CARDS_rule_the_Burgh
Nate LePage, Siena '13
Re: Any Potential new DIII Programs and the future of the Northeast 10 DII teams?
NCAA does not have a track record for allowing exceptions to the rules. (For example, RIT's men went up just before the moratorium on DI membership. New playups are no longer allowed. RIT has petitioned the NCAA to allow the women a one-time exception... and word is that one may end up needing to go to court. Apparently the NCAA's response to RIT's petition was something along the lines of "If you can't comply with Title IX because of a split-division hockey program, you can resolve the issue by dropping your men's team back to DIII)
DIII as a whole would have to vote on it collectively. I don't think the DIIs can submit this, because it would have to be voted on by DIII membership. I think a DIII multi-sport conference would have to sponsor the proposal. The fact of the matter is, DIII is 449 schools at the moment. There are 71 schools in DIII men's hockey, another 5 DIII schools sponsor DI Men's and/or Women's Hockey, and another 3 who sponsor on women's hockey. That leaves 370, which is slightly over 82% of the DIII membership. I'd be willing to bet that at least 350 of those schools couldn't care less about the state of the sport of Ice Hockey in NCAA Division III, and would see this proposal as a handful of DII Schools trying to barge in on the DIII scene. I'd bet at that debate, you'd hear the statement "But they still have an open opportunity to play in DI with the rest of their multi-sport conference!" a lot. (Which is true, because the new ban on playups allows for teams whose division does not sponsor a championship an opportunity to do so.)
Given that the NCAA is not known for stepping in and allowing exceptions to their established order because of "special considerations" (I don't think they've done it once), and the fact that 82% of the membership that would have to approve this motion has little to no vested interest in this issue, I'm going to go out on a limb and say it... the only way these teams resolve this issue is go DI or drop the whole program to DIII. Neither of which are likely to happen, as neither school wants to put the kind of an investment necessary for DI into their hockey program, and all these schools have very strong ties to DII in Basketball, which is likely a nice revenue-producer for them. Money talks, and the money says these programs will either have to maintain the status quo, which means in 2 years time St. M and St. A will have to join their NE-10 brethren when they get booted from the ECAC-E and then struggle to maintain a schedule with the DIII programs, or cut the program.
Yeah, I said it... these programs going the way of Scranton, Crookston, and LVC is a possibility. Or worse... it could go the way of MCLA, and not even have a club program...
NCAA does not have a track record for allowing exceptions to the rules. (For example, RIT's men went up just before the moratorium on DI membership. New playups are no longer allowed. RIT has petitioned the NCAA to allow the women a one-time exception... and word is that one may end up needing to go to court. Apparently the NCAA's response to RIT's petition was something along the lines of "If you can't comply with Title IX because of a split-division hockey program, you can resolve the issue by dropping your men's team back to DIII)
DIII as a whole would have to vote on it collectively. I don't think the DIIs can submit this, because it would have to be voted on by DIII membership. I think a DIII multi-sport conference would have to sponsor the proposal. The fact of the matter is, DIII is 449 schools at the moment. There are 71 schools in DIII men's hockey, another 5 DIII schools sponsor DI Men's and/or Women's Hockey, and another 3 who sponsor on women's hockey. That leaves 370, which is slightly over 82% of the DIII membership. I'd be willing to bet that at least 350 of those schools couldn't care less about the state of the sport of Ice Hockey in NCAA Division III, and would see this proposal as a handful of DII Schools trying to barge in on the DIII scene. I'd bet at that debate, you'd hear the statement "But they still have an open opportunity to play in DI with the rest of their multi-sport conference!" a lot. (Which is true, because the new ban on playups allows for teams whose division does not sponsor a championship an opportunity to do so.)
Given that the NCAA is not known for stepping in and allowing exceptions to their established order because of "special considerations" (I don't think they've done it once), and the fact that 82% of the membership that would have to approve this motion has little to no vested interest in this issue, I'm going to go out on a limb and say it... the only way these teams resolve this issue is go DI or drop the whole program to DIII. Neither of which are likely to happen, as neither school wants to put the kind of an investment necessary for DI into their hockey program, and all these schools have very strong ties to DII in Basketball, which is likely a nice revenue-producer for them. Money talks, and the money says these programs will either have to maintain the status quo, which means in 2 years time St. M and St. A will have to join their NE-10 brethren when they get booted from the ECAC-E and then struggle to maintain a schedule with the DIII programs, or cut the program.
Yeah, I said it... these programs going the way of Scranton, Crookston, and LVC is a possibility. Or worse... it could go the way of MCLA, and not even have a club program...
I hope not.
That is as likely as hawk buying Charlie a steak or Norm praising something done by Delventhal