Petition against DivIII changes

[RSTuthill]

Believe it or not, Vicb, I do have a life outside of message boards. How many pages of postings does this thread have? You think that I am going to read them all?

Nope. I am just happy that others thought of this before me. Thanks for the link, but I don't allow ActiveX scripts to run on my machine.

[Ralph Baer]

Dick,

Actually, most of that discussion is here: http://board.uscho.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28399

[vicb]

Originally posted by RSTuthill
Believe it or not, Vicb, I do have a life outside of message boards.

Really???? :)

[chip5]

Following <a href="http://www.uscho.com/news/2003/08/14_006856.php">Adam Wodon's lead</a>, I wrote <a href="http://jatblog.blogspot.com/2003_08_01_jatblog_archive.html#106095145912878936 ">a letter</a> to my DIII alma mater (Washington University) president and cc'd the AD. I'm not going to post the entire replies, but the AD shared Adam's (and mine) concern that eliminating scholarships at a DI level would effectively eliminate the DI program, which is inconsistent with the grandfather clause:
<i>I believe taking away the athletic scholarship opportunity is as severe as
eliminating the "play-up/Division I option" for those classified in D3
...can you imagine Johns Hopkins maintaining a Division I schedule in
lacrosse, much less competing for a national championship year after year?

It's a small group of institutions that are involved...so it's not an issue
that impacts all of Division III...therefore I hope the majority of the
Division III voters will not take the "athletic scholarship" option away.

The Presidents Council is a very influential group and many votes are in the
"pocket" of the voting delegates prior to their arrival at the NCAA
Convention....hopefully the 12 institutions with multiclassification status
will be able to generate support for their cause.</i>

This reply gave me confidence that CC, SLU, RPI, and Clarkson had nothing to worry about; the actions of alumni, the petition, and common sense could win out. But then I got a response from the chancellor of Wash U:

<i>As you know, we do not have an institutional
stake in this. Frankly, I regret that Johns Hopkins, in particular, has
the Div I sport...I think that was a factor in their dropping out of the
UAA. Their decision is adverse to us, other members of the UAA, and, most
important, to their students. Further, it is my view that athletic
scholarships are not a wise an investment of precious financial aid
resources needed to support aspiring students.</i>

Chancellor Mark Wrighton, <a href="http://www.wustl.edu/wrighton/">an incredibly intelligent man</a>, is apparently in strong disagreement with his own AD based, it appears, on personal fealings of resentment regarding a decision by Johns Hopkins regarding their athletic program.
I am now much less confident that an amendment to kill this proposal will make it through.
But, all said, this is just one DIII school. And maybe the AD will convince the chancellor to change his mind. Anyone else get responses?

[Rolevio]

I am pretty suprised that the Chancellor is blaming John Hopkins for the decline in the UAA. I am not sure about most sports, but in football, the UAA is an incredibally weak conference with only 4 members remaining. The last one to leave was the University of Rochester which had dual membership in the UAA and UCAA, but was forced to pick one when the UCAA decided to expand by inviting Coast Guard, King's Point, WPI and Springfield. If he is blaming things on Hopkins, he might as well be blaming the UCAA schools which include Clarkson, SLU, RPI, Hobart, and Union.

[bigfish]

Originally posted by chip5

were both parties aware you intended to post sections of their responses on an Internet Bulletin Board?

[RSTuthill]

Bigfish, it really makes no difference unless he specifically requested confidentiality and was granted it prior to the letter.

I love the second letter:

"As you know, we do not have an institutional stake in this."

Yeah, sure ... Wrightman then goes on to say precisely the opposite and in fact that he harbors ill will towards Hopkins because they had a stake in this.

Gotta read critically, folks. The AD is saying he thinks this is a done deal because they counted votes before they recommended the rule to the full body. This will be an uphill fight.

[d3follower]

Originally posted by Jon
D3- So now your argument has shifted from the laughable "fair and balanced" to the idea that your side is unstoppable... :rolleyes: I see...

I have no idea whether "my side" is "unstoppable" (there's ample precedent for the D3 membership rejecting recommendations by the presidents' council) but I do know that the burden is on you and your allies to make your case. But when your case consists primarily of ad hominem and emotional attacks against anyone who questions the appropriateness of D3 institutions granting athletic scholarships, you have much ground to cover if you hope to make your case . .

[Ralph Baer]

Originally posted by d3follower
I have no idea whether "my side" is "unstoppable" (there's ample precedent for the D3 membership rejecting recommendations by the presidents' council) but I do know that the burden is on you and your allies to make your case. But when your case consists primarily of ad hominem and emotional attacks against anyone who questions the appropriateness of D3 institutions granting athletic scholarships, you have much ground to cover if you hope to make your case . . The ad hominem attacks have gone both ways.

[vicb]

Originally posted by d3follower
........ad hominem and emotional attacks against anyone who questions the appropriateness of D3 institutions granting athletic scholarships, ....

Ad hominem, the scholarships are for D1 sports, not D3 sports. Big difference IMHO. Ad hominem, the legislation still allows them to play up in D1, therefore ad hominem they should be allowed to follow D1 scholarships rules if they choose.

As for the Wash U Chancellor's comment Their decision is adverse to us, other members of the UAA, and, most important, to their students I'd really like to hear his explaination as to how Hopkins decisions regarding playing in Div 1 lacrosse and giving athletic scholarships is adverse to their students.

Ad hominem, veritas vos liberabit and pasta fazulle for all :) .

[Ralph Baer]

It seems that fewer people have been signing the petition recently. There has to be a way to get more people aware of the situation.

[Ralph Baer]

I wonder if 4873 is the real Ray Shero.

[TimU]

Originally posted by Ralph Baer
I wonder if 4873 is the real Ray Shero.

I'ts probably the Ray Shero that played for SLU from 81-85. Are you wondering about his father?

[LynahFan]

Let me see if I can follow this reasoning. Bigfish and d3 seem to believe the following things:


1. The money, prestige, and facilities from a D1 sport give the play-up schools an unfair advantage vs. their D3 competitors in other sports. (I don't believe this)
2. These teams could continue to be just as successful in their D1 sports without scholarships. (nor this)

Therefore, even if these schools stopped offering scholarships, it follows that:

3. These schools would continue to bring in just as much money, have the same prestige, and be able to offer the same facilities (or possibly even better, because they could spend the money that had been devoted to scholarships on facilities, coaches, etc).
4. Any unfair advantage that the D1 programs have must not be related to scholarships at all, so this is a completely moot argument.

Now, from that, I think there are only 2 tenable positions:

A - D3 schools should not be allowed to play up to D1 period.
B - Tradition and history should be respected and the situation is fine the way it is.

Supporting this proposed change is just plain silly - it won't prevent the harm it is allegedly intended to stop, and it certainly at least has the *potential* to hamstring the ability of these teams to be competitive with their peers in D1.

What am I missing?

[Sejast]

Originally posted by Ralph Baer
It seems that fewer people have been signing the petition recently. There has to be a way to get more people aware of the situation.

Hopefully with classes starting up next week that will help, especially at the affected schools. I'd be disapointed if the college newspapers didn't do some story on this.

My guess/hope is that a large number of students haven't been following the situation and once they all get back to campus they'll learn of it from those who have kept track.

[Ralph Baer]

Originally posted by TimU
I'ts probably the Ray Shero that played for SLU from 81-85. Are you wondering about his father? My error. I knew that the son played for SLU, but I was indeed mixing them up.

[Ralph Baer]

Originally posted by Sejast
Hopefully with classes starting up next week that will help, especially at the affected schools. I'd be disapointed if the college newspapers didn't do some story on this.

My guess/hope is that a large number of students haven't been following the situation and once they all get back to campus they'll learn of it from those who have kept track. Agreed. I wonder what kind of alumni data bases RPI has. I really should write to Pete Pedone when I return to DC if no one else has tried this. There should be lists of people who attend the satellite broadcasts, but I don't recall if they asked for email addresses. At a minimum the site coordinators should be contacted,

[bigfish]

Originally posted by RSTuthill
Bigfish, it really makes no difference unless he specifically requested confidentiality and was granted it prior to the letter.



So, just to make sure I understand you, if someone writes to you in your job and you respond, you have every expectation what you write will be in the public domain?

[bigfish]

Originally posted by Ralph Baer
The ad hominem attacks have gone both ways.
Ralph, I believe D3 may have been referring to the denigrating of the actual DIII presidents involved, not the board sniping.

[Ralph Baer]

Originally posted by bigfish
So, just to make sure I understand you, if someone writes to you in your job and you respond, you have every expectation what you write will be in the public domain? I work for the Federal Gov't, and I have that understanding. Everything I write connected with my work (at least the part that isn't classified) is in the public domain. OTOH, I might have asked for permission, but it probably isn't necessary.