Petition against DivIII changes

[vicb]

Originally posted by bigfish
If you cannot even acknowledge that the situation is the exact opposite, how can anyone attempt to discuss this with you?



Really, I am not trying to be a wise ***** about this but I agree with westerburg on this. I really have not head a good reason in my mind that makes a compelling case for this particular rule. You can still play Div I but you can't give scholarships in your Div I sport. That IMHO is what I am having trouble with.

To Quote westerburg: "Everything I have heard is not a compelling reason. They have just brought up vague notions of "unfair benefits" and "tainting the D-III philosophy" --- charges which have no basis in fact or reality.

So, now these 12 programs will be subjected to the whims of this mass of D-III - who have some misguided notion that they are making noble reforms -- and who clearly haven't thought this one through, nor understand the historical ramifications. "

No truer words IMHO have been spoken.

[Chuck_N]

Originally posted by westerburg
... and it is being defended by 2 people on this board...

Wasn't there... a 3rd person ...the guy who... wrote like... this and made... no sense... something munnie... what happened to... him.chuck


PS- The petition link (http://www.petitiononline.com/NCAAD3/petition.html )

[d3follower]

Originally posted by vicb
. . .The ******er is, go ahead and play Div I if you want but you can't give scholarships, a right that every Div I school has when you play a Div I sport. I'd love to get this ruling infront of any judge in the country and see if it would stand up. . .


I doubt that any judge would this argument persuasive in view of the fact that only 4 of the 12 D1 ECAC schools even offer athletic scholarships. The judge would probably have a difficult time figuring out how you even had the nerve to make such an argument and then the judge would probably conclude that the only proper response is to revoke Clarkson's "priviledge" to grant college degrees . . .

[Red Cloud]

Originally posted by d3follower
As long as RPI, CC, SLU, and Clarkson insist on staying in D3, they will continue to be subject to D3 rules, including those pertaining to scholarships. And they will be exempted from those rules only of they make a compelling case to the powers-that-be in D3. Typing in caps will not change reality and nor will claims of entitlement. . Except for the fact that they are D-I schools... in this sport. It's completely and utterly separate from D-III in every way, shape, and form.

There are NCAA rules that say that a school cannot be hamstrung into one single division for every single sport (edit: there's no direct rule, but there's no rule forcing it). Hence these 8 schools that are D-III in most of their sports are D-I in one sport. It happens in D-II as well. Just look at Merrimack, North Dakota, Ferris State, etc. Gonna find ways to penalize them? "Well, they're D-II, they shouldn't be trying to put out teams that can compete at the D-I level." Sorta sounds like the same rationale you're using above.

Honestly, what is your concern about scholarships? Are they evil? Do they scare your kids or your cat? It must be something like that, because we can tell by looking at RPI, Clarkson, St. Lawrence, and Johns Hopkins that it's clearly not an academic integrity problem.

I doubt that any judge would this argument persuasive in view of the fact that only 4 of the 12 D1 ECAC schools even offer athletic scholarships. The judge would probably have a difficult time figuring out how you even had the nerve to make such an argument and then the judge would probably conclude that the only proper response is to revoke Clarkson's "priviledge" to grant college degrees . . . Any credibility you may have had went down the tubes with this insane quote. You really seem to be the type of person that would benefit from a D4.

Try this structure on for size:
D1 - Large schools with committment to excellence in athletics, includes smaller schools with tradition of top-tier competition.
D2 - A mix of smaller schools with committment to excellence in athletics and those with less of a committment than D1 schools.
D3 - Small schools with a committment to excellence in athletics while maintaining a full committment to excellence in academics.
D4 - Small schools with a committment to excellence in academics wishing to offer students opportunity to compete in intercollegiate athletics.

[Sejast]

Originally posted by d3follower
I doubt that any judge would this argument persuasive in view of the fact that only 4 of the 12 D1 ECAC schools even offer athletic scholarships. The judge would probably have a difficult time figuring out how you even had the nerve to make such an argument and then the judge would probably conclude that the only proper response is to revoke Clarkson's "priviledge" to grant college degrees . . .

Actually (and forgive me because I can't remeber the name of a particular case), but if I recall corectly the judge would most likely say, "there's nothing unconstitutional about this organization trying to set this kind of rule for its members. The rule doesn't affect the members in an unconstitutional way, or remove their ability to participate through other means." The judge would then say that because of this the courts do not have any jurisdiction over the decisions of the organization and throw the case out. There have been cases like that, and like I said i can't remember a name and flaming me won't help because my sport law text is in a box somewhere, and this has been the response of the courts in the past.

[d3follower]

Originally posted by RPIRED
Except for the fact that they are D-I schools... in this sport. It's completely and utterly separate from D-III in every way, shape, and form. . . .

Get a grip on reality. Your school is a D3 school and subject to whatever rules D3 may establish governing such matters as scholarships and playing up. . . That's life.

[Ralph Baer]

Originally posted by d3follower
Get a grip on reality. Your school is a D3 school and subject to whatever rules D3 may establish governing such matters as scholarships and playing up. . . That's life. Clearly, the affected schools are subject to whatever rules NCAA D-III comes up with. That's the reason that all of us are concerned about it. However, it isn't clear to me that the NCAA should allow D-III to have any jurisdiction over the schools in question when they play up. Thirty years ago, the NCAA allowed schools to play up in one sport and this was accepted. Now the NCAA D-III authorities are attempting to put constraints on this. That doesn't wash with me.

[bigfish]

Originally posted by Ralph Baer
Clearly, the affected schools are subject to whatever rules NCAA D-III comes up with. That's the reason that all of us are concerned about it. However, it isn't clear to me that the NCAA should allow D-III to have any jurisdiction over the schools in question when they play up. Thirty years ago, the NCAA allowed schools to play up in one sport and this was accepted. Now the NCAA D-III authorities are attempting to put constraints on this. That doesn't wash with me.
Ralph,
In all sincerity, just as all of you seem to 'lose' me when I say things that seem both clear and dead on to me, I have never grasped this 'argument'.

You were 'fine' when playing up and scholarships for these schools were allowed BY DIII, correct? But now, when DIII is considering changes you don't like, they should not have jurisdiction? NTM the fact, often repeated here, that all three ECAC schools WANT to be DIII and EMBRACE the DIII philosophy.

:confused: :confused:

[Ralph Baer]

Bigfish, You have a point that perhaps the schools in question should have squawked when D-III was allowed to make any rules for them playing up -- but they didn't, probably because the rules grandfathered them. However, at the moment the problem is to somehow defeat this proposal. There are several ways it could be done.

The RPI alumni website suggests that we contact Myles Brand, RPI '64, http://www.alumni.rpi.edu/ . He is probably not in a position to twist D-III arms, but he could say that this is not D-III's concern. At least that is my opinion.

I still think that there are a lot of things wrong with college athletics incuding D-III sports, but this is not one of them, and even if it were one of them, it only affects 12 schools. I really don't buy the argument that it enhances these schools in other sports. I would think to the contrary that athletes would be less likely to attend these schools in other sports because they are perceived as one-sport schools.

[vicb]

Originally posted by Sejast
There have been cases like that, and like I said i can't remember a name and flaming me won't help because my sport law text is in a box somewhere, and this has been the response of the courts in the past.

I have not flamed anyone on this argument one way or the other :) . I still think if this got to court (and it won't I believe) some good lawyer would be able to make a case that would get the no scholarship part thrown out.

Div I members have the right to scholarships

Div II members who play in Div I have the right to scholarships

Div III members who play in Div I can't have scholarship rights??????

[jmh]

Originally posted by d3follower
I doubt that any judge would this argument persuasive in view of the fact that only 4 of the 12 D1 ECAC schools even offer athletic scholarships. The 8 of 12 ECAC D1 schools that do not offer scholarships do so because they CHOOSE not to offer scholarships, not because of any reason relating to the policies of DI, DIII, the NCAA, or the ECAC. Your point here isn't relevant at all.

[Jon]

Sarcasm alert!
Originally posted by jmh
The 8 of 12 ECAC D1 schools that do not offer scholarships do so because they CHOOSE not to offer scholarships, not because of any reason relating to the policies of DI, DIII, the NCAA, or the ECAC. Your point here isn't relevant at all.

No, your point is the one that's not relevent. What you don't seem to understand is that entrance into a DIII program is like a prison sentence where they can retroactively punish for no reason. Its crucial to the fair and balanced, neigh! utopian landscape on DIII that those insidious nests of iniquity - that foul, massive horde of 12 schools!- be brought into the DIII fold full time. The glorious people's revolution of DIII will restore full power to the proletariat schools (whether they care or not) inorder to prevent all those dynasties that the Play up infidels have perpetrated in other sports. Typing in caps will not change this! ;)
Tradition! Fie, fie on tradition! When this veritable Magna Carta of the the 21st century passes, the first act will be to restore the 85' DI National Championship to its true owners in the RI area. :D

[Ralph Baer]

Originally posted by Jon
Tradition! Fie, fie on tradition! When this veritable Magna Carta of the the 21st century passes, the first act will be to restore the 85' DI National Championship to its true owners in the RI area. :D I don't recall Brom having a good team back then. ;)

[joecct77]

Inside College Hockey posted this article on how to get the proposal fixed.

http://www.insidecollegehockey.com/7Archives/Features/reform_0146.htm

It's a good read.

[moe24]

Originally posted by cct2div3
Inside College Hockey posted this article on how to get the proposal fixed.

http://www.insidecollegehockey.com/7Archives/Features/reform_0146.htm

It's a good read. That is a great read, and a very well thought out article. I just hope all the efforts that people are going through don't fall on deaf ears.

[bigfish]

Originally posted by Moe24
That is a great read, and a very well thought out article. I just hope all the efforts that people are going through don't fall on deaf ears.
Huh? Did you say something?;)

[moe24]

Originally posted by bigfish
Huh? Did you say something?;) Hopefully the people who will be voting listen better. :D

BTW, I love your location. That was a great song.

[bigfish]

Originally posted by Moe24
Hopefully the people who will be voting listen better. :D

BTW, I love your location. That was a great song.
thanks, yes it was
some nice jazz cds from you in the cafe thread....

[moe24]

Originally posted by bigfish
thanks, yes it was
some nice jazz cds from you in the cafe thread.... I have over 500 jazz CDs. I just listed the first few on my rack.

[bigfish]

I only have about 150

I do however, have my Mom's LP collection of about 250,
and will get someday my Dad's, though I want him to live forever:) , collection of 2,000 + LPs and maybe 800 cds....