Div I Conferences will reject Div II Teams

[SDSUFAN]

Here is an update fresh off the SDSU Collegian Press the campus newspaper at SDSU on the D1 Consideration:

SDSU Home

College Publisher

Private, corporate money could cover DI, officials say

By Justin R. Lessman

SDSU officials pushing for the jump from Division II athletic competition to Division I have thus far touted big crowds, national exposure, high-quality competition and more prestige as reasons for the move being essential.

However, if the move is made, SDSU athletes, students and fans will face, among other repercussions, a required four-year absence from DI post-season play, an 8-year eligibility wait for a chance at the "March Madness" men's basketball tournament, and a significant hike in scholarship dollars.

Not to mention the prospect of scrounging up a cool $2 million to meet projected athletic budget requirements.

SDSU's existing revenues have the athletic budget sitting at just more than $4.1 million.

And, while a typical budget in D-I-AA is around $4.75 million, - not an insurmountable step up for SDSU - the average budget in the nearest D-I-AA league, Big Sky, sits at more than $6.2 million.

That's a $2.1 million budget increase.

The University of South Dakota, another D-II school previously looking at making the move, has an athletic budget of around $3.2 million. However, earlier this fall, Athletic Director Kelly Higgins announced that the Coyotes found a move to DI to be "not feasible."

Despite the postulated difficulty in finding an additional couple million dollars for the required budget upgrade, a recent market analysis done by Conventions, Sports & Leisure, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minn., indicated that, with a move to DI-AA, annual revenues could increase to between $4.7 million and $5.9 million.

An appealing thought.

But where is that initial, get-the-ball-rolling $2 million going to come from?

Dana Dykhouse, SDSU Foundation chairman, said he expected the increased budget dollars to come primarily from two sources: private funding and corporate sponsorships.

"The opportunity for an increase in corporate sponsorships would definitely increase," Dykhouse said. "Information that I have received indicates that SDSU could expand its sponsorship area to a 75-mile radius. That would include the Sioux Falls metropolitan area and would unlock numerous interested corporations."

As for private funding being available when needed, Dykhouse cites the fact that many of the facility improvements made on campus in the last decade to 25 years have been financed through private donors.

"The new Performing Arts Center, the engineering hall addition and now Solberg; these are funded by private donors and, in many cases, the city of Brookings," he said. "When we have wanted to improve facilities, the dollars have been there."

As far as facility improvement requirements, Athletic Director Fred Oien said only two concerns need to be addressed immediately.

"The two we would need to look at right away are a football locker room upgrade and further expansion of the HPER wellness center," he said.

Oien said the locker rooms were designed for 60, and now well over 100 football personnel use them. The upgraded locker rooms will have more room and space for medical and training areas.

In the future, Oien said the university would have to take seriously the prospect of a wellness center as a stand-alone facility, improved concession facilities and landscaping at Coughlin-Alumni, relocation issues with the track, reconstruction of the baseball field, and practice facilities for soccer and softball.

"Regardless of whether or not we move to Division I, these improvements will be done," said Oien.

Donations and sponsorships, coupled with event concession sales and interest earnings on endowments, account for about 25 percent of SDSU's athletic budget.

Approximately 13 percent comes from ticket revenue, and 34 percent stems from state support in the form of salary dollars to coaches who also teach, plus tuition.

The remaining 27 percent or so is generated by student fees.

Currently, SDSU's per-credit student fee is the lowest among the six state universities.

While many expected that to change with a switch to DI, Oien said it would not.

"We will not ask for or use additional student fee money in the immediate future," he said. "With a move, we would still, for a while, be Division II. We shouldn't be asking for fees when other important student programs exist that they could go to. Now, I'm not saying forever. In the future, we will have to evaluate the need for that source."

Oien said this despite a survey conducted last year that showed students would generally not oppose a fee increase.

This surprised both Oien and SA President Dan Hansen.

The survey asked students if they would be willing to see a fee increase of $25 up to $100. A convincing 82 percent surveyed said they would support the $25 increase, while a still strong 64 percent said they would give up the $100 for DI sports.

"That decrease as you went up is expected," Hansen said. "But the numbers were still shockingly high and that's the substantial part of it."

An increased number of athletic scholarships would also add to the bill.

Currently, SDSU gives the equivalent of 96.5 full athletic scholarships that total around $820,000. Oien said the number of scholarships is created mainly by combinations of fractions of scholarships.

A move to DI could increase the number of scholarships offered by at least 70 more across all sports, men and women.

Oien said this increase will required an additional $600,000.

"This (scholarship) money will primarily come from donated dollars or planned giving," Oien said.

Other, less touted costs could also add up.

Throw significant travel costs and staff additions in some sports into the mix, and the bill just keeps getting steeper.

With the prospect of a move very real, Dykhouse said the Foundation is ready to help out however it can.

"The Foundation will support the school whatever decision it makes," he said. "We believe that the benefit to the university is well beyond athletics. It's the prestige of the university and we stand ready to support a decision."

Oien said he believes that SDSU's move to DI is essential and, if approved, will be done most effectively in a gradual manner.

"There will be a transition time," he said. "We will not be at the levels of other schools right away. However, we will try to catch up as quickly as we can to other schools in our conference. Patience is the key and timing is of the essence."

Would you pay more student fees for a bigger union?

No way

If they were only increased slightly

I'd pay quite a bit more

Yes - whatever is needed

I'm not sure

Dana Dykhouse is currently a bank officer in Sioux Falls and president of the SDSU Foundation. He was a football player and was on the 1979 squad that made it to the playoffs. His son is currently in the redshirt class for coach Stieg. I so glad he has spoken as he seems to have some clout in the Sioux Falls business circles.

[star2city]

It takes eigtht years for a team to become eligible for the postseason in basketball.

Point 1: Please show a reference for eight years to gain the men's basketball autobid eligibility. Based on references (Carr report at SDSU website), this is 'eight more ' years after the five years. The playoff eligibility schedule would be as follows:

Transition Year- - - - -Men

[JBB]

The table presented is how I interpret the situation as well. It looks good to me. In year 6 your eligable for an at large bid. That means if you have a deserving team you get a bid. Thats how it is for football and basketball in D2 right now. There are no auto bids.

In the probationry period I would imagine that a team wouldnt compete in any post season conference tournaments designed to single out the conference playoff representatives. It wouldnt make any sense to have them participate.

I dont see any reason to explain the BSC or the Mid Con motivations. There is a lot of posturing going on. This thing is going to play out with a lot of drama and uncertainty.

[The Sicatoka]

I look at that table and a particular sentence comes to mind:

If NCAA rules were to become less mercenary and more educationally rational; ... if the restrictions on schools making the move were made less severe; ...  

Thirteen years. What are "student-athletes" supposed to learn from that?

Of course quoting that part of the sentence wouldn't be complete without quoting this part:

... or if very many NCC schools make the move to D-I; then we could well give it some extra consideration.

I still believe that if SDSU goes, UND may find themselves in a position where the best choice is to move up.

Those quotes came from Dr. Kupchella's Statement on Division I.

(And please remember, Dr. K was requested to publicly state UND's position by a western ND legislator. You don't say "no" to an elected official, especially one that has power over your State funding.)

[tony]

"Star2city is right," he says with a grimace. "JBB is right," he smiles.

As it relates to NDSU, they did NOT put the time frame on the survey they sent out to me, they just said a that NDSU wouldn't be able to compete in national championships for a "period of time." Of course, the 13-year is pretty new and adopted at about the same time surveys were going out. If I can find NCAA sources for everything, I'll post all this information on the bisonville site as FAQs because the non-official sites are so inconsistent.

The conclusion that this rule would make conferences less likely to accept new members is kind of puzzling. Doesn't it mean they can accept new members without worrying about them taking their spot in the BB tournament? What kind of time frame would there have to be for you to think that UND should move up, Star2City?

[JBB]

NDSU petitioned the NCAA on a ruling that would have made the probationary period shorter. It was denied.

Im not surprised to see the colors changing for uendd. That would explain why "the issue" has become invisible. The good Dr. can see that the public relations battle to maintain the status que is losing in ND. Of course it is still raging in SD with the USD folks vigoursly closing ranks with all others that are against the move. SDSU is in a tougher position than NDSU and will have to excercise some very strong and steady leadership to realize the brighter future for their University and the State.

The best thing for NDSU to do is get the clock ticking. 5 years isnt that long. If they were to delay making the move they would actually increase the de facto probationary period by the length of the wait plus 5 years.

[The Sicatoka]

tony:

I know you asked "Stars," but I'd like a swing at an answer too.

The NCAA is supposed to be about "student-athletes." From my view, the NCAA is now more about "The Benjamins" than anything.

Should there be a probationary transition period? Probably. But should it be longer than the traditional period that an undergraduate education takes (four to five years)? No. Why? It's supposed to be about the student-athlete, isn't it?

Let the schools move up. Let them become tourney eligible in three to four years. The big schools won't like it, but they will like this: A school moving up reaps no fiscal rewards from the NCAA (like a piece of the TV money) from the move up (except for actual expenses accrued in NCAA tourney play if applicable) for ten years.

Let the kids play. The probations are all about money.

But there's a bigger problem at work here and I've mentioned it before: The NCAA hasn't kept up with the times.

Moorhead and Crookston now have some resources to fund athletic scholarships. DIII doesn't allow that. What are their options?

NDSU and UNC see DII being diluted by the Moorheads and Crookston (not that I'm picking on them, just using them as examples). They see their only option as moving up. But moving up causes similar effects to the Division I pool.

The problem is that the NCAA hasn't adapted since the Divisions were set up in the early 1970s but athletic department fiscal realities at all levels have radically changed since the 1970s. (Case in point: Old Engelstad Arena at UND cost $2 million to build in 1972. It costs just under $2 million annually to run the hockey program at UND today.)

If I could influence the NCAA some of my ideas would be:

- Let DIII provide scholarships.

- Make real minimums (like support budget minimums, not number of sponsored sports minimums).

- Evaluate an "all sports IAA" level to let the huge schools (with $80 million annual athletic budgets like Ohio State) have a league of their own.

- Maybe re-evaluate this "school" approach to a "sport at the school" approach allowing more than one mens and one womens program to "play up a level."

The NCAA has failed to keep up with the times and has failed its members on this issue. I'm pretty sure both UND and NDSU can agree on this. Where they differ is on what is the best solution and course of action.

[SDSUFAN]

Sicokta:

I agree with all you said above. I think its that March Madness check from CBS that drives all of this. Coming from a family of nine, I learned about sharing. The D1 upper crust are not crazy about sharing revenue and that why we hear 13 years and 8 years for basketball. Its a matter of interpretation. I believe the shortening to eight mentioned in the article is based on the assumption that SDSU would join a conference that already qualifies for a bid to March Madness. As an independant, it is a 13 year wait and I dont think that will be how SDSU comes to D1.

[star2city]

What kind of time frame would there have to be for you to think that UND should move up, Star2City?

Even a time frame of one year would be unacceptable to me if the conference that UND joined was unacceptable. Examples of scenarios in which UND should declare its intention to move up would be:

-The NCAA formally announcing I-AA as a completely separate Division where the NCC moves up together (as discussed by Sicatoka)

-The Missouri Valley Conference offering an invitation to UND (chance: <0.1% today)

-The Horizon League offfering an invitation to UND (chance: <0.01% today)

-The Big Sky dropping West Coast teams and offering invites to UND, NDSU, UNC, SDSU, USD, and one Minnesota school. (chance: <0.1% today) or forming this eight-team conference: UND, NDSU, USD, SDSU, Montana State, Montana, Idaho, and either Idaho State or E. Washington (chance: <0.1% today)

Membership in the Missouri Valley, Horizon, or a reconstituted Big Sky are goals worthy of pursuit, but the odds are badly stacked against admission to any ND school even after the transition. Membership in a Division I conference like the Mid-Continent is definitely not a goal worth pursuing and is actually a step down from the NCC.

Even after a transition period, an invitation from the Big Sky will be difficult. Unless Portland State, N. Arizona, and Sac. State leave the Big Sky, any move by the Montana schools to add former NCC schools will get blocked. The next school they add will probably be Southern Utah (which is why the Mid-Con added Centenary to protect itself). If they do expand east of the Rockies, Northern Colorado would be the first pick because it would offer some Denver media coverage and easier travel.

To obtain membership in the Missouri Valley or Horizon, the following criteria would have to be met.

- Major media market access (> 1 million people) or media attention in a new major media market

- Located within at least an adjoining state of conference's current geography

- Good basketball facilities

- Not infringe on an existing member

[star2city]

There is long-term strategy for a North Dakota school to gain entry to either the Horizon or Missouri Valley mid-major conferences: partner with a Minnesota school.

Both of the Missouri Valley and Horizon conferences crave media attention in the Minneapolis market, as no Div-I mid-major conference has any footprint here. A school like St. Thomas would actually have a good shot at joining a very respectable conference if it so chose. However, a school in Minnesota that I believe very much has its vision set on Division I is Minnesota-Duluth. The campus is going through a major expansion with enrollment expected to be 15,000 later in the decade and it

[star2city]

The conclusion that this rule would make conferences less likely to accept new members is kind of puzzling. Doesn't it mean they can accept new members without worrying about them taking their spot in the BB tournament?  

Adding new conference members all comes down to economics. Adding an ineligible member adds expenses to the conference and adds minimal revenue. Adding an eligible member should on average increases revenue more from the conference tournament. This might be an illustration:

                                                                 Add          Add

Figures in thousand                     Baseline   Ineligible Eligible

                                                              Member   Member

Conference Revenue               4000        4100       4600

Conference Expenses              2000        2300       2300

Net Revenue                           2000        1800        2300

# Schools                                    8              9             9

' Dividend' to Schools               250          200          260

Conferences are very relunctant to add an ineligible member, but will do so if it makes economic sense (Big West adding Cal-Davis to lower travel costs) or if an expansion is needed to ensure the long-term viability of the conference.

Again, if a conference declares that its tournament champion gets its auto-bid, the conference forfeits its autobid if an ineligible team wins the tournament. (I'm attempting to find a reference.)

[purplemavfan]

My brother attended the Mn. State-Mn. Duluth football game back in early September, in Duluth. He talked to a major UMD fan/booster at the game, who said Duluth is having financial problems right now. So the scenario proposed by Star City, although interesting, looks unlikely in the relatively near term at least. Obviously though, a successful UMD in the newly-arranged NCC could increase interest and fund-raising there, and possibly lead to the D-1 scenario in a decade or so, especially if demographic trends develop favorably. Duluth is a sizable community large enough to support such a venue.

[star2city]

My brother attended the Mn. State-Mn. Duluth football game back in early September, in Duluth. He talked to a major UMD fan/booster at the game, who said Duluth is having financial problems right now.

Apparently, the financial problems in the athletic department were not severe enough to keep UMD out of the NCC in 2004. The increased scholarship costs in the NCC for UMD will be significant.

[star2city]

There were two articles in the FORUM today on NDSU President Joseph Chapman. The timing of these articles seems really strange to me, as if they are intended to deflect criticism of Chapman. The owners of the FORUM/WDAY/WDAZ/WDAY-AM are definitely part of the monied establishment of Fargo, which have a Div I NDSU as a primary goal. A few suggestions, and, wham, print articles and media stories with a certain end-goal in mind could appear.

NDSU, state spending to keep Chapman

[url=http://www.in-forum.com/articles/?id=22791] NDSU's fourth-year president says he

[The Sicatoka]

'stars'

If you think NDSU doesn't like the deal UND has with Clear Channel North Dakota, how do you think NDSU likes UND's new Fighting Sioux Sports Network deal.

[star2city]

If you think NDSU doesn't like the deal UND has with Clear Channel North Dakota, how do you think NDSU likes UND's new Fighting Sioux Sports Network deal.

NDSU will probably attempt to put together a similar deal, but, with the current state of the football team, at least in the near future they won't be in a very strong bargaining position. This deal may not be as difficult to replicate, as cable access with Mid-Continent is non-exclusive (or I would presume it to be), and WDAY-TV could provide the feeds.

Forum Communications, through WDAZ, is a party to the Fighting Sioux Sports Network, so certainly it has no pretenses about working with UND if it can turn a buck. But with its extensive media properties in Fargo, it is very much has a vested interest in NDSU's future Div I 'successes'.

[star2city]

Sure enough, the FORUM articles last Sunday on Chapman were timed right before the North Dakota Board of Higher Education meetings in Wahpeton yesterday and today. The Agenda did not seem that controversial, but there are always underlying issues that are never included within an Official Agenda. I wonder how much the Board is reviewing the Div I decision informally.

By the way, the Agenda does include the Boards approval of architect fees for the UND Wellness Center .

From the Bison Insider Message Board, there is this posting:NDSU AD Leadership This is only one opinion, for whatever that's worth, but the pressures from the fans, President Chapman, and the media on the Div I issue, conference affiliation, losing football, and 'tolerance' have got to be tremendous. This would especially be true for someone who is not familiar with North Dakota culture, tradition, and politics.

Just a few more reasons to be thankful to be a Fighting Sioux fan.