PDA

View Full Version : Will the DII's ever get out of Limbo?



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

cooperalls
06-11-2010, 10:36 PM
With the fact that basically a DII's schedule is worthless and with the even more stringent recruitment policies put in place by those in charge of NCAA Div. II. Is this the beginning of the end for the D2's? From the rumors I have heard the Schools in the West don't want them because if they were allowed to compete in D3 it would give the East more schools and screw up the ratio. 4 Northeast 10 schools were pushed out of the ECAC NE and now the same thing may happen to St. Mikes and St. A's. Is there hope at the end of the tunnel for these 6 schools or can somebody speak up on what is happening with these programs.

NUProf
06-12-2010, 06:28 AM
From the rumors I have heard the Schools in the West don't want them because if they were allowed to compete in D3 it would give the East more schools and screw up the ratio.

Even though the addition of 6 schools to DIII would give us a 12 team tournament, and the history is that the extra slot is unlikely to go to any of the 6 new teams? (except maybe St. A)

Josh Carey
06-12-2010, 10:27 AM
Even though the addition of 6 schools to DIII would give us a 12 team tournament, and the history is that the extra slot is unlikely to go to any of the 6 new teams? (except maybe St. A)

I can see this being true. You need to consider what a 12 team tournament would look like with the geographical restrictions we have to deal with. In an ideal world you would get...

#8 vs. #9 advanced vs. #1
#5 vs. #12 advanced vs. #4
#6 vs. #11 advanced vs. #3
#7 vs #10 advanced vs. #2

Except you can also have options where there are multiple play-in games feeding into the same quarterfinal, and multiple byes in a single quarterfinal. For example...

#1 vs. #5
#8 vs. #9 advanced to #4 vs. #12
#3 vs. #6
#7 vs. #10 advanced to #2 vs. #11

With cross-regional matchups not happening in the play-in round, the west would have to get 5 teams into the tournament to ensure two final four spots (two byes into Quarterfinal A, one bye and one play-in into Quarterfinal B). With only four teams, all four teams can find themselves in play-in games (see: 2010) playing down to a single regional.

Is it likely the west could get five teams in a 12 team tournament? Let's break it down:

Eastern AQs (5): ECAC-NE/E, SUNYAC, NESCAC, MASCAC.
Western AQs (3): MIAC, MCHA, NCHA
Eastern Guarantee (1): Pool B*
At-large: 3

*I'm giving a Pool B back in as I'm nearly 99% confident the 5 ECAC-W schools and the NE10 schools would get over the access ratio required to maintain a Pool B. Since no western teams could receive the Pool B, this would serve as another de-factor eastern bid - which would be the biggest initial problem for the west.

So with 9 spots in the tournament spoken for, we now have 3 spots remaining for at-large teams. Recent history has shown a pretty strong inclination towards 2 eastern teams and 1 western team when at-large spots have been available. This is especially true when given the insular schedule of the NCHA. That makes an 8-4 split more than likely most years. So the debate regarding whether all four teams would get a play-in or a bye would continue.

Since now awarding the west two FF spots would require all eight eastern teams to be in a play-in game, the odds of the west getting this arrangement decrease significantly.

So, in summary: A 12 team tournament likely ensures an additional bid for the east via the continuation of Pool B past the MASCAC's AQ certification, and makes the chances of two western teams getting to the final four decrease significantly. Undoubtedly, the west would be very hesitant about allowing six eastern schools to jump into the mix, since the benefit would clearly come to the other eastern schools.

joecct
06-12-2010, 12:28 PM
Josh

Good plan and idea. But, can you split D-II into the schools that play up and the schools that play down??

One more thought -- will the NE10 become the new MCHA?? Great record and no chance to get selected.

NUProf
06-12-2010, 02:32 PM
Josh

Good plan and idea. But, can you split D-II into the schools that play up and the schools that play down??

Right now they are split into schools that play up and schools that have nothing to play for. Rebrand it as a D2/D3 Collegiate Championship and nobody is playing down.

Henry
06-12-2010, 03:45 PM
:) That's definitely the way to go.

ChiefWahoo
06-12-2010, 06:22 PM
One more thought -- will the NE10 become the new MCHA?? Great record and no chance to get selected.

Not likely. The NE-10 is a multi-sport conference.

cooperalls
06-12-2010, 10:30 PM
Why not just do what D1 does for a regional tournament one weekend send the the final four on. Why does DIII have to be so complicated doesn't it have more teams than D1 and you have to figure out an quadratic equation to figure out who gets in yet they are changing the rules of the game maybe the rules committee should change the rules of the tournament bracket!

Why are we even taling about tournament style when the question is will they even be allowed to be counted as a DIII? Will the NCAA classify the tournament as DII-DIII? Or are they just done!


I can see this being true. You need to consider what a 12 team tournament would look like with the geographical restrictions we have to deal with. In an ideal world you would get...

#8 vs. #9 advanced vs. #1
#5 vs. #12 advanced vs. #4
#6 vs. #11 advanced vs. #3
#7 vs #10 advanced vs. #2

Except you can also have options where there are multiple play-in games feeding into the same quarterfinal, and multiple byes in a single quarterfinal. For example...

#1 vs. #5
#8 vs. #9 advanced to #4 vs. #12
#3 vs. #6
#7 vs. #10 advanced to #2 vs. #11

With cross-regional matchups not happening in the play-in round, the west would have to get 5 teams into the tournament to ensure two final four spots (two byes into Quarterfinal A, one bye and one play-in into Quarterfinal B). With only four teams, all four teams can find themselves in play-in games (see: 2010) playing down to a single regional.

Is it likely the west could get five teams in a 12 team tournament? Let's break it down:

Eastern AQs (5): ECAC-NE/E, SUNYAC, NESCAC, MASCAC.
Western AQs (3): MIAC, MCHA, NCHA
Eastern Guarantee (1): Pool B*
At-large: 3

*I'm giving a Pool B back in as I'm nearly 99% confident the 5 ECAC-W schools and the NE10 schools would get over the access ratio required to maintain a Pool B. Since no western teams could receive the Pool B, this would serve as another de-factor eastern bid - which would be the biggest initial problem for the west.

So with 9 spots in the tournament spoken for, we now have 3 spots remaining for at-large teams. Recent history has shown a pretty strong inclination towards 2 eastern teams and 1 western team when at-large spots have been available. This is especially true when given the insular schedule of the NCHA. That makes an 8-4 split more than likely most years. So the debate regarding whether all four teams would get a play-in or a bye would continue.

Since now awarding the west two FF spots would require all eight eastern teams to be in a play-in game, the odds of the west getting this arrangement decrease significantly.

So, in summary: A 12 team tournament likely ensures an additional bid for the east via the continuation of Pool B past the MASCAC's AQ certification, and makes the chances of two western teams getting to the final four decrease significantly. Undoubtedly, the west would be very hesitant about allowing six eastern schools to jump into the mix, since the benefit would clearly come to the other eastern schools.

Josh Carey
06-13-2010, 04:58 AM
Josh

Good plan and idea. But, can you split D-II into the schools that play up and the schools that play down??

Not really necessary, I don't think. The takeaway is the "access ratio" would be 66 teams securing 8 AQs, or 8.25. So for every 8.25 teams, there would be one Pool B bid. Whether or not the NCAA is willing to give the 0.25 as a friendly rounding would determine if it would take 3 or 4 DII teams + the ECAC-West to secure a Pool B bid.


One more thought -- will the NE10 become the new MCHA?? Great record and no chance to get selected.

No. Because until Adrian came along, that "great record" part wasn't a part of the MCHA discussion. It's a fairly recent development that the MCHA has even been in the discussion at all. Because the NE10 would be a smaller conference, one of two things would happen making that unlikely. Either they would play a highly insular schedule (think 4 games each against 5 other teams) or would play against the stiff competition. Maybe if they could get most NC games against NE schools or MASCAC schools, there would be a chance, but frankly, you might see the same lack of desire to schedule them in NC games as the MCHA experiences out west.


Why not just do what D1 does for a regional tournament one weekend send the the final four on.

Money.


Why does DIII have to be so complicated doesn't it have more teams than D1 and you have to figure out an quadratic equation to figure out who gets in yet they are changing the rules of the game maybe the rules committee should change the rules of the tournament bracket!

Money. Wisconsin and Boston College have slightly larger athletic department revenues than SUNY Morrisville an UW Eau Claire.

Honestly, the quadratic equation is much more straightforward than the D3 selection process. Nobody outside of the NCAA is opposed to changing the rules of the tournament bracket. So either schools need to start lobbying the NCAA or leave if they want it changed.


Why are we even taling about tournament style when the question is will they even be allowed to be counted as a DIII? Will the NCAA classify the tournament as DII-DIII? Or are they just done!

It's June. Not exactly a lot of hockey going on. Have to pass the time somehow.

joecct
06-13-2010, 02:35 PM
Right now they are split into schools that play up and schools that have nothing to play for. Rebrand it as a D2/D3 Collegiate Championship and nobody is playing down.But don't forget that there are about 14 D-II schools playing D-I hockey.

My concern is how the NCAA can legislate that 14 D-II schools play in the D-I championship and 6 D-II schools play in the D2/3 championship. I've never seen a division split before, but I guess there is a first time.

NUProf
06-13-2010, 03:34 PM
But don't forget that there are about 14 D-II schools playing D-I hockey.

My concern is how the NCAA can legislate that 14 D-II schools play in the D-I championship and 6 D-II schools play in the D2/3 championship. I've never seen a division split before, but I guess there is a first time.

Don't forget that there are several DIII schools (Clarkson, SLU, RIT, etc.) playing in the DI championship, and the rest play at the DIII level, so if DIII can split, why not DII?

norm1909
06-13-2010, 05:33 PM
Don't forget that there are several DIII schools (Clarkson, SLU, RIT, etc.) playing in the DI championship, and the rest play at the DIII level, so if DIII can split, why not DII?

Grandfather :eek:

hawkhockey
06-13-2010, 06:45 PM
thank you NU Prof.
of the 10 schools playing NCAA hockey,in NE10 4 are currently playing DI hockey and 6 are playing a DII/III schedule.Of the 4 playing DI, the chance of any of the schools dropping down ,due to the current NCAA situation is 0%.
If there was the option of playing a DIII schedule, then there might be a 50% chance of AIC dropping down,30% Merrimack(strictly for financial reasons),10% Bentley and 0% Lowell.If something is not worked out Assumption.Franklin Pierce and Stonehill would probably drop the sport,SNHU would have to take a hard look at Varsity status ,leaving St.A's and St.Mike's to try to figure it out on there own.
If the NCAA can sign off on playing up, what is the big deal on allowing teams to play down(if they continue to play by DIII rules).

The Real Georgia Peach
06-13-2010, 07:01 PM
Big issue in the past was DII student athletes playing in more than one sport, where they could get athletic scholarship for one sport and play in another, thus b'ball players can't play other sports, I am led to believe.

hawkhockey
06-13-2010, 07:12 PM
put language prohibiting any student that receives any athletic scholarship money,in any sport,from playing hockey.let the AD sign an affadavit affirming this and then move on.for the record, few, if any scholarship student has played any other varsity sport at St.A's,although non scholarship students have played basketball.

neumyer
06-13-2010, 07:17 PM
If something is not worked out Assumption.Franklin Pierce and Stonehill would probably drop the sport,SNHU would have to take a hard look at Varsity status ,leaving St.A's and St.Mike's to try to figure it out on there own.
If the NCAA can sign off on playing up, what is the big deal on allowing teams to play down(if they continue to play by DIII rules).I have to believe that St A's must have a contingency plan having just put several million dollars into a new on campus rink. I don't see them walking away from hockey.

hawkhockey
06-13-2010, 10:04 PM
[QUOTE=neumyer;4797568]I have to believe that St A's must have a contingency plan having just put several million dollars into a new on campus rink. I don't see them walking away from hockey.[/QU
the rink was built with monies from a restricted gift stipulating that the money could only be used to build a rink.
The contigency plan(s) was to either drop schlarships(basketball) and move everything to DIII, which,because of the NCAA moratorium, is not a current option or to move hockey to DI, which may or not be an option if the NCAA decides that all new programs petitioning to move one sport to DI will be denied unless the school decides to move ALL programs to DI.That will not happen.this is a classic"between a rock and a hard place" scenario that is being caused by the NCAA.Remember ,St.A's has had a varsity team since 1969 and now is faced with no real options.

joecct
06-14-2010, 10:44 AM
Don't forget that there are several DIII schools (Clarkson, SLU, RIT, etc.) playing in the DI championship, and the rest play at the DIII level, so if DIII can split, why not DII?Let me pick this off from the NCAA D-III manual:

18.02.1.1 National Collegiate Championship. A National Collegiate Championship for a particular sport is postseason competition conducted by the Association for eligible student-athletes and teams of active member institutions to determine the NCAA champion in that sport for all divisions that do not have a separate division championship in that sport. A National Collegiate Championship is established or continued in accordance with the criteria set forth in Bylaws 18.2.3 and 18.2.4.
18.2.1 National Collegiate Championship. A National Collegiate Championship for which any active member in good standing is eligible (per Bylaw 20.8) may be established by action of all three divisions acting through each divisionís governance structure, subject to the requirements, standards and conditions regarding the required number of members sponsoring the sport as prescribed in this bylaw. (Revised: 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)
18.2.2 Division Championship. A division championship in a particular sport may be established by a majority vote of all members of that division present and voting at an annual Convention subject to the requirements, standards and conditions regarding the required number of members sponsoring the sport as prescribed in this bylaw. (Revised: 1/9/96 effective 8/1/97)
18.2.5 Establishment of Single Championship in Sport. If only one championship is established or continued in accordance with Bylaws 18.2.3 and 18.2.4, it shall be a National Collegiate Championship for which any active member institution in good standing can be eligible.
18.2.6 Establishment of Two Championships in Sport. If a National Collegiate Championship and one division championship exist in the same sport, only the members of the division sponsoring the division championship may participate in the division championship, and that divisionís membership may not participate in the National Collegiate Championship in that sport.
18.2.7 Establishment of Three Championships in Sport. If a National Collegiate Championship and two division championships exist in the same sport, the National Collegiate Championship automatically shall become a division championship for the remaining division that does not sponsor a division championship in that sport.

20.4.1.1 Classification of a Sport in Division I. A member institution may petition to be classified in Division I in any one menís sport, other than football or basketball, and in any one womenís sport, other than basketball, and in any single sport in which the only NCAA championships opportunity is the National Collegiate Championship. (Revised: 1/11/94 effective 8/1/94)
20.4.1.2 Womenís Multidivision-Classification Limitation. A member institution that has its womenís program classified in a division other than its membership division (per Bylaw 20.1.1.1) shall not be eligible to petition for the multidivision-classification opportunities available to a womenís program that is classified in the same division as the institutionís menís program.
20.4.1.3 National Collegiate Championship. A member institution may petition to be classified in a division other than its membership division in a single sport in which the only NCAA championships opportunity is a National Collegiate Championship for which all divisions are eligible. (Adopted: 1/10/91, Revised: 1/10/92)

18.5.1 Division Championship. To be eligible for automatic qualification into any Division III championship, a conference shall meet the requirements set forth in Bylaw 31.3.4. (Revised: 1/7/06)
18.5.2 National Collegiate Championship. [#] To be eligible for automatic qualification into any National Collegiate Championship, a conference shall: (Adopted: 1/7/06)
(a) Have at least six active members that sponsor the applicable sport in any division; and
(b) Meet all applicable requirements for conference automatic qualification into any National Collegiate Championship
as set forth in Bylaw 31.3.4.


Seems the applicable section is 18.2.6 for an NCC. But we also have that nobody can play up to D-II in 20.4.1.1

Howver, reading the language I THINK you can do this:
D-I Divisional Championship
D-II/III NCC

Schools that currently play up via 20.4.1.1 could continue to play in the D-I Championship. Everyone else in D-II/III can play in the NCC.

If you get an NCC then the criteria for an AQ is 6 members, not 7. Then the NE10 would qualify for an AQ, which, Josh, I think re-kills Pool B

We all know how D-III selects the field for the championship, but what if the NCC uses D-II rules??? This will drive Webb nuts!


31.3.1 Size of Championships Fields. The size of all NCAA championships fields shall be established by the Championships Committee to provide for efficient management of the events, adequate NCAA championship opportunities relative to the nationwide quality of competition and sound economic administration of the financial resources of the Association and its championships. (Revised: 8/13/93, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)
31.3.2 Selection Decisions of Sports Committees. The determination of sites, selection of teams or individuals, or their site assignment in championships competition made by a governing sports committee (or a designated subcommittee) may not be appealed.
31.3.3 Criteria for Selection of Participants. The following criteria shall be employed by a governing sports committee in selecting participants for NCAA championships competition, and a governing sports committee that wishes to use additional criteria must obtain Championships Committee approval before doing so:
(a) Won-lost record;
(b) Strength of schedule;
(c) Availability of student-athletes for NCAA championships (Revised: 1/9/06 effective 8/1/06); and
(d) Nullification. (Revised: 1/9/06 effective 8/1/06)
31.3.5 S election of Balance of Championship Field. Once the official representative(s) of each qualifying conference is determined, the governing sports committee responsible for selection of the balance of the championship field shall consider objectively and without prejudice the competitive records of all other eligible student-athletes and teams (including representatives of the other members of the conferences receiving automatic qualification). To the best of its ability, the committee shall select the most highly qualified individuals and teams to complete the championship field in accordance with the regional structure, if any, approved for the particular championship.

NUProf
06-14-2010, 03:00 PM
If you get an NCC then the criteria for an AQ is 6 members, not 7. Then the NE10 would qualify for an AQ, which, Josh, I think re-kills Pool B


However, if we went this route, then St. As and St. Ms would not be kicked out of the ECAC East - they might choose to leave, but they wouldn't have to leave. That would leave 9 teams in Pool B (5 ECAC W and 4 NE 10s) which should be enough to un-re-kill :cool: Pool B. This makes so much sense, it could never happen. :D

joecct
06-14-2010, 03:49 PM
However, if we went this route, then St. As and St. Ms would not be kicked out of the ECAC East - they might choose to leave, but they wouldn't have to leave. That would leave 9 teams in Pool B (5 ECAC W and 4 NE 10s) which should be enough to un-re-kill :cool: Pool B. This makes so much sense, it could never happen. :DWould the Saints want to be a little fish in the Norwich pond or a big fish in their own pond????

Does anyone out there know if an NCC for D-II/III is being discussed?????