If we create all these new Divisions, then titles won't mean anything. It
is like what is happening in high school sports in Minnesota. We have six
classes of football and four classes in boys and girls basketball. As the
saying goes, lets give everyone a trophy at the beginning of the year and
call it all good and everyone goes home happy.
Troy Mills
Bemidji State (96)
NAIA Champs 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1973, 1979, 1980
NCAA III Champs 1986
NCAA II Champs 1984, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1997
NCAA I Champs ????
----------
From: Adam Wodon <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Small Schools in D-I Sports.
Date: Monday, June 29, 1998 8:05 PM
> Who am I to judge, you ask? I'm not judging, I'm
> simply expressing my
> opinion that these programs are wasting their time and
> energy pretending
> that they're big-time schools. I have the right to my
> own opinion, just
> as you do. Don't get all huffy about it.
That's fine if you express as opinion, and not as a demand that
something be done about it.
> > Anyway -- you miss the big picture. A program is D-1 for
many, many
> > reasons other than whether their football or basketball team
is doing
> > well. Maybe they do well in other sports, or maybe there are
other
> > factors.
>
> Care to rephrase this? I don't understand what you meant.
I think Eeyore took care of this.
> > There are 300 D-I basketball teams (approx.) -- There are
about 500
> > (rough approx.) D-III basketball teams. Football has a
similar ratio.
> > You dump all the bad D-I football teams down to D-III and then
what,
> > exactly???
>
> Again, you're putting words in my mouth. Like I said below,
Football has
> a D-IAA that helps eliminate some of the absurdities of D-I
Basketball.
> Of course you're going to have a large number of teams that, for
one
> reason or another, can't put together a winning program. I just
think
> that D-I Basketball has gotten absurd.
The point is, what about all the absurdities at D-III ... not to
mention, there's plenty of absurdities, as you call them, at D-I -
and again I'll mention Temple and Rutgers, only because they so
quickly come to mind.
> There is a big difference between programs that are bad
> because of inept management and programs that are bad because
they just
> don't have the resources to compete at the D-I level. I'm
talking
> about programs that are D-I who have never had and/or never will
have the
> resources to be competitive in any way, shape, or form.
What's the difference if these teams play in a D-I conference or a
D-IAA conference? Are you talking conferences as a whole, or
teams within a conference? Either way, these teams are going to
be somewhere, so who cares if their record is better at a lower
level.
I just don't see what's wrong with having "minor" D-I conferences.
Why does it matter that they'll never win? St. John's has never
won the NCAA basketball tournament, and they're considered an
all-time top program (not anymore). But I got a huge thrill out
of the times they won the Big East Tournament. Even many good
programs won't win. So there better be something else to play for
than the NCAA title.
Under your scenario, you make another division, and poof, there's
another champion.
OK -- now what? I'm not putting words in your mouth, but I'm
just saying, that in order to give a satisfactory amount of teams
a chance to win every year, you'd need 150 different
classifications.
Therefore, since that won't happen -- 3 divisions, 4 divisions -
what's the difference?
> Are you saying that D-I Football has just as many pretenders
> percentage-wise as D-I Basketball? Sorry, I'm not
> buying it. Show me the
> evidence.
Look at the standings. How many college football teams have ever
won, or come close to winning a national championship? Now count
the same in basketball. Now take the percentage. I bet hoops
wins.
> Let me explain this one last time (I hope!): I can
> live with various strengths of conferences in any NC$$ Division.
I can
> accept the fact that some programs are bad year-in and year-out.
> But I also think that some
> level of common sense should prevail as well. And
> IMHO, D-I Basketball crossed that ambiguous line a long time
ago.
> It's like if Major League
> Baseball decided to expand their ranks to include A,
> AA, and AAA teams and
> conferences.
If that were the case, the teams that are now in Single-A would
still get an incredible thrill out of winning their Division -- so
in essence, it's the same thing.
AW
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
|
