Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

[ctrabs74]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

I think that Chicago State had about 73 freshmen this fall. Their debt is about on par with Haiti. I wonder if this isn't a preemptive move to fill in a member if CSU closes up.

According to the Chicago Tribune, it's 86 freshmen; you weren't that far off:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...927-story.html

Then again, with administrative dysfunction like this (from The Southern Illinoisan), who in their right mind would even consider Chicago State as a viable university:

http://thesouthern.com/news/local/st...67c357b83.html

[tsull]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

Gonzaga's basketball budget is $6.1 million -- just for that sport. Everyone thinks they're going to be Gonzaga, OK, come up with your $6M. Guessing Butler and Xavier have similar budgets. Zags have had their own jet for a decade. They're flush with money. Boise State football also has a lot of money. People think if they just join D-1, they'll become these schools ... not without a huge budget.

[Rob_AK]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

Gonzaga's basketball budget is $6.1 million -- just for that sport. Everyone thinks they're going to be Gonzaga, OK, come up with your $6M. Guessing Butler and Xavier have similar budgets. Zags have had their own jet for a decade. They're flush with money. Boise State football also has a lot of money. People think if they just join D-1, they'll become these schools ... not without a huge budget.

$6.1 mil seems a little low to me. Most P5 schools are going to be spending that much. $3 mil for head coach $1 mil for assistants, then you have support staff, travel for games and recruiting, etc. If you are Kansas, you have a special dorm for basketball players (and kids of wealthy donors - because you can't have it occupied by more than 50% athletes or it is an impermissible benefit - kids of boosters are also pretty good at taking care of the athletes so win-win - and all viewed as legal by the NCAA). If you are North Carolina, you have to pay professors really well to set up fake classes the players don't even have to attend (i.e. the 10 AFAM majors from the 2005 championship team that they still haven't been penalized for). You also have to give lots of tickets to boosters that they can pass on to recruits and players to sell so that they have extra money. Then you have to have your shoe company sponsorships to compensate the AAU coaches pushing recruits to their college programs, etc. There is a lot of money flowing around these programs. Not sure how much of it trickles down to the lower echelon schools but there is probably some of it that does.

If I recall correctly, CSU Bakersfield made it to the NIT this year and beat Cal. That would have meant a couple of nice paydays for them.

Frankly, I am concerned that UAA may someday take the leap - they have the facility in place. If it made sense financially, and would help keep the program alive over the next ten years or so while the state budget is under pressure, I could see it happening. However, being in Alaska, with its travel component and how that is handled, may be an issue. I would much rather go D1 than lose the program. I am guessing that it is an economic issue for a lot of programs. And I don't think you can say that attendance or news coverage is going to be better for a D2 team than a low level D1 team. As you say, a lot of D2 teams could beat some of these D1 teams - UAA does so regularly in the Shootout - so they are not likely to get pounded game in and game out in some of the lesser leagues. The more I think about it, why wouldn't a team want to be D1, if they can get a payday for being cannon fodder for a few Power 5 D1 teams in the non-conference season and play a lot of similar competition in their conference play compared to D2? D2 has a separate NCAA tourney and play a bunch of nobodies in non-conference versus some pretty tough D1 teams. Would you rather see WOU play UCLA on the road in non-conference or Northwest Indian at home?

Seattle U is the only GNAC team to make the jump, and I haven't paid much attention to how successful they have been. Do know they are/were looking for a new coach at the end of this year, so must not be doing that well from a competitive standpoint. Despite all the D2 defections, I have never heard of anyone coming back, so it must be working for the school.

[tsull]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

$6.1 mil seems a little low to me. Most P5 schools are going to be spending that much. $3 mil for head coach $1 mil for assistants, then you have support staff, travel for games and recruiting, etc. If you are Kansas, you have a special dorm for basketball players (and kids of wealthy donors - because you can't have it occupied by more than 50% athletes or it is an impermissible benefit - kids of boosters are also pretty good at taking care of the athletes so win-win - and all viewed as legal by the NCAA). If you are North Carolina, you have to pay professors really well to set up fake classes the players don't even have to attend (i.e. the 10 AFAM majors from the 2005 championship team that they still haven't been penalized for). You also have to give lots of tickets to boosters that they can pass on to recruits and players to sell so that they have extra money. Then you have to have your shoe company sponsorships to compensate the AAU coaches pushing recruits to their college programs, etc. There is a lot of money flowing around these programs. Not sure how much of it trickles down to the lower echelon schools but there is probably some of it that does.

If I recall correctly, CSU Bakersfield made it to the NIT this year and beat Cal. That would have meant a couple of nice paydays for them.

Frankly, I am concerned that UAA may someday take the leap - they have the facility in place. If it made sense financially, and would help keep the program alive over the next ten years or so while the state budget is under pressure, I could see it happening. However, being in Alaska, with its travel component and how that is handled, may be an issue. I would much rather go D1 than lose the program. I am guessing that it is an economic issue for a lot of programs. And I don't think you can say that attendance or news coverage is going to be better for a D2 team than a low level D1 team. As you say, a lot of D2 teams could beat some of these D1 teams - UAA does so regularly in the Shootout - so they are not likely to get pounded game in and game out in some of the lesser leagues. The more I think about it, why wouldn't a team want to be D1, if they can get a payday for being cannon fodder for a few Power 5 D1 teams in the non-conference season and play a lot of similar competition in their conference play compared to D2? D2 has a separate NCAA tourney and play a bunch of nobodies in non-conference versus some pretty tough D1 teams. Would you rather see WOU play UCLA on the road in non-conference or Northwest Indian at home?

Seattle U is the only GNAC team to make the jump, and I haven't paid much attention to how successful they have been. Do know they are/were looking for a new coach at the end of this year, so must not be doing that well from a competitive standpoint. Despite all the D2 defections, I have never heard of anyone coming back, so it must be working for the school.

UCLA would beat WOU by 70; I'd rather watch NW Indian ... though why does it have to be only a super power or a scrub? I'd rather watch WOU play Sonoma State in non-conference.

About 150 of the 355 teams should move down. Portland State averaged 550 last year, about the same as WOU, and their gym is worse. They've had to move money from academics to athletics to stay afloat. Their new gym was slated to be 5,500; they've moved it to 3K because they have no money.

Sure, teams might catch lightning in a bottle now and then, but the D-1 investment for schools is not worth it unless you're power 5 or heavily invested. It's a sham and it's short-changing athletes. Schools like Idaho State, Portland State, and Sac State, would win national titles in various sports if they were D2. The media would take notice as would fans. When Portland State was D2, they were averaging 12K in football; now they average 4K. It's all a scam. The MEAC -- a 16 seed every year -- should be D2, so should many of the mid-majors. Put standards on people: If you want to play D-1 you must have a 4K arena and you must average 2K. If you don't, you get moved down. It's a freaking fraud and the economic system is aligned so that someone like Portland State plays D-1 so they can one day lose by 40 in the first round of the tourney to get NCAA money.

As for Alaska, there's no D-1 league to join, zip, none. The Big West isn't taking you, the Big Sky requires football, the WAC isn't going to add to their already insane travel. Because a school hasn't dropped back doesn't mean it's working. It means they're playing beyond their means.

Seattle U. just hired the EWU head coach; they've been horrific since moving up to D-1 -- horrific in all sports, brutally bad.

I'd rather win like crazy.

WOU got to a Final 4 in hoops in D2; rather have that than a 70-point loss to UCLA, but that's just me, most people would rather lose like crazy in D-1 -- like Idaho State -- than win like crazy in D2.

I like winning; many people are OK with losing. I'm not.

[northernGNAChoopfan]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

[QUOTE=Rob_AK;2041Frankly, I am concerned that UAA may someday take the leap - they have the facility in place. If it made sense financially, and would help keep the program alive over the next ten years or so while the state budget is under pressure, I could see it happening. However, being in Alaska, with its travel component and how that is handled, may be an issue. I would much rather go D1 than lose the program. I am guessing that it is an economic issue for a lot of programs. And I don't think you can say that attendance or news coverage is going to be better for a D2 team than a low level D1 team. As you say, a lot of D2 teams could beat some of these D1 teams - UAA does so regularly in the Shootout - so they are not likely to get pounded game in and game out in some of the lesser leagues. The more I think about it, why wouldn't a team want to be D1, if they can get a payday for being cannon fodder for a few Power 5 D1 teams in the non-conference season and play a lot of similar competition in their conference play compared to D2? D2 has a separate NCAA tourney and play a bunch of nobodies in non-conference versus some pretty tough D1 teams. Would you rather see WOU play UCLA on the road in non-conference or Northwest Indian at home?[/QUOTE]

I have heard these silly rumors coming out of Anchorage for the last year or so too. I'm sure UAA would love to think of itself as DI worthy and to their credit, they are very, very good in several sports (women's basketball, volleyball and their indoor track and cross country, right?), but I still think it's an absurd idea. It's hard to imagine on what rational plane anyone could argue that it makes financial sense at all right now. The state is broke and as of yet, has not figured any sort of long term plan to correct the situation. I don't think there is any way that money like what flowed into the Alaska Airlines Center is going to flow into the athletics department right now to support a DI transition. I'm totally with Tsull on this one too, as far as what I want outa college sports in AK... Please, UAA, keep your ego in check and stay DII.

[tsull]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

I have heard these silly rumors coming out of Anchorage for the last year or so too. I'm sure UAA would love to think of itself as DI worthy and to their credit, they are very, very good in several sports (women's basketball, volleyball and their indoor track and cross country, right?), but I still think it's an absurd idea. It's hard to imagine on what rational plane anyone could argue that it makes financial sense at all right now. The state is broke and as of yet, has not figured any sort of long term plan to correct the situation. I don't think there is any way that money like what flowed into the Alaska Airlines Center is going to flow into the athletics department right now to support a DI transition. I'm totally with Tsull on this one too, as far as what I want outa college sports in AK... Please, UAA, keep your ego in check and stay DII.

No league to join for the Alaska schools in D-1.

[tsull]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

Portland State $20M in debt, making $9M worth of cuts overall, cranking up tuition. Another school living beyond its means overall and athletically. But gee, maybe one day they'll hit a jump shot in March and get to the NCAA and lose to UCLA by 40 in the first round! That would be awesome!

[Rob_AK]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

UAA has been (probably not too seriously) considering D1 for a long time according to people I knew in the athletic department years ago. The economics of the equation for UAA are certainly worse than for lower 48 schools. But if the economics are better, I would be all for it.

tsull, I think you are way off base thinking that these schools like Seattle U or Cal Baptist are doing this for a shot at a payday in March. Other than a different tourney with worse competition just what is the difference between D2 and D1 - I just don't see any. How many NCAA tourneys have WOU played in the last 20 years? Other than catching lightning in a bottle the last couple of years, I can't recall them playing in any since they joined the GNAC. UAA has never been dominant against D1 schools, but they have a decent record and have beat some big time teams (i.e. Texas, Michigan, etc.). Most of the better D2 teams could be competitive against the lower tier D1s. I just don't see the difference that the name D1 vs D2 makes. If you are drawing 500 people what difference does it make whether you are D1 or D2?

I seriously doubt that Portland State is going broke because they chose to play D1 sports rather than D2. Sure, they may invest a little more in the program than WOU, but they also probably get a little TV revenue during the year. You seem to think that it is some kind of character flaw that these schools want better competition and to be able to market to students that they are a D1 school, and that these schools are doing this because they have these big visions of sports grandeur. I just don't think that is the case - I think it is economics and the fact that they want better competition so there fans get to see better basketball and other sports. With the Shootout I have been able to watch Courtney Lee, Andrew Bogut, Clay Thompson and others in the not too distant past - that is pretty cool. You aren't going to get to see players like that in D2. And your players are never going to meet let alone play against any of those guys in D2 - not sure depriving the players of that opportunity is shortchanging them.

I understand - you would rather your team be a big fish in a small pond. Fine, but I don't think you should begrudge any school that want to take a chance and swim in the ocean even though they aren't going to be a big fish. I would also suggest you petition WOU to move down to D3, your team might be more successful if W-L record is how you are going to judge things.

[Brandon]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

UAA has been (probably not too seriously) considering D1 for a long time according to people I knew in the athletic department years ago. The economics of the equation for UAA are certainly worse than for lower 48 schools. But if the economics are better, I would be all for it.

tsull, I think you are way off base thinking that these schools like Seattle U or Cal Baptist are doing this for a shot at a payday in March. Other than a different tourney with worse competition just what is the difference between D2 and D1 - I just don't see any. How many NCAA tourneys have WOU played in the last 20 years? Other than catching lightning in a bottle the last couple of years, I can't recall them playing in any since they joined the GNAC. UAA has never been dominant against D1 schools, but they have a decent record and have beat some big time teams (i.e. Texas, Michigan, etc.). Most of the better D2 teams could be competitive against the lower tier D1s. I just don't see the difference that the name D1 vs D2 makes. If you are drawing 500 people what difference does it make whether you are D1 or D2?

I seriously doubt that Portland State is going broke because they chose to play D1 sports rather than D2. Sure, they may invest a little more in the program than WOU, but they also probably get a little TV revenue during the year. You seem to think that it is some kind of character flaw that these schools want better competition and to be able to market to students that they are a D1 school, and that these schools are doing this because they have these big visions of sports grandeur. I just don't think that is the case - I think it is economics and the fact that they want better competition so there fans get to see better basketball and other sports. With the Shootout I have been able to watch Courtney Lee, Andrew Bogut, Clay Thompson and others in the not too distant past - that is pretty cool. You aren't going to get to see players like that in D2. And your players are never going to meet let alone play against any of those guys in D2 - not sure depriving the players of that opportunity is shortchanging them.

I understand - you would rather your team be a big fish in a small pond. Fine, but I don't think you should begrudge any school that want to take a chance and swim in the ocean even though they aren't going to be a big fish. I would also suggest you petition WOU to move down to D3, your team might be more successful if W-L record is how you are going to judge things.

The biggest difference between Division I and Division II is cost. Both are diverse. Both have overachievers beating up on the rest of the division and both have programs that simply don't belong in their classification.

To answer your question, the answer would be cost. If a school is Division I, they are likely funding 13 scholarships rather than the maximum of 10 allowed by Division II. Instead of being in a conference that makes sense geographically, they are in conferences that require them to take trips via plane rather than bus. Instead of playing St. Martin's and making trips to Ellensburg and Bellingham, they are flying to Boulder, Phoenix, South Bend, Chicago, Kansas City, Texas, and Las Vegas. The costs are incredibly different. Is the extra expense worth the experience given to the athletes? Does the extra expense give the school more exposure and notoriety? Who is paying for it? I'll leave that for each of us to decide individually.

There are many reasons that a team reclassifies to Division I. Some make sense. Some don't.

North Dakota and North Dakota State both have enrollments of 12,000+. NDSU's athletic budget is $22 million. UND's athletic budget is $25 million They are the flagship universities in their state. It makes sense for them to reclassify to Division I when they can handle a budget and enrollment double most Division II schools (side note UND just cut women's hockey to save money). It might not make sense for another school, with an imaginary enrollment of 2,000 and and athletic budget of $4 million to reclassify. Some do simply to appear "better" than other schools in their geographic region. Some just want to get on ESPN. Some do it as resume material for those in charge.

Portland State has an athletic budget of $14.5 million. Western Oregon's athletic budget is $5.8 million. Because they are vague on their website, I cannot tell how much each school gets from the Big Sky contract. However, if it was even $1 million I would be incredibly shocked.

My personal belief about Division I is that unless a school is Pac 12, ACC, SEC, Big 10, or Big 12, it really doesn't matter what the classification is. Most people view D1 as the Big 5. The rest is "small college." Now, with basketball I think there are a couple of other respected leagues but I believe what I wrote is a fairly common mindset.

[laker]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

UCSD is trying to move from D2 to D1 without football. The Big West just turned them down. Unless the WAC adds them- like they did Cal Baptist- they will have to stay D2.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...406-story.html

And to add to Brandon's comment on air travel- last night on the Frozen Four semi final in Chicago they said that it was the first bus trip for Notre Dame all year. Every other one of their away games required air travel.

[tsull]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

UAA has been (probably not too seriously) considering D1 for a long time according to people I knew in the athletic department years ago. The economics of the equation for UAA are certainly worse than for lower 48 schools. But if the economics are better, I would be all for it.

tsull, I think you are way off base thinking that these schools like Seattle U or Cal Baptist are doing this for a shot at a payday in March. That's all it is, SU is awful in athletics overall. Other than a different tourney with worse competition just what is the difference between D2 and D1 - I just don't see any. How many NCAA tourneys have WOU played in the last 20 years? Not a lot, but we weren't going to that many in NAIA either. we don't have budget or scholarships to go d-1. Not EVERYONE is D-1 like you think. WOU definitely is not, why do you think they are? Other than catching lightning in a bottle the last couple of years, I can't recall them playing in any since they joined the GNAC. No but they're in a like-minded conference with similar budgets, they have a chance. Note: Track team just got 6th indoors with a national title relay team; distance runner is currently No. 1 in the nation in his event. In D-1, they don't get an athlete to nationals. UAA has never been dominant against D1 schools, but they have a decent record and have beat some big time teams (i.e. Texas, Michigan, etc.). Most of the better D2 teams could be competitive against the lower tier D1s. I just don't see the difference that the name D1 vs D2 makes. If you are drawing 500 people what difference does it make whether you are D1 or D2? Then go D-1 and create your own league, you don't have a conference to go to and to be honest, should be thankful the GNAC has taken you as those road trips wipe out our budgets.

I seriously doubt that Portland State is going broke because they chose to play D1 sports rather than D2.They are, they've had to move academic money to athletics, it's hurt the school. Sure, they may invest a little more in the program than WOU, but they also probably get a little TV revenue during the year.Not much considering UNLV in the MWC got ZERO dollars on their football contract two years ago -- yep, zero. You seem to think that it is some kind of character flaw that these schools want better competition and to be able to market to students that they are a D1 school, and that these schools are doing this because they have these big visions of sports grandeur. No, I think it's a joke that 355 schools think they can play d-1 when they would be much more successful in D2. The 8-man football school in Idaho and Washington aren't playing 4A athletics. There's a reason for it. I just don't think that is the case - I think it is economics and the fact that they want better competition so there fans get to see better basketball and other sports. You'll get killed in all other sports in D-1. Mid-majors score zero points at NCAA track, don't make the CWS in softball or baseball (now and then a warm-weather school does), is nowhere in NCAA wrestling, tennis, swimming, etc. Not represented. A.D.'s get 100's of thousands to have awful programs. With the Shootout I have been able to watch Courtney Lee, Andrew Bogut, Clay Thompson and others in the not too distant past - that is pretty cool. You aren't going to get to see players like that in D2. That's a nice bonus for UAA, if you don't like D2, please, quit the GNAC to save us some money and play independent in all sports because no league is touching you. And your players are never going to meet let alone play against any of those guys in D2 - not sure depriving the players of that opportunity is shortchanging them. No one is getting short-changed, I know a lot of WOU athletes, they like their experience. Not everyone is a super model in today's world,
live with it. Letting all these kids go D-1 is giving them a false sense of who they are in life.

I understand - you would rather your team be a big fish in a small pond.Why in the f--k do you think WOU could compete in D-1? Fine, but I don't think you should begrudge any school that want to take a chance and swim in the ocean even though they aren't going to be a big fish. Not everyone should join, especially PSU, which is a freaking joke. I would also suggest you petition WOU to move down to D3, your team might be more successful if W-L record is how you are going to judge things. If we weren't winning in D2 and have the nation's leaders in track, and won an all-sports trophy recently in men's athletics in the GNAC, NAIA would be the option not D3 as once again THERE'S NO LEAGUE FOR WOU TO JOIN IN D3.

:at-wits-end:

[laker]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

It is official- WSU to the AAC.

Now- what is the next team to move?

https://www.si.com/college-basketbal...state-shockers

[tsull]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

It is official- WSU to the AAC.

Now- what is the next team to move?

https://www.si.com/college-basketbal...state-shockers

Can they join without football? Or are they adding football? I'd make them have football ... too tired of the non-gridiron leeches, who can pour everything into one sport, not have football and suck in everything else. If that's too harsh for people, tough.

[laker]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

Can they join without football? Or are they adding football? I'd make them have football ... too tired of the non-gridiron leeches, who can pour everything into one sport, not have football and suck in everything else. If that's too harsh for people, tough.

They are taking Navy's spot for the non-football sports. Just saw this on Twitter:

Navy AthleticsVerified account @NavyAthletics 3h3 hours ago
More
#WelcomeWichita to the AAC! We can be your football team!

[tsull]

Re: Cal Baptist moving to D-1/WAC ... don't like it

They are taking Navy's spot for the non-football sports. Just saw this on Twitter:

Navy AthleticsVerified account @NavyAthletics 3h3 hours ago
More
#WelcomeWichita to the AAC! We can be your football team!

They should be forced to have football. The reason they dominated the MVC is because they had a much larger hoop budget and no football.