How do you know if a D-II school made the right decision to go D-I?

[zimmy21]

I think Mankato and Wayne's stadiums are small for the enrollment, but MSU is a hockey first and Wayne just doesn't get crowds

Yeah Mankato usually pull 5-7k on a really big game. For sure homecoming, most other games 3kish

[njmav1]

Yeah Mankato usually pull 5-7k on a really big game. For sure homecoming, most other games 3kish

It will be interesting to see how many come out to see Western Oregon.

[vikingfaithful]

Yeah Mankato usually pull 5-7k on a really big game. For sure homecoming, most other games 3kish

Mavs used to get big crowds for St. Cloud home games, before Cloud tucked tail firmly between their legs and dropped football. They only sponsor 6 men's programs and 10 women's.

[mtsax305]

I think Mankato and Wayne's stadiums are small for the enrollment, but MSU is a hockey first and Wayne just doesn't get crowds

Can confirm that WSU's gameday marketing (not to mention the on-field results) leaves much to be desired. On top of that, given its proximity to Michigan, Michigan State, Eastern, and heck even a random Tigers game, WSU unfortunately is at the bottom of the average metro-Detroiter's list, even if they were alums.

That being said, the stadium can and has exceeded the official capacity. It was originally designed to be completed to seat 25,000, so there's a lot of space for standing room only.

Given how large the enrollment is at WSU, it should be D1. The question is, would moving up increase attendance or school spirit any more than if there was just on the field improvement in D2 Football and Basketball?

[KleShreen]

Can confirm that WSU's gameday marketing (not to mention the on-field results) leaves much to be desired. On top of that, given its proximity to Michigan, Michigan State, Eastern, and heck even a random Tigers game, WSU unfortunately is at the bottom of the average metro-Detroiter's list, even if they were alums.

That being said, the stadium can and has exceeded the official capacity. It was originally designed to be completed to seat 25,000, so there's a lot of space for standing room only.

Given how large the enrollment is at WSU, it should be D1. The question is, would moving up increase attendance or school spirit any more than if there was just on the field improvement in D2 Football and Basketball?

Enrollment has no bearing on classification. Notre Dame has about 9k students. Louisiana-Monroe has about 7k students. TCU has about 12k students. Arizona State has 65k. Texas A&M has 75k. Michigan State has 40k. It doesn't matter. Wayne State shouldn't be D1 just because they have a lot of students.

They should be D1 based on their endowment being over 500 million dollars, compared to EMU's 94 million or CMU's 246 million or WMU's 495 million or Oakland's 102 million or UDM's 94 million (GVSU's is 175, SVSU's is 89, Ferris' is 117, btw). (Also, absurdly, MSU's is 4.4 billion and Michigan's is 17.3 billion)

[Predatory Primates]

Enrollment has no bearing on classification. Notre Dame has about 9k students. Louisiana-Monroe has about 7k students. TCU has about 12k students. Arizona State has 65k. Texas A&M has 75k. Michigan State has 40k. It doesn't matter. Wayne State shouldn't be D1 just because they have a lot of students.

They should be D1 based on their endowment being over 500 million dollars, compared to EMU's 94 million or CMU's 246 million or WMU's 495 million or Oakland's 102 million or UDM's 94 million (GVSU's is 175, SVSU's is 89, Ferris' is 117, btw). (Also, absurdly, MSU's is 4.4 billion and Michigan's is 17.3 billion)

Washington U in St Louis has 12.25 billion, and They're d3 in football.

[UNALions]

Enrollment has no bearing on classification. Notre Dame has about 9k students. Louisiana-Monroe has about 7k students. TCU has about 12k students. Arizona State has 65k. Texas A&M has 75k. Michigan State has 40k. It doesn't matter. Wayne State shouldn't be D1 just because they have a lot of students.

They should be D1 based on their endowment being over 500 million dollars, compared to EMU's 94 million or CMU's 246 million or WMU's 495 million or Oakland's 102 million or UDM's 94 million (GVSU's is 175, SVSU's is 89, Ferris' is 117, btw). (Also, absurdly, MSU's is 4.4 billion and Michigan's is 17.3 billion)

Except the two have almost nothing to do with each other. Schools rarely (I won't say never) spend money from their endowments on athletics. Most funds in endowments were earmarked by the donor for specific academic/leadership scholarships, academic research projects, and such.

Yet, certain P5s now have established endowments just to support athletics, especially scholarships and coaching salaries.

[KleShreen]

Except the two have almost nothing to do with each other. Schools rarely (I won't say never) spend money from their endowments on athletics. Most funds in endowments were earmarked by the donor for specific academic/leadership scholarships, academic research projects, and such.

Yet, certain P5s now have established endowments just to support athletics, especially scholarships and coaching salaries.

I agree. But it has more bearing than enrollment does. That's the point I was trying to make, albeit poorly. It's all about the finances put in to the programs, not about enrollments.

[KleShreen]

Washington U in St Louis has 12.25 billion, and They're d3 in football.

Exactly. Enrollment and endowments both serve not much purpose in classification of athletics.

[UNALions]

I agree. But it has more bearing than enrollment does. That's the point I was trying to make, albeit poorly. It's all about the finances put in to the programs, not about enrollments.

Gotcha. You’re right. Jax State is smaller than several GSC schools and moving to FBS this season. Their athletic budget is about triple, though.

[canadarican]

No....Presbyterian did not make the right decision lol

[Predatory Primates]

The real shame is that college endowments add up to be equivalent to about 35% of the total money in circulation in the US.

so let's not hear any more about how schools are somehow noble or altruistic.

[Redwing]

Exactly. Enrollment and endowments both serve not much purpose in classification of athletics.

Probably mostly true, but typically significant dollars in an endowment can be spent on just about anything. Yes, SOME endowments are targeted for specific purposes, but not all. If an individual donates for establishing an endowment, it can spin off more dollars than what the donor stated in the donation. Those dollars can be reinvested or spent as the board wishes. Suffice to say, there is much more flexibility in endowment dollars than Universities and others like to divulge.

For example, Mich State just invested in buying the Fisher Bldg in Detroit. There was no specific endowment for doing so, but it was paid for from the endowment funds. MSU could have spent those dollars on a new library, stadium or whatever. It's not as easy, but the creative types can also determine how to use those dollars for services, etc. Like endowing multiple professorships. That should reduce tuition since paying tor the Prof would lower the cost to the students.

Still, I don't see the angle where endowments, or enrollment, ever dictate classification of athletics. Though it may be the vehicle to drive a school to have a specific athletic classification.. D3, D2, etc.

[bigsig50]

I understand all of this. If Lindenwood wants to be a D1 school after not doing anything in D2, good for them. They're not losing anything by doing that. Go for it. But if you're a successful D2 school, it's wild to move up to D1 and think you're going to compete in anything besides FCS football, which is only because FCS football is a subset of D1 that doesn't include the powers that you have no shot of ever beating.

Again, my opinion is almost exclusively based off "how much athletic success can you have?" And my measure of "Success" is winning. That isn't everyone's opinion of college athletics. And that's fine. I just find it wild that schools who have halls built for national championship trophies in their history willingly move up to D1, and essentially can throw away the key to that hall...or convert it to a football coaches office. There's just as many kids who will turn down the D1 PWO to go play for a successful D2 as there are kids who will take the D1 scholarship at a mid-major instead of going to a successful D2.

That's why I asked....how does one measure "success" going from D2 to D1? Because it isn't going to come in trophies or athletics success. To me, the only way you can be "successful" by moving up to D1 is if it means your athletics program is making more money to contribute to the school as a whole. It's impossible to be "successful" from an athletics success standpoint. Boise State is the most successful school who joined D1 in the last 50 years, and they've won exactly zero national championships as a D1 school. Is their winning one Fiesta Bowl worth the 50 years of not winning anything else? That's for them to decide. I don't think that would be worth it. And that's by FAR the most successful story. NDSU keeps winning FCS titles, but as you pointed out, nobody really cares about that. Their next most notable thing in the last 20 years is them winning ONE March Madness game. Having that be the ceiling of success sounds miserable, in my opinion. But again, I understand that most people only care about one sport at a school and my caring about the entire program is not the norm for a fan. I would just be hard-pressed to go from competing for national championships in multiple sports and having multiple all-americans in multiple sports every year to.........maybe winning a couple conference championships and maybe getting one all-american across all sports once every few years.

So a few thoughts...

I see your rationale when speaking from an athletics standpoint only. However, the decision to go division 1 is rarely left to the athletics department alone. In fact, often times, they won't have much say in it at all. It's an institutional choice that the school needs to make based on their unique circumstances. Comparing school A's decision to stay D2 vs. school B's decision to move to D1 isn't going to be very productive or tell you a whole lot except that the schools' independent circumstances are probably different.

From an athletics point of view (specifically football), being a successful or unsuccessful D2 team may not have much bearing on their success at the FCS long term. Financially, because of the scholarship limits, their models are completely different. Less expensive state school often have an advantage at D2 level with the 36 scholarship limit. A 2/3 ride at a school that costs 12k a year is going to hit a lot different than a 2/3 ride at a private school that costs 25k a year. Conversely, well funded private schools that can max out the 63 scholarship limit are going to fair a lot better on what will amount to a more even playing field.

Outside of football, I agree 100%. Will I ever see a day where Lindenwood softball competes with OU or FSU for a championship? Very unlikely. However, will I ever see a day where LU men's basketball wins the OVC and makes "The Dance"? That's a possibility. With that comes exposure, which is likely the driving motivation behind the school's desire to go D1 in the first place. But... (bringing it back to my original thought), that was likely Lindenwood's motivation. The fact they're in a bigger market with opportunity to grow a brand and recognition through athletics. Not all schools are going to see value or even opportunity there.