Petition against DivIII changes

[kashmunnie73]

....or chooses not to play....fails to make the team? Is that true at Clarkson, SLU, CC, and Union? Is it like SEC football etc? BTW....does Davidson, a Nescac-size/style college play all D1 sports...or play up in basketball, baseball, and soccer?...are they D1 in football?......Charlotte, NC. kash

[Ralph Baer]

Originally posted by kashmunnie73
....or chooses not to play....fails to make the team? Is that true at Clarkson, SLU, CC, and Union? Is it like SEC football etc? BTW....does Davidson, a Nescac-size /style college play all D1 sports...or play up in basketball, baseball, and soccer?...are they D1 in football?......Charlotte, NC. kash kash,
You left out RPI. I think that scholarship athletes always make the team. They may not play much and then leave RPI, I haven't heard of one losing a scholarship. Then again, I wouldn't necessarily find out. There was one case last year where a scholarship athlete played very poorly, but I am pretty sure that he kept his scholarship and left RPI during the year.

[Ralph Baer]

It's not as important as signing the petition, but please vote in the poll that I started about what will happen to the proposal. http://board.uscho.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28557

[Red Cloud]

Originally posted by Ralph Baer
K...Do I have to go on?

You haven't started yet. ;) I agree. Anyone counting on this proposal to force these schools down to D-III in order to find any sort of tangible benefit for any school is dreaming. There are many options for these schools to counteract this proposal if it is enacted. SLU and Clarkson have invested a lot in having 2 D-I programs (in good faith with the '82 ruling) and are not going to give that up just because of this ruling. RPI only has one D-I sport but are working on a second one even now and is extremely unlikely that they will drop to D-III just because the going is getting tough.

Try again, proponents...

[rpi_fan03]

PSUChamps2001- I see the point you are trying to make about these schools moving to D3 having possible benefits to the schools in the ECAC West (assuming they move there). I have two problems with this...

1. A lot of the points you made seemed to center around increasing money being brought to the programs...isn't that, in a way, something the proposal is trying to counteract??

2. I don't know about CC, but SLU Clarkson and RPI all have multiple other athletic teams which are successful in their own rights. RPI, for example, has compiled almost a 70% winning percentage over the last 7 years...not one team from any of these schools IIRC currently plays in the ECAC West. Most teams are UCAA/ECAC East (where the sport is sponsored by the UCAA) and if not UCAA, then they are solely ECAC East. There MAY BE an exception, but I am not aware of any. So, are you suggesting that these schools not only drop their D1 status in their respective sport, but that they screw with all the other sports and switch leagues also?

While I don't think this is at all what you are suggesting, this is just one more "option" that these schools could have to consider...and one more reason why this whole thing stinks IMHO!


PS- thanks for your support with the petition:D

[westerburg]

Originally posted by kashmunnie73
....or chooses not to play....fails to make the team? Is that true at Clarkson, SLU, CC, and Union? Is it like SEC football etc? BTW....does Davidson, a Nescac-size/style college play all D1 sports...or play up in basketball, baseball, and soccer?...are they D1 in football?......Charlotte, NC. kash

Davidson was D-I in every sport except football. They are one of the many schools forced to move to D-I in football by a D-I edict of about 12 years ago. Dayton, Hofstra, Georgetown, St. John's, etc... were among the others.

[miker]

Just for fun, I tabulated the ECAC results for the last 12 years of Colgate and Union, two non-scholarship schools, for comparison purposes. Then, calculating the cummulative probability of their finish....here is what the numbers indicate

Colgate P( X <= x )
1st----------------------0.0159
5th or higher----------0.3138
8th or higher----------0.7769

Union P( X <= x )
1st----------------------0.0004
5th or hgiher---------0.0366
8th or higher---------0.2611

Clarkson (with scholarships)
1st --------------------0.2201
5th or higher--------0.9394
8th or higher--------0.9995

Any comments about the competition level of these teams?

[WordsSayNothing]

Originally posted by MikeR
Any comments about the competition level of these teams?

Yeah...Union sucks. ;)

Seriously, though, assuming SLU and RPI have similar numbers as Clarkson, it's quite obvious that these three schools need to retain scholarships in order to remain highly competitive within the ECAC.

[fr joe]

Looking to cycle back to the petition? It's up to 5501 signatures as of 1 am. Share the link with your friends... especially at D3 schools who oppose the proposal.

www.petitiononline.com/NCAAD3/petition.html

[nubobcat]

I signed the petition today. I grew up in the adirondacks and was raised by a father you graduated from Clarkson. Its hard to imagine the pride my father has in the school being the same without that college hockey program. The verbal sparring between Clarkson and RPI engineers (always in good fun) was a part of life for me it seemed. I still pick on RPI Engineers for having choosen such a bad school.

I've met former Clarkson players who have helped add to this great history including Terry Yurkiewicz a two time all american who passed away last year. To take away hockey from these schools is to take away the rich history and tradition that has been built. It's sad enough when fiscal reasons spell the end for great programs..but lets not have silly new rules do the same thing.

The NCAA has ruined a great many people's live by their stupid rules that they expect everyone to live by. A lawyer could make a great living working for colleges just to get through the thick and muddy waters of NCAA regs. Why can a football player not declare for the draft and go back to school if he doesn't sign with an agent, but a basketball player can? I'm sure Nate Webster of Miami would like to know that, after the NCAA stole a year of his college life from him.

To kill hockey at Clarkson and RPI or lax at Johns Hopkins would be devestating to fans, alumnis, and players...and why?...so a few ad's can have an easier job of things? Let them play...up!

[Ralph Baer]

nubobcat,

Thanks for signing.

[miker]

Originally posted by WordsSayNothing
Yeah...Union sucks. ;)

Seriously, though, assuming SLU and RPI have similar numbers as Clarkson, it's quite obvious that these three schools need to retain scholarships in order to remain highly competitive within the ECAC.

RPI
1st--------------------------- 0.0800
5th or better--------------- 0.4886
8th or better--------------- 0.8423

SLU* (first began giving scholarships in '97-98, after which they finished atop the ECAC for the first time in 12 years.)
1st----------------------------0.0862
5------------------------------ 0.4073
8------------------------------ 0.7301

[fr joe]

Originally posted by Ralph Baer
nubobcat,
Thanks for signing.

Thanks & invite your friends to sign, too. Count is up to 5610 as of 9:30 pm.

[Ralph Baer]

Originally posted by MikeR
RPI
1st--------------------------- 0.0800
5th or better--------------- 0.4886
8th or better--------------- 0.8423

SLU* (first began giving scholarships in '97-98, after which they finished atop the ECAC for the first time in 12 years.)
1st----------------------------0.0862
5------------------------------ 0.4073
8------------------------------ 0.7301 Mike,
Just curious. What kind of a distribution did you fit to the data to get those numbers?

[HighlanderRPI]

Urg... bad memories of Probability for Engineering Applications surfacing :(

But this is must be one of those cases they talked about us needing to know how to do probabilities! :D

[WordsSayNothing]

Originally posted by HighlanderRPI
Urg... bad memories of Probability for Engineering Applications surfacing :(

Oh, I hear that. Nevertheless, I understand what the final number means in the end, which is what counts.

[Patman]

Originally posted by Ralph Baer
Mike,
Just curious. What kind of a distribution did you fit to the data to get those numbers?

do ordinal rankings have distributions???? :confused:

(assuming the numbers came from ordinal ranking data)

[LynahFan]

Ooo! Ooo! I know! Pick me! Pick me!

I just finished a statistics class (for management master's degree) and the usual consensus is that it is invalid to apply "continuous" statistics methods such as normal distributions or standard deviations to ordinal rankings, whether it is a ranking or a poll that uses a "Linkert" scale (rating stuff from 1-5 or from strongly disagree to strongly agree). The best that you can usually do is a test for proportions, where you can make statements like, "with 95% confidence the historical data show that Clarkson is likely to finish in 3rd or higher X% of the time, 4th or higher Y%," etc.

[Patman]

Originally posted by LynahFan
Ooo! Ooo! I know! Pick me! Pick me!

I just finished a statistics class (for management master's degree) and the usual consensus is that it is invalid to apply "continuous" statistics methods such as normal distributions or standard deviations to ordinal rankings, whether it is a ranking or a poll that uses a "Linkert" scale (rating stuff from 1-5 or from strongly disagree to strongly agree). The best that you can usually do is a test for proportions, where you can make statements like, "with 95% confidence the historical data show that Clarkson is likely to finish in 3rd or higher X% of the time, 4th or higher Y%," etc.

well, that's good to know (my entire purpose here is as a math dork), I'd have to say I skipped half of my Stats I and Stats II classes... which is bad considering this is what I want to do with my life, so I might have missed something. The whole idea is that you can't assign a probability to something that has never occured, unlike any continuous distributions, or discrete distributions, because the "distance" between the two values are arbitrary... a can be greater than b... but there is no understanding of just how greater that value can be.

[SteveF]

signed