2004 D2 scholarship reductions?

[bisonguy]

That's higher than I thought it was (76.5, probably 76 scholarships). Using the same 90%, DIAA would be at 56 minimum scholarships. If there was a scholarship minimum put on DIAA(maybe even 50), I could see a need for a "super" DII division of approx. 40 scholarships max, 30 minimum. For the schools in DI struggling with a football budget, there's always DIAAA(no football). There have already been two DII schools that dropped football this year, so it obviously is an option, though not a good one, imo.

[tony]

Hahaha! I don't assume that everything[ you type is about NDSU. If more of us would discard the "waffle speak", a guy might have a chance of picking up on what people are really saying. Sicatoka is not on record as being in support of DI as far as I know. I've heard him go both ways ("no" if its NDSU, "maybe" if its UND) - although he would never sully himself by stating something directly (last time he did that it was to say that he thought college athletics should be scrapped). I'm not sure that he has what it takes to state a position without qualifying to the point of making it meaningless.

Always an optimist, I'll ask him now:

The Sicatoka, if you had to make the call toda, would you say that UND shoud go DI? a) Yes b) No

-----

What makes this interesting in my mind is that I can't see how a guy can say that having the NCC go DI would have been a bad idea at the same time as they want UND to move up.

As for star2city, I'd hate to push him completely over the edge by responding in my typical acerbic manner. He's nearly apoleptic as it is. In my view, UND has been like France and NDSU has been like the USA in their approach to the DI question. In this analogy, star2city would be Saddam - except that he'd have used WMD on NDSU long ago.

[The Sicatoka]

I say go DI for the Frozen Four money. 

Yes, I said that with a laugh, but I was serious. I'm not sure if you folks realize the money in 1997, 2000, and 2001 that UND left on the table by not being full DI, but making those Frozen Fours.

Yes, move up.

But, yes, I'm still afraid that it could well be fiscal suicide. In reality, the other choice (no move) isn't much better. That's the conclusion I've arrived at. It comes down to the question: Is it better to burn out or fade away? Or put another way, die, or die trying?

Like you, tony, I've mellowed to the idea over time. (Remember, you wrote once that you didn't think the idea was a good one for NDSU at first either.) As I've mellowed, I've looked for mellowing from UND. That's why I locked onto that statement by Roger Thomas. That's the first thing that could even remotely be interpreted as mellowing in the official UND position (whether it was intended or not).

The previous problems (money, conference, harsh probationary periods) still remain.

[The Sicatoka]

There have already been two DII schools that dropped football this year, ....

And three D-IAA football programs have dropped since the end of the 2002 season: Fairfield, Canisius, and St. John's (yes, that's St. John's the basketball power). All were members of the MAAC.

Michigan Tech is one. Who's the other DII?

[tony]

S, how could I have missed that!?!

This is what I consider an example of waffle-speak and is also a fair summary of what you said, "I'm afraid that UND moving to DI would be fiscal suicide, that finding a conference will be very difficult, and that the harsh probationary periods are here to stay. In conclusion, UND should go DI."

IMO, the only bet surer that NDSU won't have to wait 13 years for a BB autobid is that scholarships will be cut in DII FB.

But wait, you never got around to saying why UND's triumph in their fight to keep the NCC in DII was such brilliant strategy.

BTW, Mass-Lowell is the other DII school dropping football and that represents one less vote against scholarship reductions. The three in DI-AA were all non-scholarship programs so that's good news for DI-AA too. Michigan Tech, on the other hand, was from one of DII's "power conferences" so that can't be good.

[NDSU grad]

And three D-IAA football programs have dropped since the end of the 2002 season: Fairfield, Canisius, and St. John's (yes, that's St. John's the basketball power). All were members of the MAAC.

Michigan Tech is one. Who's the other DII?

Massachusetts-Lowell

[The Sicatoka]

Oh great waffle-speak detector

What I said was, it's becoming a choice of the less of two evils.

The choice is this:

Go into a situation where you know you'll have money and conference (and probationary period) issues or stay in a situation where you can see it's starting to melt down and be taken down with it. Great choices, eh? Still, I'd choose to not melt down, not fade away. I'd rather die trying (meaning not be able to do the budget) if it comes to that.

Budget still is the primary concern, as well as those others mentioned. Concerns don't go away by me changing my opinion on the situation. They must be in the open and addressed, even if folks don't want to keep hearing them mentioned.

But if you insist that (and my other post) was waffle speak, have at it.

[tony]

Sorry, I was being unfair. You weren't waffling - you stated your position. The list of arguments you supplied against it weren't really waffling because you didn't qualify your "yes" in any way. Keep up the good work.

[tony]

Jim, missed your post. I really believe that there will be some new standards for DI/DI-AA regardless of those BB powers that have underfunded football programs. Most likely they'll say that a school has to either offer a minimum of say 55-63 or none at all - heck, there may be a rule like that already in place.

I can see why having the DII-like dilution of DI would make it more attractive to some schools considering the move though. From my perspective, if DII cuts schollies by 6-10, if DI-AA cuts them by the same amount, it wouldn't bother me as long as they established meaningful standards for DI membership.

[The Sicatoka]

Paddling through the link Jim provided above, the closest thing to D-IAA minimums that I found was the general DI minimums:

20.9.1 Financial Aid Requirements

20.9.1.2 Minimum Awards. A member of Division I shall provide institutional financial assistance that equals one of the following: (Revised: 1/10/91 effective 9/1/94)

( a ) A minimum of 50 percent of the maximum allowable grants in 14 sports, at least seven of which must be women

[D2Football]

If a huge reorganization by the NCAA occurs only in football then it could be necessary to remove the rule requiring all sports to be in the same division. If that were to happen, you could see several other top D2 football teams make a move up while making the smart choice not to try to compete with teams like Kansas and Kentucky in basketball.

[bisonguy]

If a huge reorganization by the NCAA occurs only in football then it could be necessary to remove the rule requiring all sports to be in the same division. If that were to happen, you could see several other top D2 football teams make a move up while making the smart choice not to try to compete with teams like Kansas and Kentucky in basketball.

I believe the NCAA would have to change their bylaws that state a school may play at a higher level in a "minor" sport. That, and the fact there would be many athletes held to a different higher standard(DI eligibility vs. DII), spell that the NCAA will do nothing .

[jimdahl]

It's an interesting idea. The current rules allow you to play out of division in any one sport (excepting only basketball and football). It seems like those exceptions are there because the big schools don't want some small school to declare their basketball program D-I just to get a piece of the pie without actually upgrading their entire athletics program.

However, if you combine the idea of having divisions for sports instead of schools with the idea of hard and fast division limits, it could work. Made up examples:

D-I football: you must have 17,000 average attendance and at least 90% max scholarships

D-I basketball: you must have 5,000 average attendance and at least $1m basketball budget

etc...

Rather than institutions being classified (i.e. UND is D-II), sports would be. UND football could be D-IAA, UND basketball D-II, UND swimming D-I, etc... The sports would then be governed by the rules of their division; football players would have to comply with D-IAA rules, basketball with D-II, and so forth.

Realistically, of course it would be nearly impossible to bring about:

• It would benefit the small schools and D-I legislation tends to be about preserving the status of the big schools.
  
• I also don't think you're going to see anyone rush to abandon multi-sport conferences any time soon, so those schools that are not D-I across all sports would always be the ugly stepchildren.
  
• And then, of course, there's Title IX, you'd have to attach women's programs to men's to ensure that women got the same opportunities at the same level.