Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
Author Message
teamvsn Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 217
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 13
I Root For: NAIA
Location:
Post: #261
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
Oh, I could give you lots of them that haven't turned out well for the transitioning team. What I don't have - and you don't either - is documentation of what the ultimate motivation of each of those moves were.
08-05-2017 10:38 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #262
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
Not turning out well does not prove that the decision wasn't made in the school's best interest at the time.

The claim has no proof
08-05-2017 11:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,637
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 84
I Root For: tOSU SJSU
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #263
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
(08-05-2017 05:23 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If the decision was made to move up, then that decision was in the school's best interest, by definition. Otherwise the move would not have been made.

You do realize that is circular argument? A major logic fallacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning



"When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal" - Richard Nixon (from the David Frost interviews)
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2017 12:04 AM by Stugray2.)
08-06-2017 12:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AZcats Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 386
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation: 28
I Root For: stAte, af, zona
Location: Pike's Peak
Post: #264
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
On-field performance doesn't determine if a move up was in the school's best interest. Hypothetical example: One Jesuit school remains in NAIA, it wants to move to NCAA to strengthen its association with all other Jesuit schools. Seeking an association with like-minded schools in all departments could be one factor. There are many determining factors that lead to the decision to move up and only that school can judge what is in its best interest and whether it turned out well.
08-06-2017 12:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,637
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 84
I Root For: tOSU SJSU
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #265
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
90% are driven not by your Jesuit schools seeking similar affiliations. Seattle University's move up and subsequent wandering in D-I is the onlt example that fits your description. But they were non-selective and thus the aimless wandering. UCSD is a more focused desire for similar affiliations and unless they get them they wont move up. (Further students voted to fully self fund the cost of moving up). So far they don;t have the invite they seek, so they remain in D-II.

But in general I think Private and Public schools are two different kettles of fish. I could care less what SU or LU does, they are private, and they do not answer to tax payers, nor should they. If they are willing to open their wallets or raid their pulpit funds, so be it, their choice. Public schools are the ones I care about, and the ones we are talking about mostly when we concern the politics of professionals.

For the public schools the responsibility goes beyond the institution, and includes the State, and the tax payers and their education dollars. That is a higher level of responsibility. But by and large that is ignored in favor of the personal advantage. This is where the scrutiny belongs. Was the due diligence truly done with prudence or is euphoria overtaking, sending the school into a money pit that tax payers will be bailing out for many years to come?

Recognizing the self-serving interests of the athletic department and their media cheerleaders as apart from the University and the tax payer interests is an imperative in understanding how these things happen and whether they make sense.

I again give you the Eastern Michigan example. Tax payers are funding 30:1 ratio. And the school is not growing enrollment. Explain how this is fiasco is in the school's interest ($1000 a year per student against the student body wishes).
08-06-2017 01:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
teamvsn Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 217
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 13
I Root For: NAIA
Location:
Post: #266
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
I believe AZCats is referring to Loyola New Orleans. I think Spring Hill is Jesuit too? So they may be back, and Loyola won't be the only ones left.

I'll compile a list of obviously bad transitions tomorrow.
08-06-2017 01:36 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AZcats Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 386
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation: 28
I Root For: stAte, af, zona
Location: Pike's Peak
Post: #267
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
(08-06-2017 01:36 AM)teamvsn Wrote:  I believe AZCats is referring to Loyola New Orleans. I think Spring Hill is Jesuit too? So they may be back, and Loyola won't be the only ones left.

I'll compile a list of obviously bad transitions tomorrow.

That is what I was thinking about but it can be changed, replace Jesuit with any school's mission. I'm also not specifically meaning NAIA-to-NCAA moves. Truman State changed conferences because the MIAA was shifting away from them geographically so if this change saved them travel costs they were successful in doing what was in the school's best interest. Only the school can judge whether it was successful in doing what was in the school's best interest based on the reason for the change.
08-06-2017 09:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #268
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
(08-06-2017 12:00 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  You do realize that is circular argument?

It's not in the slightest. Neither you nor teamsvn have even attempted to lay out a definition or criteria that could be used to even judge how a decision may or may not be in a school's best interests.


(08-06-2017 01:01 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  I could care less what SU or LU does, they are private, and they do not answer to tax payers, nor should they.

Whoops -- completely wrong here.

Ever hear of FAFSA? It basically means that near 100% of SU and LU undergrad students are receiving grants or loans that are subsidized by federal taxes.

(08-06-2017 01:01 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  I again give you the Eastern Michigan example.

IE, a red herring, to distract away from what the discussion was.

The discussion was about making decisions, and if those decisions were in the school's best interest, at the time the decision was made. When was the decision made that Eastern Michigan would have FBS football?? Well, they've been in the MAC conference since 1971 ....
08-06-2017 02:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
teamvsn Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 217
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 13
I Root For: NAIA
Location:
Post: #269
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
(08-06-2017 02:12 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-06-2017 12:00 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  You do realize that is circular argument?

It's not in the slightest. Neither you nor teamsvn have even attempted to lay out a definition or criteria that could be used to even judge how a decision may or may not be in a school's best interests.


OK, so maybe I can save the effort of compiling an exhaustive list with details of what didn't work out by pointing out that I HAVE supplied a list of reasons schools make the move (a list from which Stugray2 quoted one item). The list is on this post:
http://csnbbs.com/thread-793168-post-144...id14451585

In many of the instances I'd cite, reality doesn't match up with the rationale, suggesting that either it wasn't the real rationale or the feasibility of the rationale working out favorably was poor.
08-06-2017 04:38 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #270
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
(08-06-2017 04:38 PM)teamvsn Wrote:  reality doesn't match up with the rationale, suggesting that either it wasn't the real rationale or the feasibility of the rationale working out favorably was poor.

Post #262.

You can't prove the thing you're trying to prove by assuming it is true in the first place and then declaring victory.
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2017 05:46 PM by MplsBison.)
08-06-2017 05:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
teamvsn Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 217
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 13
I Root For: NAIA
Location:
Post: #271
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
Briefly, some of the more obvious ones:

Lambuth University: This was a financially struggling small school whose administrators somehow believed that enrollment would explode if they were in the NCAA. Instead, it was likely that the additional costs of going through the membership process finished them off, or at least hastened their demise.

William Jewell: Already admitting that they are a failure in D2 by evaluating reclassifying to D3.

Malone: Considered reclassifying to D3 even before Jewell did. Since then, they've joined a solidified G-MAC instead of D3 or NAIA, and this seems a good move as far as it goes, but really they won't be any more competitive at the national level than in the last few years, but it DOES give them a shot at conference championships. Nevertheless, there's no denying that they are less able to compete in D2 than they thought they were.

Rogers State: Seems to be having trouble affording the costs of being D2. And one of their rationales for going D2 was lower costs.
http://www.claremoreprogress.com/sports/...b5e2c.html

Fresno Pacific: I know a lot of people at this school and there was a lot of drama and subterfuge involved with building support for a D2 move, including claims that they HAD to move because the GSAC and NAIA were collapsing. I met a faculty member last year who still was under this impression. And again, lower costs were one of the claimed advantages of going D2. But they barely survived the membership process, haven't been competitive, and the school is running deficits that are roughly equal to the extra money they need to spend on D2 athletics (~$2m).

Holy Names: Many problems getting through the membership process, severely uncompetitive.

I'll continue this later as I have to be somewhere. But one thing that struck me while looking at the history is how few of the leaders are still around. Many either were fired or got other jobs before the results were known.
08-06-2017 05:39 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
teamvsn Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 217
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 13
I Root For: NAIA
Location:
Post: #272
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
(08-06-2017 05:30 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Post #262.

You can't prove the thing you're trying to prove by assuming it is true in the first place and then declaring victory.

YOu said I provided no criteria. I just showed you I had.
08-06-2017 05:40 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #273
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
(08-06-2017 05:40 PM)teamvsn Wrote:  YOu said I provided no criteria. I just showed you I had.

But at the end of the post you then went on to make a completely unfounded claim, as if it were fact.

I've updated my post to quote just that section of your post.
08-06-2017 05:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #274
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
(08-06-2017 05:39 PM)teamvsn Wrote:  But one thing that struck me while looking at the history is how few of the leaders are still around. Many either were fired or got other jobs before the results were known.

As they should be ... if you fail to deliver, you own that failure. That's part of the job of being at the top. No other way to say it.


What you haven't proven, in the slightest, and which none of the examples you cite prove, is the claim that the president and board at each institution didn't make the decision that was in the school's best interest, at the time of the decision. Not being able to perfectly predict the future is not tantamount to not making decisions in the school's best interests.
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2017 05:51 PM by MplsBison.)
08-06-2017 05:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AZcats Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 386
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation: 28
I Root For: stAte, af, zona
Location: Pike's Peak
Post: #275
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
(08-06-2017 05:39 PM)teamvsn Wrote:  Briefly, some of the more obvious ones:

Lambuth University: This was a financially struggling small school whose administrators somehow believed that enrollment would explode if they were in the NCAA. Instead, it was likely that the additional costs of going through the membership process finished them off, or at least hastened their demise.

William Jewell: Already admitting that they are a failure in D2 by evaluating reclassifying to D3.

Malone: Considered reclassifying to D3 even before Jewell did. Since then, they've joined a solidified G-MAC instead of D3 or NAIA, and this seems a good move as far as it goes, but really they won't be any more competitive at the national level than in the last few years, but it DOES give them a shot at conference championships. Nevertheless, there's no denying that they are less able to compete in D2 than they thought they were.

Rogers State: Seems to be having trouble affording the costs of being D2. And one of their rationales for going D2 was lower costs.
http://www.claremoreprogress.com/sports/...b5e2c.html

Fresno Pacific: I know a lot of people at this school and there was a lot of drama and subterfuge involved with building support for a D2 move, including claims that they HAD to move because the GSAC and NAIA were collapsing. I met a faculty member last year who still was under this impression. And again, lower costs were one of the claimed advantages of going D2. But they barely survived the membership process, haven't been competitive, and the school is running deficits that are roughly equal to the extra money they need to spend on D2 athletics (~$2m).

Holy Names: Many problems getting through the membership process, severely uncompetitive.

I'll continue this later as I have to be somewhere. But one thing that struck me while looking at the history is how few of the leaders are still around. Many either were fired or got other jobs before the results were known.

Lambuth was already facing financial crisis. In the best interest of the school they made an attempt to get the school more exposure by using athletics in a move to D2. It actually worked to some degree, I had never heard of Lambuth until Arkansas Tech played them, but it was likely already a case of "too little too late". What happened here was probably how it was going to turn out anyway regardless of an attempted move up.

William Jewell to D3 is believed to be message board trolling. Unless there is an actual news article from the school to disprove this, it will stay in the fake news section.

Malone had the best interest of the school in mind when they decided to go D2 to stay with its NAIA conference mates. It took some time but they are now reuniting in the G-MAC. In this respect it did turn out well, they have also made at least one national NCAA appearance representing the GLIAC.

A 7-year old link is provided that shows Rogers State was looking to go D2 which included the reasons it would be in the best interest of the school but nothing is provided to show their current status. Rogers State might be doing some belt-tightening, along with all other schools in the state, right now due to the Oklahoma economy so nothing has been shown that says things haven't turned out well for them.

Fresno Pacific and Holy Names had a difficult transition. So have other schools. Did they have the best interest of the school in mind to move up, they would say "yes". How things turned out for them would depend on the reasons for the move up and they are the only ones who can judge the results. On-field performance is not the determining factor for how things turned out.

You say they did not have the best interest of the school in mind when the move up hasn't gone well and that's your opinion. I want to see an announcement by the school giving the reasons for the move up and the results of their evaluation of how it turned out.
08-07-2017 01:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
teamvsn Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 217
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 13
I Root For: NAIA
Location:
Post: #276
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
I have evidence on Jewell, will post tomorrow. Rogers was factually incorrect about D2 having lower costs. FPUs propaganda about the NAIA and GSAC suggests that they didn't think their other reasons were persuasive.
08-07-2017 01:17 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #277
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
Regardless, it is becoming more and more clear that teamvsn has conflated two completely different concepts: A) making a decision that wasn't in the school's best interest at the time of the decision, and B) a decision that simply didn't work out as well as what was intended by the decision makers.

B is far, far, FAR more innocent than the practically criminal accusation of A, which in itself is almost impossible to prove. You would need a secret tape recording of a president talking to a board member saying something like "well, you and I both know that this decision isn't in the best interest of the school, but it sure is going to line our pockets with donor money that we're going to skim off the top!"
08-07-2017 10:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
teamvsn Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 217
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 13
I Root For: NAIA
Location:
Post: #278
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
My source is identical to this one:
http://www.d2messageboard.com/showthread...ost2053940

You misunderstood my "self interest" motivation. It's not skimming; this is non-elite athletics and there's not that kind of money to be had. It's the prospect of having the NCAA stamp of approval on your resume, that allows easier entrance to better NCAA jobs, attendance at NCAA conventions, networking with other NCAA professionals. This runs from trainers through coaches and administrators all the way to the Presidents Council. Getting hired for a head D1 job straight from an NAIA school is practically unheard of in the modern world. You have to be some level of NCAA to start with. The easiest way for one of these professionals is to be on staff at an NAIA school making the transition. It's very good for the professionals. Not so much for many of the schools they work for.

I don't think I've conflated anything. Certainly there are times when things don't work out as well as expected, but that's not the scenario I am referring to. I am referring to, basically, 1) incompetence and 2) self interest in disregard of what's best for the institution. Short of a legal trial or public confession, there's no way to tell which one is which in a given situation where one or the other is suspected. Two examples I cited earlier:

Rogers State: They publicly cited that the NCAA could be cheaper as a reason to go . I've looked through https://ope.ed.gov/athletics many times getting an idea of what the different costs are between the NCAA and NAIA and have found none where the NCAA was significantly cheaper, and tons where they are very significantly higher. If you found one that was cheaper, it would probably be because they dropped sports, not because they changed affiliation. https://ope.ed.gov/ is publicly available. Did they not bother to look what happened to other programs (incompetence)? Or did they know and ignore it (self interest)? We'll probably never know. The reality is that their budget has managed to stay flat since their transition, no doubt restrained by Oklahoma's fiscal situation, and have been mostly uncompetitive in their conference. They were very competitive in the Sooner conference before they started their transition. The statement that they would save money is false, and predictably false given the publicly available data.

Fresno Pacific: As I mentioned, there was a lot of deception involved with their campaign to go D2. They told faculty & staff that the GSAC and the NAIA wouldn't be around in 5 years, so they had to go "now". They also claimed that money would be saved. "Someone" engineered the campaign with a lot of anonymous buzz about going D2 that couldn't be pinned down. I asked the chair of the Board of Trustees myself if there was something to it, and he said "never in my lifetime" would they go D2. Yet it happened. After the transition, a similar anonymous campaign was launched around starting a softball team; it was discovered that it was engineered by the AD, who was promptly fired. You can conclude what you want about who was running the D2 campaign.

None of this is surprising for private schools. Yes, the ultimate decision makers are the president and board of trustees. But when a president's AD lobbies strongly favoring a membership transition, to deny it is a vote on non-confidence. It's the same way between the Trustees and the President; they hired him to do a job, and if he says they should go NCAA they're going to let him do his job, and hopefully hold him accountable later. Most of the trustees aren't going to be athletically inclined, and not be familiar with the NAIA brand why it's good for them. They DO often like being associated with the NCAA disc though. If it doesn't work out, the damage is done and it's doubly hard to convince them to go back very soon. It's an admission of failure many aren't willing to make so blatantly.

So yes, it's the president and trustees who make the decision, but it really comes down to the AD in many cases. And he and his staff's careers will get a boost by being NCAA. They might be long gone by the time anyone knows the full consequences for the school.
08-07-2017 06:26 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rube Dali Online
2nd String
*

Posts: 452
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 12
I Root For: UST, BSU, Minn
Location: Maplewood, MN
Post: #279
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
Lone Star Conference steals 8 Heartland Conference members for 2019:

http://www.lonestarconference.org/news/2...83017.aspx

Note: Newman University has no home for next season.
(This post was last modified: 08-30-2017 03:41 PM by Rube Dali.)
08-30-2017 12:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,802
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 114
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #280
RE: D-II/D-III/NAIA movement
(08-30-2017 12:44 PM)Rube Dali Wrote:  Lone Star Conference steals 8 Heartland Conference members for next season:

http://www.lonestarconference.org/news/2...83017.aspx

Note: Newman University has no home for next season.


Why adding schools unless you know somebody is leaving? We know several schools from Lone Star wanted D1.
08-30-2017 01:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.