishments and will work that vein of propaganda pretty hard, even while talking about the school's alumni acceptance rate into medical school or the internship possibilities available or the new student center that just got built last year.

North Park has thirty freshmen on the men's soccer team this year. I'm pretty sure that John Born's never had more than half of that total in any previous recruiting cycle. Is it a coincidence that NPU was the national runner-up last year? No, it isn't. The NPU coaches have not hesitated to attribute the unprecedentedly swollen freshman class to the fact that the Vikings played for the national championship last season. A very high percentage of the guys that they contacted on the recruiting trail chose North Park, and my impression (not an ironclad proven fact, but rather my impression) is that some of them self-recruited by initiating the contact themselves. Even though this makes John Born the hero of the North Park admissions department, it's not necessarily an outcome that he would've chosen. He's had to hire another assistant just to help coach all of those guys, and the team now has to hold separate practices for the regular varsity and for the mammoth squad of reserves, many of whom will never get to even play in a reserve match.

But if you went up and down the line with those freshmen, you'd find that a large number of them wanted to attend North Park because they wanted to be a part of a winning program that they think can get back to Greensboro. That's not at all unusual. Heck, in our society at the D1 level, schools notice a bump in general admission among males, not student-athlete admissions, when a title or a Final Four is achieved in football or men's basketball, because guys want to be a part of a school that excels. Winning is contagious, and, while not literally everyone, lots and lots of people want to catch a dose of that contagion.

You see to be making a ton out of last year's run while lecturing us that NPU's "pattern" or "trend" or aimless recruiting strategy is no different no than it ever was.

Wow. There's a mouthful of accusations. Let's wade through them:

* "making a ton out of last year's run" -- Sorry for the snark, but the only possible response is ... well, duh. North Park is my alma mater, I'm the school's sports broadcaster, the Vikings men's soccer team reached the national championship match, and this is the d3boards.com soccer forum. QED.

* "while lecturing us that NPU's 'pattern' or 'trend' or aimless recruiting strategy" -- See, here's what I'm talking about when I say that you're dishing it out every bit as much as you're taking it with regard to insults. The verb "lecturing" here to describe my explanations of what's going on in the men's soccer program at NPU is clearly a case of you sniping at me.

And I don't talk about a "pattern" or a "trend". Those are your words. "Aimless recruiting strategy" strikes me as more sarcasm here on your part, but if there's no sarcastic intent here, I will tell you that what John Born and his staff do is far from aimless. Aimless recruiting strategies are failed recruiting strategies. Like any good coaching staff, they know their school, they know what type of student-athletes they want to target, they know where to look for them based upon the first two points, and they pursue them. Recruiting is the biggest and most important part of a coach's job. Aimlessness in that endeavor means an eventual trip to the unemployment line.

* "is no different than it ever was" -- Not true. I've never said that. In fact, I've done the opposite. I've pointed out how it's changed over the past three years, because a recruiting pipeline in Norway has opened up. North Park's international contingent was almost exclusively Swedish from the program's beginning as a varsity sport 36 years ago (although the Swedes back then were walk-ons). Now there's more Norwegians than Swedes. It's a subtle change (as I like to joke, the age-old rivalry between Swedes and Norwegians is like identical twin sisters arguing over which one of them is prettier), but it's a change nevertheless.

  You gave a smart-aleky response to nearly every poster....1970s NESCAC, rudy, EB2319, Mr.Right, myself....

Good grief. What sort of a blanket accusation is that? 1970s NESCAC? rudy? What do they have to do with anything?

You attacked me here, straight out, right from the get-go, with that "completely off-base" accusation. Telling me that you disagree with me is one thing. But starting off by telling me that I'm completely off-base is another thing entirely in terms of tone. I have the right to defend not only my school and my school's soccer program, but myself as well. I don't go around seeking conflict, although I enjoy a good back-and-forth discussion as much as anybody here on d3boards.com, but if you come after me I'm going to come right back at you.

I'm not stupid.

Never said you were. One of the main reasons why you're exasperating me is that I know full well that you're not stupid.

I don't think or at least I hope there will not be full teams of 22-23+ year olds who actually recruited instead of just sitting there already in any student body.

Wait a minute. Before it was 25-to-30-year-olds. Then it was 25-year-olds. Now it's 22-23+-year-olds. How far are you going to backtrack on this? I'll say this for Mr. Right -- he at least came flat out and said that just about any non-traditional student in age, even perhaps a few who only take a single gap year after high school in some cases, ought to be disqualified from participating in D3 sports:

So I have always said International players are fine but for D3 Sports there MUST be an age limit for incoming Frosh. Maybe 19-20 years old would be a good cut off.

...I said multiple times I have no issue with a couple of 65 year olds from Madagascar.....you and a couple of others defended your points by suggesting intentional policy as opposed to anamoly.

No, we didn't. We cited both points. Or have you forgotten Pat's gibe about a team from a school consisting of students aged 25-27?

....So, aside from likelihood, given your argument, and given 15 foreign players [what are all their ages???]

Oh, come on. Are you really asking me to hunt down all of North Park's international men's soccer players and inquire as to each of their birthdays?

you cited who I assume are not "reservists," it is very reasonable in my OPINION t ask you if you would be OK with the hypothetical.

And, as I have said, I think that your hypothetical is so totally groundless as to not be worthy of debate. If something can't happen in the real world, it's invalid as a hypothetical.

Have a great day.

You, too. Seriously.

[blooter442]

It wasn't even my intention to poke fun, I was more or less just entertained that you had written such a long post.

[Gregory Sager]

Since I opened Pandora's box on this issue, let me clarify my position.  And for the record, I'm new to the D3 scene so it's not like I'm "after" NPU because of their success.

Yes, you said that before and I accepted your word on that. Thank you for saying it again. Seriously.

With that said...

I recognize it's not against the rules to field an entire roster of internationals or 25 year olds. It's not what I would do, but if that's what teams want to do, then so be it. As I've said before, "to each their own".  However, I do think it goes against the spirit of rules.  I likened it to the youth coach that purposely under flights his team so they can win a trophy against inferior competition.   

Can you see why that analogy bothers me so much? If the rules of a youth league include age limits, and a coach defies that rule, that's cheating. How are those of us who support North Park supposed to react when you use an analogy of a cheating team as a comparison to our school's men's soccer program?

As for the spirit of the rules, again, fielding a student-athlete who is of a non-traditional age doesn't go against them at all. As Pat, Dave, and I have in turn explained, the rules of D3 don't simply allow for student-athletes of any age to participate as an arbitrary decision or as an overlooked loophole. They are driven by the spirit of D3, as defined in point #8 of the D3 philosophy statement, as I quoted above to PaulNewman. It's right there on the website at www.ncaa.org.

In NPU's case, their roster is 38% international.  Their international student-body percentage.... 4%.

It's actually 7%, but you're missing the bigger point here. And I think that it might have to do with your lack of familiarity with North Park University and with the city of Chicago.

NPU is an urban school. It's located on the North Side of a city of almost three million people -- a city that contains a bewildering variety of people from pretty much every nation on Earth. The 60625 zip code in which North Park is located is, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, one of the three most ethnically diverse zip codes in the entire country. The school reflects that diversity. A very large percentage of the student body consists of students from working-class or new-professional-class households in the city or the inner-ring suburbs, and a very large percentage in turn of that segment of the student body consists of first- or second-generation immigrants. It's very common at an NPU commencement to see young people cross the stage as the first person in their respective families to ever receive a university diploma -- and a lot of those proud families in the audience speak heavily accented or broken English. This is not at all unusual in a Chicago school such as North Park, DePaul, Loyola, UIC, or Roosevelt.

Look at the NPU men's soccer rosters of the past several seasons, and you'll see lots of Spanish and Polish names. Nearly every single one of those players was/is from a local immigrant family. You hear lots of Polish and Spanish, or English with a Polish or Hispanic accent, in the stands where the families sit at NPU soccer matches. In other words, the international students on the NPU roster are in some ways different from a lot of their North Park teammates -- and a lot of their North Park classmates -- only by the fact that their families haven't physically moved to America. A great many of NPU's American students live in the dual world common to an immigrant or an immigrant family. To some degree, the line between international player and American player is blurred for much of the team -- just as it is within the campus at large, especially among the traditional commuter population.

This is how soccer has always operated in Chicago. It's not a homegrown sport, as you all know. It's an imported sport. Because Americans at large disdained soccer for generations, a huge percentage of the people who played the sport or followed the sport at all were immigrants. This was especially true in a melting-pot city like Chicago, where ethnic clubs invariably had their own soccer leagues, and Germans, Serbs, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Italians, Croats, etc., and then Africans, Asians, and Latin Americans as well, got their first real experiences with people from other cultures outside of a job site or a government office by playing them on a soccer pitch in a public park. To this day, the immigrant population heavily shapes Chicagoland soccer, as any examination of the roster of a local college team (that's mostly locally-based, unlike Chicago or Wheaton or Illinois Tech) will tell you. Heck, you can even see it in the box score of last night's Chicago @ NPU match, in which the assistant referees were Tomas Kaczowka and Krzysztof Bajorek. At North Park, we've long grown used to seeing refs call our matches who came to this city from Croatia or Poland or Mexico or Iraq or Germany.

While there is no longer a substantial population of Scandinavian immigrants in Chicago (although it was at one time the second-largest Swedish city in the world after Stockholm, and the largest Norwegian city, even bigger than Oslo and Bergen), North Park is a school that has a Swedish heritage. (Hence, the royal blue and gold school colors, taken from the Swedish flag, and the nickname "Vikings".) It has a Center for Scandinavian Studies on campus, and it is one of less than a half-dozen colleges and universities in the U.S. that offers Swedish as a major. A substantial percentage of international students in general at NPU are from Scandinavia. So the international players from Norway and Sweden fit the school's ethos perfectly as well.

North Park's men's soccer roster is very much in harmony with what the school stands for and who it serves.

Clearly there is a concerned effort to recruit international players for the sole purpose of playing soccer.

Not true. Just like every coach at every university or college in America -- well, I guess that I better be careful and except D1 football and men's basketball coaches from this blanket statement -- NPU coaches recruit student-athletes to both participate in their sport and to get an education. North Park is no different in that regard than any other school in D3.

To me, that's a D1 or D2 philosophy and not the mission of D3.  Is it legal?  Yes.  Does it smell funny? Absolutely.

Sorry, but I just think that you're completely wrong about this. North Park recruits student-athletes in the exact same manner, and with the exact same intent, as does every other D3 institution. The only difference to which you can point is the fact that, as far as the NPU men's soccer team is concerned, some of those student-athletes come from overseas. But that's not unique to NPU; lots and lots of D3 schools have international soccer players, just as do D1, D2, and NAIA schools.

Regarding the 24 year old Brazilian freshman,

He's 23.

this too smells foul although it's perfectly legal.

That's a completely subjective response. You're entitled to it, of course. But it holds no currency with me, because North Park men's soccer has neither broken any rules nor done something that goes against the school's mission or the D3 philosophy.

Again, not the mission of D3 in my eyes, but I guess I'm wrong.  Do I think 11 of his friends will transfer in next semester? Certainly not. But honestly, it wouldn't shock me if it did happen somewhere, sometime.

I apologize for starting this s*#t storm.  I simply made what I thought was a harmless observation on something I disagreed with - like we all do about other things such as playing styles.  It was never my intention to create a debate or ruffle feathers.

Understood, and appreciated.

[Gregory Sager]

It wasn't even my intention to poke fun, I was more or less just entertained that you had written such a long post.

I'll bet that I made your day today, then. 

[PaulNewman]

Wow....just wow.  Is it OK if I have a little exasperation?

Mr. Sager, as long as we're getting fine-grained here....don't recall this in the other thread?

"The second benefit is that, as juco students, they represent a potential pool of recruits for North Park."

Couple of other errors on your part... I was not a poster who suggested any legislation or designated anything "designation-worthy."

I also for the msot part have not referred to 'intentional' as related to an y particular school.....was more a suggestion that you must be be assigning some level of intentionality to the NCAA and D3 Presidents given how you have cloaked the "policy" in terms of something exuding all of the best in terms of the grand spirit of D3.

Neither you nor Mr. Coleman will convince me of any equivalency regarding the tuba player or lead in To Kill a Mockingbird....but feel free to show me where Wheaton ever showed concern about the drama students at NPU possibly participating in professional Off-Broadway productions.

Again, giving already existent students in a student body and giving them full access to all college activities is far different than the current state of D3 soccer recruitment.

You are obviously quite proud of NPU's tradition and recruiting pipeline.  Just embrace it without all the defensiveness.

[PaulNewman]

".....are driven by the spirit of D3"

Ummm, no, there's the rub....allowed, but not necessarily in the spirit of....which is my only point about intentionality and the hypothetical you keep binding to me.  The question is whether the NCAA and D3 Presidents have intentionality regarding any systemic recruiting....and especially whether what you want to be draped in something magnificent should be so draped.  The odd, occasional 45 year old Vet of Desert Storm isn't the issue we're debating.

And this was sweet -- "Because -- say it with me now...."

[Gregory Sager]

Wow....just wow.  Is it OK if I have a little exasperation?

Plenty to go around, apparently.

Mr. Sager, as long as we're getting fine-grained here....don't recall this in the other thread?

"The second benefit is that, as juco students, they represent a potential pool of recruits for North Park."

See, that's the problem here. You're pulling in stuff from other boards and other conversational threads besides the one that started on the CCIW board a few days ago. That's the one where I went hunting for some reference to a "potential pool of recruits" and jucos following your previous post, because that's the source material for this current debate. Which other thread were you talking about? is the question that needs to be asked here. I've got 20,747 posts to my name on this website at the moment. How am I supposed to keep track of what you're quoting unless you give me context, such as date and board? At least use the d3boards.com quote function, so that I can track it down that way. Now that you've retyped my words, I can recall it and identify it as a post that I made at some point (still not sure when) as to why it's more useful for NPU to play jucos in reserve matches than other four-year-school reserve teams. (I've made the same point several times on the CCIW men's basketball board, and I may have even made it in the CCIW baseball room. It's germane to all three of those sports.)

Couple of other errors on your part... I was not a poster who suggested any legislation or designated anything "designation-worthy."

You certainly seemed to be implying that. But ... fair enough. Withdrawn.

I also for the msot part have not referred to 'intentional' as related to an y particular school.....was more a suggestion that you must be be assigning some level of intentionality to the NCAA and D3 Presidents given how you have cloaked the "policy" in terms of something exuding all of the best in terms of the grand spirit of D3.

Your statement on 9/5 at 4:19:55 was vaguely worded in such a way that "intentional policy" could be interpreted from the context as being either a reference to NPU's soccer recruiting methodology or to D3's governing philosophy -- especially since you later referred to an "actual, intentional pattern, trend, strategy (whatever you want to call it) of a trend or pipeline-building" vis-a-vis NPU recruiting later on in the same post -- and so I covered both bases. (Emphasis mine.)

Neither you nor Mr. Coleman will convince me of any equivalency regarding the tuba player or lead in To Kill a Mockingbird....but feel free to show me where Wheaton ever showed concern about the drama students at NPU possibly participating in professional Off-Broadway productions.

Sorry, but that's just plain silly. Wheaton and North Park don't compete on the stage. But they do compete (very fiercely) on the soccer pitch. Nor, as far as I know, are college actors prohibited from participating in professional stage productions the way that college athletes are prohibited from being paid to play sports. Your analogy doesn't work.

Again, giving already existent students in a student body and giving them full access to all college activities is far different than the current state of D3 soccer recruitment.

Well, like you said, you are just going to have to disagree with Pat and I (and Dave) about that. Fortunately for the three of us, the division's rules and the college and university administrators who make them have agreed with us since the division was created in the early '70s.

You are obviously quite proud of NPU's tradition and recruiting pipeline.  Just embrace it without all the defensiveness.

I'd like to do so ...  but if the program's integrity is impugned on a public website, then you can bet your bottom dollar that I'm going to defend it.

".....are driven by the spirit of D3"

Ummm, no, there's the rub....allowed, but not necessarily in the spirit of....which is my only point about intentionality and the hypothetical you keep binding to me.  The question is whether the NCAA and D3 Presidents have intentionality regarding any systemic recruiting....and especially whether what you want to be draped in something magnificent should be so draped.  The odd, occasional 45 year old Vet of Desert Storm isn't the issue we're debating.

The intentionality lies in the no-age-requirement rule. And, yes, insofar as D3 is concerned, it is the 45-year-old vet of Desert Storm that we're debating ... and your mythical 65-year-old from Madagascar ... and the 25-year-old RIT lacrosse player ... and Deni Cresto, and Malcom Kelly, and whatever other mid-20s anomalies, both talented and untalented, that we're addressing. They're all of a piece to the NCAA.

[PaulNewman]

The reference to a "pool of recruits" and "jucos" was pulled directly from the CCIW thread and in the same basic discussion or just before all this started, somewhere in the page 64-66 range.  That thread gave direct birth to this thread.  Sorry I haven't mastered the multiple quotes within a post function.

You can keep saying we disagree about NCAA D3 policy.  We don't, or rather we disagree to what extent it is a laudable, intentional thing or whether schools do what they can within the rules. 

Let's change the focus.  In my view one can argue about the degree to which NESCAC (and similar) schools aggressively recruit, use "tips," etc.  Allowed, yes, but in the best tradition of the spirit?  Not so sure.

My point is in the title of thread....agreeing with zero discrimination but wondering where the line is in terms of some bleeding into professionalization.

The truth is that I don't care that much.  I got caught up much more in how I experience you coming across, and I assume to some significant extent the same is true for you and my style/persistence.