Clarkson saga over? (and SLU/RPI)

[KeithK]

More important than the Morris deal being over is the current proposal by DIII to prevent schools who are playing up from offering scholarships.  This would affect Clarkson, RPi, SLU and Union (not really Union) in the ECAC and CC in the WCHA.  According to USCHO (no link - just go look) the legislation is part of an overall drive to restore academic/athletic integrity DIII and has past a couple hurdles.

SLU has succeeded without scholarships (and not so much with yet) but this would probably be a real blow to those schools and the ECAC in general if it does take affect in 2008 as planned.

Also, one of the proposals shortens the season for winter sports from 21 weeks to 19.  This could require these schools to shorten their hockey schedule.  I don't know, and I haven't looked to see if Adam, etc. have an analysis yet.

[marty]

Keith K '93 wrote:

More important than the Morris deal being over is the current proposal by DIII to prevent schools who are playing up from offering scholarships.  This would affect Clarkson, RPi, SLU and Union (not really Union) in the ECAC and CC in the WCHA.  

Well this whole issue is so clouded by the Union (not really Union) bullsh$* that I don't know how the powers that be can look themselves in the face each day.  They lower themselves when they promulgate this kind of foolishness.  

How about the Ivies (not really the Ivies)!!!  Most of us know stories concerning the "jobs" that athletes have had at Teagle and these stories tend to undermine the whole idea that there are no scholarships.

Just which jurist wannabe came up with this proposal?  Anyone care to step up and take some heat.  It reminds me of the Williams College holier than thou attitude that precludes them from post season tourneys and bowl appearances (or something like that - I think I have been corrected on this before as they have some convoluted method of determining which post season activities are proper for a school of their stature).  They have this asinine rule but guess what the coaches do if they have a hot high school prospect.  They're able to use one of their chits to get the athlete a fat letter of acceptance in the spring.

Anyone who thinks that rules can dictate moral behavior should spend a little time on planet earth.

As an aside I would like to acknowledge the new naming convention for that great school in Troy.  It seems to be no longer known as RPI or Rensselaer but rather Rensselaer Tech :-D  :


http://cornellbigred.ocsn.com/sports/m-hockey/sched/corn-m-hockey-sched.html

[ugarte]

As the USCHO article notes, this proposal also hits Johns Hopkins lax.  I think there are a number of schools that play up in wresting as well (The Pennsylvania schools (Edinboro, Clarion and Lock Haven) come to mind, but I am not sure which ones are actually D-I).  Unless there is some widespread abuse that I don't know about, this strikes me as a very bad idea.  Schools should be permitted to create identity around a signature program and compete in that program at the highest level.



Post Edited (08-08-03 15:58)

[KeithK]

I can accept that the DIII establishment doesn't think that schools should play up in new sports.  But Clarkson, etc. play up in hockey because historically they have played a the highest level of college hockey (again, not really Union :-D ) since before there were divisions.

[Lenny]

I agree that the idea is dumb, but the schools can continue to have D1 programs.  They just won't be able to have scholarships for them.  Won't that just put them on an even level with the Ivies?
They already have established programs, so wouldn't players still want to go there too win?
I understand the whole "they can get money if they go somewhere else" issue, but the same with the Ivies.  I guess players come to the Ivies because of the education they can get??
So therefore the logic would mean that these schools need scholarships because they are as good academically as the Ivies.  Does this make sense?
L

[DeltaOne81]

It's hard enough for the Ivies, even with the academic draw. A mid-upper school like these would have an even tougher time. I wish no one the situation we're in, nevermind a worse one.

They'd survive, sure... In fact, I have a hunch if this happened, several (all?) of them would just move their full program to D-I in some low-level conference. But still, it's a pain :-).

[ursusminor]

I doubt that they would go to D-I -- perhaps D-II.

Please show your support:
http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?NCAAD3&1



Post Edited (08-11-03 06:45)

[Greg Berge]

I was signator #3399, which is more than I expected (and about 1% of the number needed for the NCAA to give a crap).

[ursusminor]

Greg,

I was thinking myself as to how many signatures it would take to have an effect. I don't think that it would take 300,000+, but I do think that it would have to be in six figures which this petition is unlikely to reach. Better would be if the Admins of the eight affected schools started doing a lot of arm twisting.

[Rich Stamboulian]

My understanding is that there is already some "marshaling of allies" going on among our D3 allies.  

I suppose some support of the D1 admins who have been "played up to" would be beneficial...can we count on support from the Ivies?

[jeh25]

Keith K '93 wrote:

More important than the Morris deal being over is the current proposal by DIII to prevent schools who are playing up from offering scholarships.  This would affect Clarkson, RPi, SLU and Union (not really Union) in the ECAC and CC in the WCHA.  

And Johns Hopkins in lacrosse.

Edit: ooops. I should read the whole thread before responding. I should have assumed BRA, Al or Doyle the Elder would have caught this.



Post Edited (08-20-03 12:48)

[ugarte]

I finally found the list of all schools affected in a USA Today article:

Johns Hopkins (men's and women's lacrosse)
St. Lawrence (men's and women's ice hockey)
Colorado College (men's hockey and women's soccer)
Clarkson (men's and women's ice hockey)
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (men's hockey)
Hartwick (women's water polo)
SUNY - Oneonta (men's soccer)
Rutgers-Newark (men's volleyball)

The full article is at http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2003-08-07-notes_x.htm .

Much to my surprise, none of the Pennsylvania wrestling schools are on the list.  Are they not Division I? Does wrestling organize itself differently vis-a-vis divisions? Al?



Post Edited (08-20-03 13:04)

[ugarte]

Rich Stamboulian wrote:

My understanding is that there is already some "marshaling of allies" going on among our D3 allies.  

I suppose some support of the D1 admins who have been "played up to" would be beneficial...can we count on support from the Ivies?

You have my support, Rich, but I don't know if the Ivies will do more than shrug.  As a previous poster wrote (sorry, but I am in threaded view) the Ivies don't give scholarships, so they aren't very likely to agree that it is such a hardship.

[adamw]

Those Pennsylvania schools are Division II

[Jeff Hopkins \'82]

I'm not sure what you mean by "the Pennsylvania wrestling schools", but  I'll deal with the PA schools in the EIWA: Lehigh, East Stroudsburg, and Franklin & Marshall

Lehigh is a D-I school (I-AA in football, like Cornell).  No issue there.

East Stroudsburg, like the rest of the PSAC schools (Edinboro, Kutztown, etc.) are D-II.  Mostly, they play in their own conference, so I don't think of them as playing up.   The exception is ESU, but even so, they are not affected by the proposal, since the silliness is a D-III proposal, and wouldn't impact D-II schools.

F&M is a D-III school and an EIWA member, so I think they would be affected.  Maybe they don't offer scholarships, despite competing in D-I, so they've been left of the list because of that?

JH