Can The Patriot "Afford" Scholarship Football?

[DFW HOYA]

A comment in the PL week 1 thread asks this question:


What is amazing to me is that the academic "leaders" seem so besotted with the Ivy model that they ignore the quality private academic institutions that are very competitive at this level. It is as if schools such as Richmond, Nova, Furman, Wofford, and dare I say Elon, don't exist.


Yes, they exist, but there are three factors which play into the PL issue:

1. Gender equity. Furman, Wofford, and Elon are considerably out of proportion when measuring men's schoalrship aid to the population as a whole. Variances of more than five percent are potential Title IX issues:

Elon: 47% male, 62% of spending (-15%)
Wofford: 51% male, 70% of spending (-19%)
Furman: 43% male, 70% of spending (-27%)

Within the Patriot, everyone is close to five percent, meaning major increases to men's spending could prove difficult:

Bucknell: 49% male, 45% of spending (+4%)
Lafayette: 52% male, 51% of spending (+1%)
Fordham: 47% male, 48% of spending (-1%)
Georgetown: 45% male, 48% of spending (-3%)
Holy Cross: 44% male, 49% of spending (-5%)
Lehigh: 58% male, 63% of spending (-5%)
Colgate: 48% male, 54% of spending (-6%)

2. Football vs. Other Sports. Furman, Wofford, and Elon spend a lot of money on football vs. other sports--they carry fewer male sports and many are not on a major regional or national level.

Furman: 56% of men's spending on football
Elon: 57% of men's spending on football
Wofford: 63% of men's spending on football

The Patriot schools have more men's sports and while most (with one exception) spend comparably on football, they have more sports to fund as well.

Lafayette: 52% of men's spending on football
Fordham: 48% of men's spending on football
Colgate: 46% of men's spending on football
Holy Cross: 45% of men's spending on football
Lehigh: 43% of men's spending on football
Bucknell: 41% of men's spending on football
Georgetown: 11% of men's spending on football

Georgetown's numbers have two important caveats--one, the cost of basketball skews the numbers, and two, its number of men's sports in the Big East (13) require minimum levels of scholarship support that limits what could be spent on football, all things being equal. Villanova spends about 35% on football relative to its other men's sports but sponsors three fewer sports.

3. "Soft money". When football money is already baked in the budget (Fordham), conversion to athletic scholarships is easy, but when "soft" money (financial aid) is covering the difference instead of atheltic aid, a lot less so. This is the issue Lafayette is feeling the heat over and while other schools may not be as public about it, there may be a few others that have been floating on financial aid.

Can it be done? Yes. Will it? Hard to say. Do PL presidents really care if their school can get a money game at Temple or Buffalo instead of the status quo and games with Princeton and Brown instead?

[RichH2]

As usual DFW your research is depressingly accurate. $$ aside, as I have no verifiable info on any of our schools as to merit aid cost and Title IX, I agree that most do not care directly whether we play a MAC school or a PFL . They care about alumni pressure and funding, peer approval ( not us) and academic rep. At LU when they last deemphsized in the early 60s, there was somuch alumni pressure admin caved and hired Dunlap and doubled football $$. That pressure likewise led to Lembo leaving as the view was he could only bring winning seasons but no playoff success. consistent 8-3s were not enuf. Lembo smartly took his ability to a scholarship school and is very successful. Coen came in with the stated goal of building a Natl champioship team.On paper he has recruited well but has 10 losses by less than a td into this season and under 500 over his career here. This team is all his players. However we find ourselves in a different competive world than 4 yrs ago, more schollies around and IL aid increased. While I think Andy has built a solid team ,it does not appear to be keeping pace with much less catching schollie schools. He was a superb OC. The one he hired sucks. The coaching has been uneven in game management and schemes.Last yr,staff I think altered and expanded O nicely for Clark. Haveno explanation for CCSU.

Will LU take the necessary steps to merit aid. I think so. Will it force PL movement .NO If PL waffles on aid will LU move to the front. If Sterrett in control, YES. Is he?

Long winded response indicating that I am not optimistic of PL moving quickly or far enuf to save the PL . Compromise with 15 schollie min no max but with a slow phase in to keep some intra PL parity. By then some 5-8 yrs we will certainly be irrelevant

[Seawolf97]

A comment in the PL week 1 thread asks this question:



Yes, they exist, but there are three factors which play into the PL issue:

1. Gender equity. Furman, Wofford, and Elon are considerably out of proportion when measuring men's schoalrship aid to the population as a whole. Variances of more than five percent are potential Title IX issues:

Elon: 47% male, 62% of spending (-15%)
Wofford: 51% male, 70% of spending (-19%)
Furman: 43% male, 70% of spending (-27%)

Within the Patriot, everyone is close to five percent, meaning major increases to men's spending could prove difficult:

Bucknell: 49% male, 45% of spending (+4%)
Lafayette: 52% male, 51% of spending (+1%)
Fordham: 47% male, 48% of spending (-1%)
Georgetown: 45% male, 48% of spending (-3%)
Holy Cross: 44% male, 49% of spending (-5%)
Lehigh: 58% male, 63% of spending (-5%)
Colgate: 48% male, 54% of spending (-6%)

2. Football vs. Other Sports. Furman, Wofford, and Elon spend a lot of money on football vs. other sports--they carry fewer male sports and many are not on a major regional or national level.

Furman: 56% of men's spending on football
Elon: 57% of men's spending on football
Wofford: 63% of men's spending on football

The Patriot schools have more men's sports and while most (with one exception) spend comparably on football, they have more sports to fund as well.

Lafayette: 52% of men's spending on football
Fordham: 48% of men's spending on football
Colgate: 46% of men's spending on football
Holy Cross: 45% of men's spending on football
Lehigh: 43% of men's spending on football
Bucknell: 41% of men's spending on football
Georgetown: 11% of men's spending on football

Georgetown's numbers have two important caveats--one, the cost of basketball skews the numbers, and two, its number of men's sports in the Big East (13) require minimum levels of scholarship support that limits what could be spent on football, all things being equal. Villanova spends about 35% on football relative to its other men's sports but sponsors three fewer sports.

3. "Soft money". When football money is already baked in the budget (Fordham), conversion to athletic scholarships is easy, but when "soft" money (financial aid) is covering the difference instead of atheltic aid, a lot less so. This is the issue Lafayette is feeling the heat over and while other schools may not be as public about it, there may be a few others that have been floating on financial aid.

Can it be done? Yes. Will it? Hard to say. Do PL presidents really care if their school can get a money game at Temple or Buffalo instead of the status quo and games with Princeton and Brown instead?

Excellent post -start of a good discussion.

[blukeys]

A comment in the PL week 1 thread asks this question:



Yes, they exist, but there are three factors which play into the PL issue:

1. Gender equity. Furman, Wofford, and Elon are considerably out of proportion when measuring men's schoalrship aid to the population as a whole. Variances of more than five percent are potential Title IX issues:

Elon: 47% male, 62% of spending (-15%)
Wofford: 51% male, 70% of spending (-19%)
Furman: 43% male, 70% of spending (-27%)

Within the Patriot, everyone is close to five percent, meaning major increases to men's spending could prove difficult:

Bucknell: 49% male, 45% of spending (+4%)
Lafayette: 52% male, 51% of spending (+1%)
Fordham: 47% male, 48% of spending (-1%)
Georgetown: 45% male, 48% of spending (-3%)
Holy Cross: 44% male, 49% of spending (-5%)
Lehigh: 58% male, 63% of spending (-5%)
Colgate: 48% male, 54% of spending (-6%)

2. Football vs. Other Sports. Furman, Wofford, and Elon spend a lot of money on football vs. other sports--they carry fewer male sports and many are not on a major regional or national level.

Furman: 56% of men's spending on football
Elon: 57% of men's spending on football
Wofford: 63% of men's spending on football

The Patriot schools have more men's sports and while most (with one exception) spend comparably on football, they have more sports to fund as well.

Lafayette: 52% of men's spending on football
Fordham: 48% of men's spending on football
Colgate: 46% of men's spending on football
Holy Cross: 45% of men's spending on football
Lehigh: 43% of men's spending on football
Bucknell: 41% of men's spending on football
Georgetown: 11% of men's spending on football

Georgetown's numbers have two important caveats--one, the cost of basketball skews the numbers, and two, its number of men's sports in the Big East (13) require minimum levels of scholarship support that limits what could be spent on football, all things being equal. Villanova spends about 35% on football relative to its other men's sports but sponsors three fewer sports.

3. "Soft money". When football money is already baked in the budget (Fordham), conversion to athletic scholarships is easy, but when "soft" money (financial aid) is covering the difference instead of atheltic aid, a lot less so. This is the issue Lafayette is feeling the heat over and while other schools may not be as public about it, there may be a few others that have been floating on financial aid.

Can it be done? Yes. Will it? Hard to say. Do PL presidents really care if their school can get a money game at Temple or Buffalo instead of the status quo and games with Princeton and Brown instead?


For the purposes of Title IX the Equivalencies offered by the PL to athletes count the same as scholarships. I understand there may be some differences but in the end the cost issue of a scholarship vs. a grant in aid is minor as the richmond President found out a few years back when he mistakenly assumed that Richmond could save some bucks by going Grant in Aid.

Unless, the PL increases the number of athletes above the generally accepted 54 equivalencies. then Title IX should not be a significant issue. Yes if 9 more Scollies or equivalencies are added then there will be an impact as per Title IX and adding those equivalencies will help the PL teams.

I still go back to the statement of ngineer. If the PL does not really want to be in the hunt for the NC, they should just say so and schedule the Ivy Champ for a post season game. I prefer the AQ bowl over the IQ bowl. The AQ would be what they are throwing away.

[danefan]

For the purposes of Title IX the Equivalencies offered by the PL to athletes count the same as scholarships. I understand there may be some differences but in the end the cost issue of a scholarship vs. a grant in aid is minor as the richmond President found out a few years back when he mistakenly assumed that Richmond could save some bucks by going Grant in Aid.

Unless, the PL increases the number of athletes above the generally accepted 54 equivalencies. then Title IX should not be a significant issue. Yes if 9 more Scollies or equivalencies are added then there will be an impact as per Title IX and adding those equivalencies will help the PL teams.

I still go back to the statement of ngineer. If the PL does not really want to be in the hunt for the NC, they should just say so and schedule the Ivy Champ for a post season game. I prefer the AQ bowl over the IQ bowl. The AQ would be what they are throwing away.

In theory what you are saying is correct, however, according to the below article most PL schools have not been treating their equivalencies the same as scholarships for Title IX purposes. IMO they've been fudging numbers (except for Fordham).

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/ncaa/ncaa/ncaa+news/ncaa+news+online/2009/division+i/patriot+league+discusses+football+scholarships_07_ 21_09_ncaa_news



The decision to award athletics aid to football players at Fordham had little to do with economics. Unlike most institutions in the Patriot League, Fordham counted need-based aid given to football players toward its gender-equity limits under Title IX. The school already offered a comparable number of athletics scholarships to women as to men.

At most Patriot League schools, however, the need-based aid awarded to football players is not counted toward gender-equity limits. Therefore, if other institutions in the conference were to move toward awarding athletics aid in football, they also would need to award a comparable amount of athletics aid to female student-athletes to meet generally accepted Title IX requirements. For example, if a school were to offer 60 scholarships in football, it would need to offer 60 scholarships to female student-athletes as well.

For Fordham, which already counted its need-based aid as a scholarship for gender-equity purposes, the scale is already balanced. The school simply repackaged its dollars to be more strategic and assist in the recruitment of football student-athletes. (The school outlines its decision and its repercussions in a detailed Q&A document (http://www.fordham.edu/campus_resources/enewsroom/archives/archive_1573.asp).) Most Patriot League schools do not count that way, and any move toward allowing the scholarships could be cost-prohibitive for them.

[Go...gate]

Great thread!

[RichH2]

Dane,

it is not just 1 issue. An example with ABC college which does not count student aid towards gender equity and currently give 50 equivalencies but only gives 26 female equivalencies.To maintain the same level inswitching to merit aid ABC would have to add 24 more schollies. Some schools are in a real bind ,and most have some version of this issue.Others have plain $$$ issues and throw in some remaining philosophical crap ala the Ivies and you have a glimpse of the PL mess

There are perhaps 3 definite for the switch .

[blukeys]

In theory what you are saying is correct, however, according to the below article most PL schools have not been treating their equivalencies the same as scholarships for Title IX purposes. IMO they've been fudging numbers (except for Fordham).

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/ncaa/ncaa/ncaa+news/ncaa+news+online/2009/division+i/patriot+league+discusses+football+scholarships_07_ 21_09_ncaa_news

Interesting danefan. With this being the case are not those PL schools referenced in danger of a lawsuit??? And how does this impact DFW Hoya's original stats regarding the PL expenditures? Would not the PL's expenditures look more like Wofford and Furman.

One of the problems in making cross school and cross conference comparisons is differences in accounting procedures. It is nearly impossible to get a apples to apples comparison.

[carney2]

For the purposes of Title IX the Equivalencies offered by the PL to athletes count the same as scholarships. I understand there may be some differences but in the end the cost issue of a scholarship vs. a grant in aid is minor...

Not so, as danefan has already pointed out. Briefly:

Some of the PL schools have treated equivalencies as "the same type of need based aid offered to all students." In short, it is not in any way treated the same as a football scholarship, and does not count in the gender equity calculations since it is not athlete or sport specific.

Converting these equivalencies to football scholarships would not, as you indicate, cost much, if anything, additional in terms of funding the football program. Where the difference comes in, and where the problem arises, is that now you are offering this aid to a male athlete and a male athlete only. It is no longer need based aid offered to all incoming freshmen. There would now need to be an incredibly costly (or at least more than some of these schools care to spend) requirement to offer equal aid to female athletes.

I hope that you now see the dilemma. It is not a simple "$equivalencies = $scholarships, so what's the problem?"

[carney2]

With this being the case are not those PL schools referenced in danger of a lawsuit???

No. What they have been doing is perfectly "legal." There are many ways to remain in compliance with Title IX. It is not necessary to have body for body equity. For instance, and to carry this "cooking of the books" a little further, it is OK to have the funds "available" for female athletes and then just not spend the money. This, believe it or not, puts the institution "in compliance." This is precisely how a few of the Patriot league schools have been able to field a football team thus far. Being forced to spend those dollars AND also come up with the equalizer to football scholarships will make this a very bitter pill at I'm guessing at least half of the institutions.

My money keeps moving around the table on this issue, but I am now betting that

(1) The League will eventually (2010?) authorize football scholarships in the same way they authorized basketball scholarships back in the 90s. In other words, they will probably set a maximum (let's say 15 per year = 60, a little under the NCAA max of 63 to again say "we're not like those other schools"), but will let each school do its own thing.

(2) The League will still adhere to some sort of an Academic Index to further reinforce their holier than thou attitude.

In other words, you will see many of the Patriot League schools operating at an NEC - or lower - level of scholarships, and then filling in around them with equivalencies to make up the difference. Only the scholarships will count in the gender equity calculations.

[Go...gate]

No. What they have been doing is perfectly "legal." There are many ways to remain in compliance with Title IX. It is not necessary to have body for body equity. For instance, and to carry this "cooking of the books" a little further, it is OK to have the funds "available" for female athletes and then just not spend the money. This, believe it or not, puts the institution "in compliance." This is precisely how a few of the Patriot league schools have been able to field a football team thus far. Being forced to spend those dollars AND also come up with the equalizer to football scholarships will make this a very bitter pill at I'm guessing at least half of the institutions.

My money keeps moving around the table on this issue, but I am now betting that

(1) The League will eventually (2010?) authorize football scholarships in the same way they authorized basketball scholarships back in the 90s. In other words, they will probably set a maximum (let's say 15 per year = 60, a little under the NCAA max of 63 to again say "we're not like those other schools"), but will let each school do its own thing.

(2) The League will still adhere to some sort of an Academic Index to further reinforce their holier than thou attitude.

In other words, you will see many of the Patriot League schools operating at an NEC - or lower - level of scholarships, and then filling in around them with equivalencies to make up the difference. Only the scholarships will count in the gender equity calculations.

Talk about Rube Goldberg.....

[blukeys]

Talk about Rube Goldberg.....

Yes, My head is spinning. No wonder Lembo went to Elon.

[ngineer]

Not so, as danefan has already pointed out. Briefly:

Some of the PL schools have treated equivalencies as "the same type of need based aid offered to all students." In short, it is not in any way treated the same as a football scholarship, and does not count in the gender equity calculations since it is not athlete or sport specific.

Converting these equivalencies to football scholarships would not, as you indicate, cost much, if anything, additional in terms of funding the football program. Where the difference comes in, and where the problem arises, is that now you are offering this aid to a male athlete and a male athlete only. It is no longer need based aid offered to all incoming freshmen. There would now need to be an incredibly costly (or at least more than some of these schools care to spend) requirement to offer equal aid to female athletes.
I hope that you now see the dilemma. It is not a simple "$equivalencies = $scholarships, so what's the problem?"

That is the crux of the financial part of this puzzle. Nail on the head. However, you still have the 'peer' pressure of still being part of the 'Ivy' world and those who see going in another direction as abandoning the original principal of the PL.
All depends on who is holding the reins (reigns;)) at each school.

[ngineer]

Yes, My head is spinning. No wonder Lembo went to Elon.

Absolutely. Pete saw the handwriting on the wall and the Elon opening was a perfect escape valve for him. As I told a Phoenix fan, though. They should not fall in love with him, he's a guy on the move and I suspect will be looking to be an Asst. at an FBS in near future or HC at a lower level 'FBS'.

I also agree with Carney on his prognostication for the future. To keep Fordham around the PL will allow the members to gradually include merit scholarships up to a max/year and up to a total max--may guess would be up to 45, with the rest of the 'equivalencies' to make up the difference to 63.

[MplsBison]

$0.02:

1) drop some men's sports to be in compliance.

2) ditch the AI, either for equivalencies or scholarhips. Is it really going to ruin the school if 20 football players who "aren't reall PL material upstairs" are enrolled every year? Come on. For what you would gain, a winning football team that could compete for national championships, it seems worth it to sweep them under the rug.

I hope I just made some PL well-to-do'ers spit out their brandy onto the screen.

[carney2]

That is the crux of the financial part of this puzzle. Nail on the head. However, you still have the 'peer' pressure of still being part of the 'Ivy' world and those who see going in another direction as abandoning the original principal of the PL.
All depends on who is holding the reins (reigns;)) at each school.

Ergo, each school does its own thing, offering as few or as many football scholarships as it likes.

[ngineer]

$0.02:

1) drop some men's sports to be in compliance.

2) ditch the AI, either for equivalencies or scholarhips. Is it really going to ruin the school if 20 football players who "aren't reall PL material upstairs" are enrolled every year? Come on. For what you would gain, a winning football team that could compete for national championships, it seems worth it to sweep them under the rug.

I hope I just made some PL well-to-do'ers spit out their brandy onto the screen.

As for #1---Whose ox gets gored? One of the PL's badges is the number of intercollegiate sports the schools offer. Lehigh, has been making noise on the national stage in soccer and the lacrosse program is taking off. Athletics don't make money at PL schools. It's viewed as part of the overall academic package. So I don't see dropping sports to fund football scholarships to be the answer

As for #2--I don't see this happening either. The argument sells to big schools that make money on certain sports (i.e. Georgetown's exceptions for some basketball players), but to the small PL schools who have no 'money maker' sports it is not an argument that will sell to the faculty--who have significant say at these places. The primary reason for creating the PL was to "do it right". To do away with the AI would throw out the very core reason for the League's existence.

[carney2]

$0.02:

1) drop some men's sports to be in compliance.

2) ditch the AI, either for equivalencies or scholarhips. Is it really going to ruin the school if 20 football players who "aren't reall PL material upstairs" are enrolled every year? Come on. For what you would gain, a winning football team that could compete for national championships, it seems worth it to sweep them under the rug.

I hope I just made some PL well-to-do'ers spit out their brandy onto the screen.

The brandy may be dripping, but the "logic" just isn't there - at least from a Patriot League point of view.

1. Dropping non-scholarship men's sports (and non-scholarship is most of what you have at patriot League schools) would save very little money (how much would be saved by dropping men's golf?, men's swimming?). Further, with, let's say 60 football scholarships in the mix (that weren't there previously), how does dropping non-scholarship men's sports lighten the gender equity load? You still have to offset those 60 somehow on the women's side with real merit aid.

2. "Is it really going to ruin the school if 20 football players who "aren't real PL material upstairs" are enrolled every year?" Ruin is a strong word. Lessen, sully, cheapen might be better choices. Oh yeah, and the answer is yes.

"For what you would gain, a winning football team that could compete for national championships, it seems worth it to sweep them under the rug." The old "the end justifies the means" argument. This one doesn't even fly with me, and I'm as far from a Patriot League purist as one can get and still hold a degree from one of the contending institutions.

[ngineer]

The only recent example of any PL school doing anything drastic in raising the athletic bar with a ton of money, was when Lehigh bit the bullet, with substantial alumni help, to begin merit scholarships for its sacred wrestling program....HOWEVER, wrestling is NOT a PL sport; hence, the exception. But faced with the same handwriting on the wall back in the mid-90's that the program could no longer compete on the big stage with the Oklahomas, Iowas and Penn States. The decision was clear. Drop to D-II or step up. The decision was a no brainer for Lehigh's wrestling tradition. Interestingly, since going scholarship, the athletic index for Lehigh's wrestlers has improved significantly. Approximately half of the wrestling team had over 3.00 cum aves, with several academic all-americans. So jock straps and slide rules can swing together.

[carney2]

So jock straps and slide rules can swing together.

You are really dating yourself. You probably now need to explain what a slide rule is - and the term SRA - to the fuzzy faced kids on this board.

[Go...gate]

You are really dating yourself. You probably now need to explain what a slide rule is - and the term SRA - to the fuzzy faced kids on this board.

G-D, how I remember those damned readng lessons and tests in Catholic school WAY back in the day.

Agree with you, Carney, that it is going to be a mishmash as to scholarships if the FB circuit is to hold together.

[blukeys]

$0.02:

1) drop some men's sports to be in compliance.

2) ditch the AI, either for equivalencies or scholarhips. Is it really going to ruin the school if 20 football players who "aren't reall PL material upstairs" are enrolled every year? Come on. For what you would gain, a winning football team that could compete for national championships, it seems worth it to sweep them under the rug.

I hope I just made some PL well-to-do'ers spit out their brandy onto the screen.

My only problem with the AI in the Pl is the lack of flexibility it has towards member institutions. I know that this is an issue with Fordham.

In a sense every school has an Academic Index. This is something all schools do or at least they should do it.

It does no good to admit an athlete to a program that he/she has no opportunity to complete based on either grades, GED's or academic preparation. Athlete's typically benefit from having slightly lower entry requirements for the program that they apply to and this includes the Ivies.

However schools wisely do not open the floodgates to any great athlete to enter any program. This obviously does a disservice to the athlete who may enter a program for which he/she is ill suited and thereby set up to fail. It also does the school no favor as they will lose the athlete early in their career to academic probation or worse.

Maybe, NDSU has an opens admission policy. There are some public institutions that do this. But most schools have admission standards which are meant in part to assure that applicants have the preparation to succeed at attaining a 4 year degree.

[carney2]

G-D, how I remember those damned readng lessons and tests in Catholic school WAY back in the day.

We are at cross purposes here.

You are talking about that elementary school reading product (I think they involved themselves in other disciplines too) from McGraw Hill.

I am talking about Slide Rule Accuracy. When you used a slide rule for calculations in an exam, you always scribbled "SRA" next to your answer and circled it. It was a reminder to the grader that you were forced to use an imprecise magic ruler and are now begging for latitude if your numbers don't jive exactly with the grading key.

[MplsBison]

The brandy may be dripping, but the "logic" just isn't there - at least from a Patriot League point of view.

1. Dropping non-scholarship men's sports (and non-scholarship is most of what you have at patriot League schools) would save very little money (how much would be saved by dropping men's golf?, men's swimming?). Further, with, let's say 60 football scholarships in the mix (that weren't there previously), how does dropping non-scholarship men's sports lighten the gender equity load? You still have to offset those 60 somehow on the women's side with real merit aid.

2. "Is it really going to ruin the school if 20 football players who "aren't real PL material upstairs" are enrolled every year?" Ruin is a strong word. Lessen, sully, cheapen might be better choices. Oh yeah, and the answer is yes.

"For what you would gain, a winning football team that could compete for national championships, it seems worth it to sweep them under the rug." The old "the end justifies the means" argument. This one doesn't even fly with me, and I'm as far from a Patriot League purist as one can get and still hold a degree from one of the contending institutions.


1) really? All the other sports, other than bball and fball, are non-scholarship in the PL?

Jebus-H.

The PL really is tight-assed.

In that case, then no you are correct, it wouldn't help much to drop non-scholarship sports.



But wait a second, I thought there was some rule for being NCAA DI that you had to offer X scholarships? Or is it just equivalencies? And then the same "legal" argument applies of just pretending that it's the same aid that any student can get, even though that's a lie.

Someone should sue them on that. Really open things up.




2) Ah, I see.

I guess you really are "holier than thou" (as you put it), as you're clearly superior ethically than such sullied schools as Northwestern, Stanford, Duke, Tulane, etc etc etc

xcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxrolleyesx xrolleyesxxrolleyesxxrolleyesxxrolleyesx


Whatever. The AI is not much of a barrier to getting good football players. You certainly can win a NC with guys who can also get it done in the classroom.....IF you offer them real scholarships based on merit, and not financial need.


Just makes me chuckle that you think you're "better" than Stanford because you won't stoop to their level of letting in a few players who aren't the brightest bulbs in the room.

[MplsBison]

The only recent example of any PL school doing anything drastic in raising the athletic bar with a ton of money, was when Lehigh bit the bullet, with substantial alumni help, to begin merit scholarships for its sacred wrestling program....HOWEVER, wrestling is NOT a PL sport; hence, the exception. But faced with the same handwriting on the wall back in the mid-90's that the program could no longer compete on the big stage with the Oklahomas, Iowas and Penn States. The decision was clear. Drop to D-II or step up. The decision was a no brainer for Lehigh's wrestling tradition. Interestingly, since going scholarship, the athletic index for Lehigh's wrestlers has improved significantly. Approximately half of the wrestling team had over 3.00 cum aves, with several academic all-americans. So jock straps and slide rules can swing together.

Slide rule?

Is that like a TI-89?

[MplsBison]

My only problem with the AI in the Pl is the lack of flexibility it has towards member institutions. I know that this is an issue with Fordham.

In a sense every school has an Academic Index. This is something all schools do or at least they should do it.

It does no good to admit an athlete to a program that he/she has no opportunity to complete based on either grades, GED's or academic preparation. Athlete's typically benefit from having slightly lower entry requirements for the program that they apply to and this includes the Ivies.

However schools wisely do not open the floodgates to any great athlete to enter any program. This obviously does a disservice to the athlete who may enter a program for which he/she is ill suited and thereby set up to fail. It also does the school no favor as they will lose the athlete early in their career to academic probation or worse.

Maybe, NDSU has an opens admission policy. There are some public institutions that do this. But most schools have admission standards which are meant in part to assure that applicants have the preparation to succeed at attaining a 4 year degree.


The NCAA has the clearinghouse.

IMO, that should be enough. You shouldn't require football players to go above and beyond that.


But to each his own.

[RichH2]

All sports in PL are scholarship except football. School option whether and how much to offer.

[gophoenix]

The NCAA has the clearinghouse.

IMO, that should be enough. You shouldn't require football players to go above and beyond that.


But to each his own.

Dude, that's retarded. Each school should have it's own set of requirements, not base it off some minimum set of standards that is the lowest common denominator set by the NCAA. These are still schools with a set of requirements, they bend it for a students in each program whether it be sports, or a legacy, a musician or an engineering student they want and there is wiggle room in their code. but there is no reason to sacrifice the unviversity's standards as a whole because players meet the NCAA minimum. And this is true for both public and private schools.

[gophoenix]

1) really? All the other sports, other than bball and fball, are non-scholarship in the PL?

Jebus-H.

The PL really is tight-assed.

In that case, then no you are correct, it wouldn't help much to drop non-scholarship sports.



But wait a second, I thought there was some rule for being NCAA DI that you had to offer X scholarships? Or is it just equivalencies? And then the same "legal" argument applies of just pretending that it's the same aid that any student can get, even though that's a lie.

Someone should sue them on that. Really open things up.




2) Ah, I see.

I guess you really are "holier than thou" (as you put it), as you're clearly superior ethically than such sullied schools as Northwestern, Stanford, Duke, Tulane, etc etc etc

xcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxrolleyesx xrolleyesxxrolleyesxxrolleyesxxrolleyesx


Whatever. The AI is not much of a barrier to getting good football players. You certainly can win a NC with guys who can also get it done in the classroom.....IF you offer them real scholarships based on merit, and not financial need.


Just makes me chuckle that you think you're "better" than Stanford because you won't stoop to their level of letting in a few players who aren't the brightest bulbs in the room.

Why do you think like this. There are many who think entry to college should be based on academic, art or some sort of merit to the programs of the traditional college. And there is a lot of merit to this thinking. There is no reason to criticize those schools for thinking like SCHOOLS and not like minor league sporting venues. And that isn't to say that they think they are better than Duke, Stanford, Tulane, etc.... it means they have a different approach. How many people know Duke for basketball as opposed to their law and medical programs? Same for Stanford..... It is that type of mentality, they want to make it on academic merits rather than athletic merits. More power to them, there is nothing wrong with it.

Although I expect you to have a big problem because you have such a problem with private schools to begin with...

[HoyaMetanoia]

The NCAA has the clearinghouse.

IMO, that should be enough. You shouldn't require football players to go above and beyond that.


But to each his own.

A student that sneaks in just above the Clearinghouse minimums would wash out of Georgetown in weeks.

[DFW HOYA]

A student that sneaks in just above the Clearinghouse minimums would wash out of Georgetown in weeks.

This is more an issue in football than other sports--a basketball player usually has a summer and a fall semester to get acclimated to studies before the season takes hold, football players have to hit the ground running (figuratively and literally) in the fall. I don't know about washing out within weeks, but the rigors of freshman year coursework (particularly in business or foreign service) are not well suited to someone not prepared for it.

But back to the topic at hand: how "patient" will be Fordham if the PL approves some sort of slower approach that does not come close to Fordham's 60-63 grant plan?

[Franks Tanks]

Dude, that's retarded. Each school should have it's own set of requirements, not base it off some minimum set of standards that is the lowest common denominator set by the NCAA. These are still schools with a set of requirements, they bend it for a students in each program whether it be sports, or a legacy, a musician or an engineering student they want and there is wiggle room in their code. but there is no reason to sacrifice the unviversity's standards as a whole because players meet the NCAA minimum. And this is true for both public and private schools.

That is retared. Kids who barely pass the clearinghouse will have trouble passing classes and stying eligible at many schools. What is the point of setting a kid up for failure in the classroom?

[RichH2]

I guess as patient as they are forced to be unless they go Big South or Indie

[carney2]

All sports in PL are scholarship except football. School option whether and how much to offer.

And only a very few of those "options" have been exercised. Therefore, "cuts" would come primarily from non-scholarship sports.

[carney2]

That is retared. Kids who barely pass the clearinghouse will have trouble passing classes and stying eligible at many schools. What is the point of setting a kid up for failure in the classroom?

Obviously you miss the point, Franks. One of the primary goals of higher educational institutions is apparently to field winning, high visibility athletic teams. Missing this key point is yet another failing of the Patriot League.

[Franks Tanks]

Obviously you miss the point, Franks. One of the primary goals of higher educational institutions is apparently to field winning, high visibility athletic teams. Missing this key point is yet another failing of the Patriot League.

AHH -- thanks

[bison137]

For the purposes of Title IX the Equivalencies offered by the PL to athletes count the same as scholarships. I understand there may be some differences but in the end the cost issue of a scholarship vs. a grant in aid is minor.



When it comes to Title IX, that is not correct. IF a school has the exact same need-based aid program for male and female athletes, and if it turns out that more male athletes (or female) qualify for aid due to their financial situation, then there is Title IX issue. However, if scholarships are offered - which are independent of need - then normally they must be given out in roughly equivalent amounts to males and females to comply with Title IX.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

One of the unsaid issues with the league, IMO, is not simply the sports in which PL schools are members. It's those dreaded "exception sports" that throw everything out of whack.

Colgate has ECAC Hockey. Holy Cross is obviously attempting to "ramp up" hockey too, notably offering scholarships there.

Lehigh has ECAC wrestling.

Army & Navy have, of course, their FBS football programs. Army and Navy also are active in ECAC wrestling.

Georgetown has big-time basketball. Fordham would die to have big-time basketball, but are still mid-major basketball in name with a higher profile than PL basketball. The Big East are national players in non-revenue sports, while the A-10 are in certain circumstances too.

Think about that a second. Only American, Bucknell and Lafayette don't have sports in which they are national, scholarship players. In American and Bucknell's case, it's a little debatable because of their mid-major success on the hardwood - but the majority of nearly-full-members and associate members in football have a scholarship "elephant in the room" affecting the debate.

That's what makes HC's foray into scholarship hockey especially interesting. They've gone from being in the Bucknell/Lafayette camp ("just let me compromise on basketball, and we'll be fine") to being in the Colgate/Lehigh camp ("We're OK with 'non-scholarship', just give us our scholarships basketball (of course) but also in (exception sport)"). You could also put Army and Navy in this Lehigh/Colgate nexus, too, because of FBS football.

[MplsBison]

A student that sneaks in just above the Clearinghouse minimums would wash out of Georgetown in weeks.

AND?!!?!?

Then the problem has sorted itself out!!!

If he just isn't smart enough to get it done in the classroom, he will fail and will be done after fall.



Why bar entry in the first place?

[MplsBison]

Obviously you miss the point, Franks. One of the primary goals of higher educational institutions is apparently to field winning, high visibility athletic teams. Missing this key point is yet another failing of the Patriot League.

You're being sarcastic, but you hit it exactly on the head.


Cost v benefits: let in a few football players who meet clearinghouse but not the standards of PL schools and you get winning, highly visible teams that result in increased school spirit and donations.


But fine, if you'd rather miss that gravy train in order to hold your noses high, be my guest.

[Franks Tanks]

AND?!!?!?

Then the problem has sorted itself out!!!

If he just isn't smart enough to get it done in the classroom, he will fail and will be done after fall.



Why bar entry in the first place?

WHy would a school spend the time and effort to recruit 10 or 20 players that will last a month?

[RichH2]

Geez, Bison with your logic why not just hire 10or20 FB players for a year, then flunk them out and get anew batch next yr. We could be Conference USA of the EAST

[FUrams7]

Can The Patriot "Afford" Scholarship Football?

HOW CAN THE PL NOT AFFORD TO GO SCHOLLY!!!!!!!! The NEC, among other leagues, have caught up to and prepared to pass the PL League in talent level. In addition, the CAA continues to grow stronger in talent and recognition.. its saddenes me, but the PL is headed downhill. scholly's and soon may save the ship. if not.. its gonna get ugly and fast.

[gophoenix]

AND?!!?!?

Then the problem has sorted itself out!!!

If he just isn't smart enough to get it done in the classroom, he will fail and will be done after fall.



Why bar entry in the first place?

Uhm, the APR for one, that's why.

[DFW HOYA]

HOW CAN THE PL NOT AFFORD TO GO SCHOLLY!!!!!!!! The NEC, among other leagues, have caught up to and prepared to pass the PL League in talent level. In addition, the CAA continues to grow stronger in talent and recognition.. its saddenes me, but the PL is headed downhill. scholly's and soon may save the ship. if not.. its gonna get ugly and fast.

If you begin at the start of this thread, the discussion is not about talent and competition but structural issues (financial, sports sponsored, level of support) that makes the current PL arrangement a tangled web of interests and abilities.

OK, so Fordham figured it out and can plow ahead with football, but not every school has this latitude. The question remains what the PL can do versus what they will do.

[RamRay]

I think the PL can afford it, the question is do PL schools want it done. There will be some sacrifice, but in the end it will help PL football be competative in the future.

I can ony hope the PL can re-allign their financial packages for football. Given that for these schools, football and only football are not scholarship based and all other PL teams are scholarship, it can be done. Start the paperwork to convert grants to scholies now so in a few years the PL can hold it's own against others. OR kick Fordham out and serve as Ivy league schedule fillers.

Fordham got creamed by CAA's URI and most NEC who played PL teams won this weekend. Going forward it will be more difficult for PL teams to be competative with scholy leagues. Fordham has agreed to forego a chance at winning a championship and an autobid in the PL and being a full part of the PL in 2010 in order to stay in the PL and hope the PL works out some way to allow scholarships. I think this proves Fordham's desire to stay in the PL, else we could have just announced we are ending the association in 2010: we are truly hoping the PL will allow scholies as each school sees fit. Many in the PL want to offer scholarship's and rightly fear becoming less competative (ask Pete Lembro formerly of Lehigh and Dave Clausen formerly of Fordham who each know that a non-scoly program is a dead-end for serious FCS competition). I think the PL's traditional slow-pace to make big dicisions has been put to the test. While there are a lot of posters who see a new A-10, or a giant CAA with Fordham in it, there are many at Fordham who want to stay in the PL, but only with Scholies.

Some History: Fordham, once a full memeber of the PL wanted scholies in BBall. The PL said no, Fordham left for the A-10 save for FBall. THEN Holy Cross demanded BBall scholarships and the PL allowed them. Had the PL said yes, Fordham would have stayed in the PL as a full memeber.

I hope history does not repeat itself.

[MplsBison]

WHy would a school spend the time and effort to recruit 10 or 20 players that will last a month?

They wouldn't last a month. They'd last a season, at least. They wouldn't be ineligible until the next semester.


Besides that, I think there are many capable players out there who don't meet the elite PL standards but who do pass the clearinghouse who could hang in there, academically, in a PL school.


But like I said, keep your elitist, non-sullying AI standard. Just award REAL scholarships, based on merit.

[youwouldno]

Iverson sure lasted a while at Georgetown.

[Franks Tanks]

They wouldn't last a month. They'd last a season, at least. They wouldn't be ineligible until the next semester.


Besides that, I think there are many capable players out there who don't meet the elite PL standards but who do pass the clearinghouse who could hang in there, academically, in a PL school.


But like I said, keep your elitist, non-sullying AI standard. Just award REAL scholarships, based on merit.

Kids who barely pass the clearing house will not last in a PL school. It is not snobbery, its just facts. The reason is that classes are very small, their are no junk classes, and profs expect engaged students in every class. I am not saying the class are harder or the students better, but there is simply nowhere to hide. When you have a class of 9 students and the prof expects each one to have read the matrial and be actively engaged in the class discussion every day, an unqualified student simply cannot keep up.

Also it's not about "hanging in there" it is about success in the classroom and athletic field and being a well rounded person.

[blukeys]

They wouldn't last a month. They'd last a season, at least. They wouldn't be ineligible until the next semester.


Besides that, I think there are many capable players out there who don't meet the elite PL standards but who do pass the clearinghouse who could hang in there, academically, in a PL school.


But like I said, keep your elitist, non-sullying AI standard. Just award REAL scholarships, based on merit.

I am curious Mplsbison would you care to name the FCS schools that use only the NCAA clearinghouse standards for admission by their FOOTBALL programs? Looking at just the CAA South I can't think of one although maybe Towson might do so for in state students. I know Furman, Wofford, and Elon require more than the minimum NCAA Clearinghouse standards. Are all these schools just being snooty or are they genuinely concerned about what is best for their students?

Your inane suggestion that one should keep an 18 year old kid for one semester does the school and the student no good. Most successful FCS teams have 5th year seniors in some key positions. I know I would rather have a 23 year old offensive lineman than an 18 year old fresh out of high school.

In addition after you have used this 18 year old up for his one year of eligibility you will have a lower graduation rate for which you can be penalized by the NCAA.

I have been critical of the "holier than thou" attitude of some PL folks but the AI is not the cause of this nor is it the result. For the most part the AI is well intentioned.

I always thought that NDSU was a quality school that did in fact have admission standards. The more I read on this thread the more I realize I was probably in error.

[blukeys]

I think the PL can afford it, the question is do PL schools want it done. There will be some sacrifice, but in the end it will help PL football be competative in the future.

I can ony hope the PL can re-allign their financial packages for football. Given that for these schools, football and only football are not scholarship based and all other PL teams are scholarship, it can be done. Start the paperwork to convert grants to scholies now so in a few years the PL can hold it's own against others. OR kick Fordham out and serve as Ivy league schedule fillers.

Fordham got creamed by CAA's URI and most NEC who played PL teams won this weekend. Going forward it will be more difficult for PL teams to be competative with scholy leagues. Fordham has agreed to forego a chance at winning a championship and an autobid in the PL and being a full part of the PL in 2010 in order to stay in the PL and hope the PL works out some way to allow scholarships. I think this proves Fordham's desire to stay in the PL, else we could have just announced we are ending the association in 2010: we are truly hoping the PL will allow scholies as each school sees fit. Many in the PL want to offer scholarship's and rightly fear becoming less competative (ask Pete Lembro formerly of Lehigh and Dave Clausen formerly of Fordham who each know that a non-scoly program is a dead-end for serious FCS competition). I think the PL's traditional slow-pace to make big dicisions has been put to the test. While there are a lot of posters who see a new A-10, or a giant CAA with Fordham in it, there are many at Fordham who want to stay in the PL, but only with Scholies.

Some History: Fordham, once a full memeber of the PL wanted scholies in BBall. The PL said no, Fordham left for the A-10 save for FBall. THEN Holy Cross demanded BBall scholarships and the PL allowed them. Had the PL said yes, Fordham would have stayed in the PL as a full memeber.

I hope history does not repeat itself.

I would love to see you guys as all sport in the CAA. You would have some natural rivals in all sports. I think you would find Men's and women's basketball competitive.
It would probably p.o, the Nova crowd but that would just be a side benefit. xsmiley_wixxsmiley_wixxsmiley_wix

[MplsBison]

Kids who barely pass the clearing house will not last in a PL school. It is not snobbery, its just facts. The reason is that classes are very small, their are no junk classes, and profs expect engaged students in every class. I am not saying the class are harder or the students better, but there is simply nowhere to hide. When you have a class of 9 students and the prof expects each one to have read the matrial and be actively engaged in the class discussion every day, an unqualified student simply cannot keep up.

Also it's not about "hanging in there" it is about success in the classroom and athletic field and being a well rounded person.

How do you know? Have you ever let one try? No of course not, that might lead to more of "those kinds" getting into the school.

[MplsBison]

I am curious Mplsbison would you care to name the FCS schools that use only the NCAA clearinghouse standards for admission by their FOOTBALL programs? Looking at just the CAA South I can't think of one although maybe Towson might do so for in state students. I know Furman, Wofford, and Elon require more than the minimum NCAA Clearinghouse standards. Are all these schools just being snooty or are they genuinely concerned about what is best for their students?

Your inane suggestion that one should keep an 18 year old kid for one semester does the school and the student no good. Most successful FCS teams have 5th year seniors in some key positions. I know I would rather have a 23 year old offensive lineman than an 18 year old fresh out of high school.

In addition after you have used this 18 year old up for his one year of eligibility you will have a lower graduation rate for which you can be penalized by the NCAA.

I have been critical of the "holier than thou" attitude of some PL folks but the AI is not the cause of this nor is it the result. For the most part the AI is well intentioned.

I always thought that NDSU was a quality school that did in fact have admission standards. The more I read on this thread the more I realize I was probably in error.

NDSU "highly recommends" a score of 21 or higher on the ACT. What can I say, they let me in?

[Franks Tanks]

How do you know? Have you ever let one try? No of course not, that might lead to more of "those kinds" getting into the school.

I have seen plenty of kids (athletes and non-athletes) with very solid HS stats do poorly. Common sense and reason dictates what is likely to happen.

[youwouldno]

It is unethical to admit a student unless he/she is capable of graduating and, in the earnest judgment of the recruiter, will in fact make an effort to do so.

Grades and test scores do not authoritatively answer to those issues but they are useful benchmarks. Refusing to consider a degree of flexibility is sort of a self-indictment; the PL does not trust itself to properly account for the best interests of the student-athletes and member institutions. The institutions do not trust their coaches or each other. I'm not convinced that's the right way to do things, beyond the nuts and bolts issues.

[Franks Tanks]

It is unethical to admit a student unless he/she is capable of graduating and, in the earnest judgment of the recruiter, will in fact make an effort to do so.

Grades and test scores do not authoritatively answer to those issues but they are useful benchmarks. Refusing to consider a degree of flexibility is sort of a self-indictment; the PL does not trust itself to properly account for the best interests of the student-athletes and member institutions. The institutions do not trust their coaches or each other. I'm not convinced that's the right way to do things, beyond the nuts and bolts issues.

I agree with the trust issue and perhaps a bit more flexibility is in order, but PL schools have enough slots to let in kids who are solid but not spectacular students. As you say it is a judgement call at some point.

[gophoenix]

How do you know? Have you ever let one try? No of course not, that might lead to more of "those kinds" getting into the school.

More of what kids? What are you talking about? I have looked at a few schools online just in passing now, and I haven't seen one that uses the minimum for the NCAA Clearinghouse as a base for student admission. Some list requirements, some show requirements as being bendable if you are highly involved in clubs and activities.

What the PL guys say is true at both public and private schools, requirements are there to keep riff raff out (it doesn't pay to have ineligible players left and right at the end of every semester), it kills the APR to do that (a la NCAA cutting scholarships if you don't take people that will work in YOUR college), and so on. Every school has their requirements and bends them for programs that they want kids in, but only bend them for kids they think will work in the school.

It's not being snooty, its not being holier than thou. It is in the best interest of schools to have kids who graduate, and its better for the image if they graduate (ie, who wants to go to schoo lthat flunks out people left and right because they let any old athlete in). Plus for private schools, they aren't taking public money (ie, kids don't last, they have to find someone to fill the spot), someone not in the spot is lost money; scholarship or not. Even public schools will take that hit if they can't fil lthe voids.

I am seriously, do you really not get all this.

[MplsBison]

Addmissions offices have leeway to let someone in who doesn't meet the academic standards if there are other considerations, such as you mention clubs or volunteering or whatever.


Playing football happens to be one of those considerations.



Again, goes back to cost/benefits. Let in a few "underachievers" in order to gain a highly visible, championship team which leads to increased school spirit and donations. It's a business decision, IMO.

You have not even sullied the degree or academic reputation of the school. Not even a single iota. It's ridiculous and elitist to suggestion otherwise, IMO.


We may just have to agree to disagree, but I think I've won the argument when I have schools like Stanford, Northwestern, Duke, etc. on my side.

[blukeys]

Addmissions offices have leeway to let someone in who doesn't meet the academic standards if there are other considerations, such as you mention clubs or volunteering or whatever.


Playing football happens to be one of those considerations.



Again, goes back to cost/benefits. Let in a few "underachievers" in order to gain a highly visible, championship team which leads to increased school spirit and donations. It's a business decision, IMO.

You have not even sullied the degree or academic reputation of the school. Not even a single iota. It's ridiculous and elitist to suggestion otherwise, IMO.


We may just have to agree to disagree, but I think I've won the argument when I have schools like Stanford, Northwestern, Duke, etc. on my side.


You don't have schools such as Stanford, Nothwestern or Duke on your side. They have admission standards for athletes far above the NCAA minimum of the Clearinghouse. Do You even have a clue what the Academic Index for PL athletes is?

There are lower standards for PL football players and the Ivies. You have been arguing against yourself in this entire thread.

Please tell me again the Schools that use as their criteria for admitting athletes only the NCAA Clearinghouse Standards. I know Delaware requires more than this for their athletes as does, Richmond, JMU, William and Mary, Duke, Stanford, etc.

[gophoenix]

Addmissions offices have leeway to let someone in who doesn't meet the academic standards if there are other considerations, such as you mention clubs or volunteering or whatever.


Playing football happens to be one of those considerations.



Again, goes back to cost/benefits. Let in a few "underachievers" in order to gain a highly visible, championship team which leads to increased school spirit and donations. It's a business decision, IMO.

You have not even sullied the degree or academic reputation of the school. Not even a single iota. It's ridiculous and elitist to suggestion otherwise, IMO.


We may just have to agree to disagree, but I think I've won the argument when I have schools like Stanford, Northwestern, Duke, etc. on my side.

Admissions personnel have SOME leeway, not complete control.

Taking in underachievers that will flunk out does NOTHING for the school. if players flunk, it hurts the APR. That in turn hurts the program and all of it hurts that university's image.

Seriously.

[MplsBison]

Admissions personnel have SOME leeway, not complete control.

Taking in underachievers that will flunk out does NOTHING for the school. if players flunk, it hurts the APR. That in turn hurts the program and all of it hurts that university's image.

Seriously.

Sure, I agree.


But does that justify going all the way to the other end of the spectrum and requiring that a football player be one of the top in his class with a 30+ ACT in order to play for a school?

Hardly, IMO.



There has to be some compromise between the NCAA clearinghouse and the current AI.

[gophoenix]

Sure, I agree.


But does that justify going all the way to the other end of the spectrum and requiring that a football player be one of the top in his class with a 30+ ACT in order to play for a school?

Hardly, IMO.



There has to be some compromise between the NCAA clearinghouse and the current AI.

But that's just it, there doesn't have to be a compromise at all. They can do it the way they want to and there is really nothing wrong with it.

[Go...gate]

I think it is fair to say this thread is veering off the the track.

I've said this a couple of times before and it is unpopular, but...are we headed for a 40-scholarship max Patriot League football conference, to ostensibly keep everybody "competitive"?

[carney2]

I think it is fair to say this thread is veering off the the track.

I've said this a couple of times before and it is unpopular, but...are we headed for a 40-scholarship max Patriot League football conference, to ostensibly keep everybody "competitive"?

Yes, we have veered far off course.

A 40 scholarship max intuitively makes no sense. The League would lose Fordham, which has already established their own "max" at 15 per year X 4 = 60. Since appeasing Fordham and keeping them in the fold is ostensibly the reason that this subject is on the agenda anyway,...well, 40 just makes no sense.

I'm still betting that the League goes with "do your own thing" which will, of course, mean that some (my guess is any or all of the following 4: Bucknell, Georgetown, Holy Cross and Lafayette) will set their own limits at 40 or less. Why? Back to the theme of this thread: because they perceive that they can't "afford" anything more.

[Go...gate]

Yes, we have veered far off course.

A 40 scholarship max intuitively makes no sense. The League would lose Fordham, which has already established their own "max" at 15 per year X 4 = 60. Since appeasing Fordham and keeping them in the fold is ostensibly the reason that this subject is on the agenda anyway,...well, 40 just makes no sense.

I'm still betting that the League goes with "do your own thing" which will, of course, mean that some (my guess is any or all of the following 4: Bucknell, Georgetown, Holy Cross and Lafayette) will set their own limits at 40 or less. Why? Back to the theme of this thread: because they perceive that they can't "afford" anything more.

And the "affording" issue is based in Title IX? Just trying to be clear. Because I can see the following scenario, which will be reminiscent of PL basketball not long ago:

Fordham: - 63 Scholarships
Lehigh: 57 Scholarships (just enough to be a counter)
Colgate: 57 "
Lafayette: 57 "
Holy Cross: 57 "
Bucknell: 40 "
Georgetown: 0 " (all equivalencies)

[RichH2]

Not bad Gate, altho I think GU, based on DFW's estimate could do up to 20 I think

Q someone mentioned merit aid with equivalencies to fill in rest. Can that be done and still comply with gender equity?

[Go...gate]

As an attorney but not a constitutional scholar, it would seem to me to do the "hybrid" thing with merit aid and equivalencies might invite litigation, e.g. does the use of equivalencies "discriminate" against women. What say you, other AGS counsellors?

[MplsBison]

The best way to mitigate the legal risk, IMO, is to provide all athletic aid in the form of merit-based scholarships in an amount to each gender based soley upon the demographics of the school enrollment (IE, a school with 55% females would have 55% of the athletic scholarships to females, etc.).


Anything short of that is asking for a lawsuit unless you use the DIII-in-DI model of only providing financial-need based aid.

[carney2]

And the "affording" issue is based in Title IX? Just trying to be clear.

Pretty much, but there are other issues as these institutions emerge from the current economic downturn. Check this article from last Friday's New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/05...aying-for-college/05money.html?em

OOPS. SORRY. THE ARTICLE HAS APPARENTLY BEEN DELETED VIA SOME SORT OF A "TIMEOUT" MECHANISM.

I don't think that Lafayette's President Weiss expects Patriot League type schools to emerge into the same world they left behind.

Anyway, each school has its own set of problems and priorities. Some have danced through the Title IX loopholes to a greater extent than others.

[carney2]

As an attorney but not a constitutional scholar, it would seem to me to do the "hybrid" thing with merit aid and equivalencies might invite litigation, e.g. does the use of equivalencies "discriminate" against women. What say you, other AGS counsellors?

No counsellor me. But I note that equivalencies are not deemed to discriminate against women in the current environment where they are the only form of football aid. I ask what would be different about equivalencies if they were used in conjunction with scholarships? The old argument still holds: they are need based aid, the same as is offered to every incoming freshman and freshwoman, and therefore neither gender specific nor discriminating in any way.

[Franks Tanks]

And the "affording" issue is based in Title IX? Just trying to be clear. Because I can see the following scenario, which will be reminiscent of PL basketball not long ago:

Fordham: - 63 Scholarships
Lehigh: 57 Scholarships (just enough to be a counter)
Colgate: 57 "
Lafayette: 57 "
Holy Cross: 57 "
Bucknell: 40 "
Georgetown: 0 " (all equivalencies)

I think it makes a lot of sense for the PL to get to counter status. For example Rutgers plays Howard and Texas Southern this year. Nothing againt those schools, but the better PL teams would most certainly be favored to beat those schools. Colgate. Lehigh, and Lafayette are long time rivals of Rutgers. In fact Rutgers still ranks as one of Lafayette's and Lehigh's most played opponents and vice versa-- and we havent played in over 30 years. I think Schiano would schedule those three and Bucknell (his alma mater) in a heartbeat if we were counters.

[DFW HOYA]

And the "affording" issue is based in Title IX? Just trying to be clear. Because I can see the following scenario, which will be reminiscent of PL basketball not long ago:

Fordham: - 63 Scholarships
Lehigh: 57 Scholarships (just enough to be a counter)
Colgate: 57 "
Lafayette: 57 "
Holy Cross: 57 "
Bucknell: 40 "
Georgetown: 0 " (all equivalencies)

Just to be clear, Georgetown can't afford "all equivalencies" at this point, so what you really mean is 0 scholarships, 10-15 equivalencies and the rest are on their own. (This scenario would be especially awkward when six of the seven schools can offer a well-to-do recruit a free ride and one can't offer anything. )

[MplsBison]

If PL football equivalencies don't count for title IX, then why does the NCAA count them as equivalencies?

To put it in another way, why don't the pioneer league schools have any equivalencies counted against their football programs, if they are using the same need-based aid only?


Doesn't it seem like the PL is claiming that aid only available to football players is the same aid that any student, man or woman, could obtain.

[RichH2]

I, too am an attorney, albeit retired, which is why I asked the Q. While apparently gender neutral as available to all students, once you put need and merit aid in the same mix , the possibility of abuse is self evident and the perception even if not the reality of gender bias in favorof males almost begs for litigation. However, many other posters are much more knowledgable about the gordion knot of Title IX. I would imagine that some variation of this scenario has arisen. How was it treated, if it has come up.I would hate for thePL to be a test case.

[RichH2]

Bison , they are called "equivalencies" precisely because they are not merit aid. The purpose is to prevent a school from giving out 120 equivalencies , which $$ is in fact not generally available to all students. If as in the IL such $$ is the same and available to all then like the academies there is no limit. If such packages are need based and only for football players, then those grants face the same upper limit as all other FCS .

[ngineer]

No counsellor me. But I note that equivalencies are not deemed to discriminate against women in the current environment where they are the only form of football aid. I ask what would be different about equivalencies if they were used in conjunction with scholarships? The old argument still holds: they are need based aid, the same as is offered to every incoming freshman and freshwoman, and therefore neither gender specific nor discriminating in any way.

I agree. So long as the 'equivalency' is based upon a need based formula that is the same as any other student, then I think that is compliance. I also agree that different school's demographics will come into play. Lehigh has approx. 60% men, so they can bend their aid in that direction---and already do with their wrestling scholarships. I note, however, that Lehigh's womens crew is a varsity sport, whereas mens crew appears to be 'club' category? Oh the games we have to play...xrotatehx

[ngineer]

I think it makes a lot of sense for the PL to get to counter status. For example Rutgers plays Howard and Texas Southern this year. Nothing againt those schools, but the better PL teams would most certainly be favored to beat those schools. Colgate. Lehigh, and Lafayette are long time rivals of Rutgers. In fact Rutgers still ranks as one of Lafayette's and Lehigh's most played opponents and vice versa-- and we havent played in over 30 years. I think Schiano would schedule those three and Bucknell (his alma mater) in a heartbeat if we were counters.

Yeah, the 'good ol' days'...We had a great series with Rutgers when I was in school and over the last 10 games between the two schools, we split 5 each. I think our last one was around 1977 at RU. And if we could up to 'counter' status, maybe JoePa would deem us worthy of a trip to Happy Valley! Give the Nits a chance to retaliate for their worst loss in history!:D

[jimbo65]

Just to be clear, Georgetown can't afford "all equivalencies" at this point, so what you really mean is 0 scholarships, 10-15 equivalencies and the rest are on their own. (This scenario would be especially awkward when six of the seven schools can offer a well-to-do recruit a free ride and one can't offer anything. )
I have a ?. My view of Gtown is a national university, with a well heeled alum base situated in an excellent location and possessing a sports program supported by a top notch basketball program. Why does the University not support fball. There is a tradition, albeit many years ago, of success. Gtown fball is similar to Fordham basketball, both are generally failures. There is one difference, Fordham spends/squanders millions each year on the bball program. We want to succeed but are inept, seems Gtown does not care about fball. Is my analysis wrong or does GTown really not have the cash to succeed in fball.

[DFW HOYA]

I have a ?. My view of Gtown is a national university, with a well heeled alum base situated in an excellent location and possessing a sports program supported by a top notch basketball program. Why does the University not support fball. There is a tradition, albeit many years ago, of success. Gtown fball is similar to Fordham basketball, both are generally failures. There is one difference, Fordham spends/squanders millions each year on the bball program. We want to succeed but are inept, seems Gtown does not care about fball. Is my analysis wrong or does GTown really not have the cash to succeed in fball.

The analysis is wrong. There are at least five factors in play, in various amounts:

1. Georgetown is a highly leveraged university (over $700M in liabilities). Athletics must have cash on hand to get anything built, which is why a Top 20 track program has no track and a Top 20 basketball program has no practice facility. Absent cash on hand, you get this:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_5aDKqsf1RVE/SpSMgdAzrwI/AAAAAAAAAFQ/yTpXuof1UQU/s1600-h/msf5.jpg

Without facilities, revenue potential is sharply limited. People squawk about that Georgetown only averages 2,100 a game, but it only holds 2,400. People aren't going to pay money to sit on dirt.

2. What about basketball? Revenue from men's basketball goes back into basketball, owing to the extreme costs imposed in renting Verizon Center because the Big East mandates arena sizes of at least 6,000 for games. Thirteen other men's sports compete for what is essentially a $5 million budget.

3. Among those 13 sports, 10 compete in the Big East, which has instituted minimum scholarship requirements. Scholarship money that could conceivably be directed to football may, in the future, go to meet requirements in tennis, golf, or swimming.

4. The combination of the Patriot League Academic Index and the inability to sign players that get better offers elsewhere have limited the degree to which Georgetown can get the visibility needed in the marketplace. PL Football gets a big yawn in markets like Washington and New York among athletes and of fans.

5. Nine straight losing seasons do not rally the faithful. There's no Bill Walsh available to cover the gaps.

Obviously, Georgetown doesn't need football to stay in a league or for the school's name recognition, but GU has shown support for football over the last 45 years now and 104 seasons overall. The money isn't there right now for the kind of things Fordham is capable of doing, which raises all sorts of competitive questions as the PL stumbles into the future, one way or the other.

[ngineer]

All of this talk of "affording" scholarships goes well beyond cash. Universities such as these are not typically run to the drum of the 'fan base' of the school, since in reality, the fan base of these schools is relatively small in comparison to the alumni base, of which the great majority give a rat's azz about how well the football team or bball team is doing. The vocals about such things (like us) are really in the minority. We are just more vocal about our interest than the geeks, nerds, computer whizzes, entrepreneurs, and board room mavens. The powers that be are much more interested in seeing the graduates going on to meaningful careers and professions. Athletics, while deemed important as PART of the academic experience, is not much more than part of the diversionary activities that make life more enjoyable, as opposed to an end in itself.
So can the PL "afford" to go the route of scholarships? In a cash sense, yes. In a broader, philosophical sense, maybe not. Until "it " reaches that level of importance on the grand scale of the institutions, I am afraid we're stuck in the limbo we find ourselves.
Done.

[OL FU]

All of this talk of "affording" scholarships goes well beyond cash. Universities such as these are not typically run to the drum of the 'fan base' of the school, since in reality, the fan base of these schools is relatively small in comparison to the alumni base, of which the great majority give a rat's azz about how well the football team or bball team is doing. The vocals about such things (like us) are really in the minority. We are just more vocal about our interest than the geeks, nerds, computer whizzes, entrepreneurs, and board room mavens. The powers that be are much more interested in seeing the graduates going on to meaningful careers and professions. Athletics, while deemed important as PART of the academic experience, is not much more than part of the diversionary activities that make life more enjoyable, as opposed to an end in itself.
So can the PL "afford" to go the route of scholarships? In a cash sense, yes. In a broader, philosophical sense, maybe not. Until "it " reaches that level of importance on the grand scale of the institutions, I am afraid we're stuck in the limbo we find ourselves.
Done.

I agree with your post. I wonder to what extent a comparison of the FUs and WCs and Richmonds of the world to the schools in the PL ends simply because of the fact that football in the south is a "cultural" requirement xconfusedx

[carney2]

I think it makes a lot of sense for the PL to get to counter status.

Undoubtedly true for those schools that care. (Georgetown? Bucknell?) Anyway, counter status is currently 57. Equivalencies count. You have 57 equivalencies, you are a counter on FBS schedules across America. My contention is that you can get to counter status without 57 merit aid football scholarships. Just combine a lower number of football scholarships with some equivalencies (that theoretically wouldn't rock the Title IX boat and thereby hold costs down) and you're there.

[colorless raider]

xsmhxOL FU,

The "cultural" reference is very important as in the Northeast that no longer is applicable. Eastern football is really three schools Penn State, Rutgers and BC, perhps 'Cuse. The academics and the media have regulated Ivy/Patriot football to an activity only. The crowds at Colgate games are family older alums and townies. Not the craz of yesteryear.

[OL FU]

xsmhxOL FU,

The "cultural" reference is very important as in the Northeast that no longer is applicable. Eastern football is really three schools Penn State, Rutgers and BC, perhps 'Cuse. The academics and the media have regulated Ivy/Patriot football to an activity only. The crowds at Colgate games are family older alums and townies. Not the craz of yesteryear.

Of Course SC doesn't have pro football. ( I know a lot of people consider the Panthers to be Carolina's team, but.....) on any given saturday, it is very possible to have 300,000 people in college stadiums in South Carolina and the state only has 4,000,000 people. xnodx College football is still the king down heahxsmiley_wix

[danefan]

I don't think the PL should worry about getting to "counter" status.

Many FBS teams are now playing non-counter games. Any second FCS game on a FBS schedule is a non counter and if Albany can get a BCS game why can't PL teams?

Another thing - there are many "full scholarship" FCS teams that are not funding 63 rides. Case-in-point - Georgia Southern. Coach Hatcher said on his Monday morning presser for this week that GSU has been funding at around 54-56 scholarships for the past 3 years. Thus, GSU is NOT A COUNTER. They're playing at North Carolina next week.

Seems to me like Fordham may have overstated the need to get scholarships for payday games. These games are out there.....if AD's really want to play them.

[Go...gate]

Just to be clear, Georgetown can't afford "all equivalencies" at this point, so what you really mean is 0 scholarships, 10-15 equivalencies and the rest are on their own. (This scenario would be especially awkward when six of the seven schools can offer a well-to-do recruit a free ride and one can't offer anything. )

10-15 total, or 10-15 each year??

[DFW HOYA]

10-15 total, or 10-15 each year??

Right now, I'd say total.

[Go...gate]

Right now, I'd say total.

So, what you are saying is that you are fielding a team of mostly walk-ons? xeekx

[colorless raider]

You can't tell me all those kids are paying...somethings not right.

[Go...gate]

If so, how can they be competitive at all?

[Gater]

The issue for Colgate is school ranking. This is more important than anything else. The per student endowment needs to stay the same. The fear is that increased spending on football will lower this and drop Colgate's US News and World Report ranking. Colgate is ready to spend the money on scholarships (many board members want to) but they need to figure out how to do so without dropping in the (non-football) polls.

[HoyaMetanoia]

You can't tell me all those kids are paying...somethings not right.

Not all of them are paying. The 15 equivalencies just means that the non-grant portion of their financial aid is being picked up by the AD. Many of the players have significant financial aid packages, outside of football, while others have smaller aid grants mixed in with work study and GU loans. It is true, however, that some players do pay their own way. For example, Chris Bisanzo, a So. C, had offers from UCONN and Syracuse, but chose GU over both of those schools and pays his own way (he's from Greenwich).

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I'm bringing this up again because I think this is important and germane to the original issue.




1. Gender equity. Furman, Wofford, and Elon are considerably out of proportion when measuring men's schoalrship aid to the population as a whole. Within the Patriot, everyone is close to five percent, meaning major increases to men's spending could prove difficult:

2. Football vs. Other Sports. Furman, Wofford, and Elon spend a lot of money on football vs. other sports--they carry fewer male sports and many are not on a major regional or national level. The Patriot schools have more men's sports and while most (with one exception) spend comparably on football, they have more sports to fund as well. ...

Georgetown's numbers have two important caveats--one, the cost of basketball skews the numbers, and two, its number of men's sports in the Big East (13) require minimum levels of scholarship support that limits what could be spent on football, all things being equal. Villanova spends about 35% on football relative to its other men's sports but sponsors three fewer sports.

3. "Soft money". When football money is already baked in the budget (Fordham), conversion to athletic scholarships is easy, but when "soft" money (financial aid) is covering the difference instead of atheltic aid, a lot less so. This is the issue Lafayette is feeling the heat over and while other schools may not be as public about it, there may be a few others that have been floating on financial aid.


One of the unsaid issues with the league, IMO, is not simply the sports in which PL schools are members. It's those dreaded "exception sports" that throw everything out of whack.

Colgate has ECAC Hockey. Holy Cross is obviously attempting to "ramp up" hockey too, notably offering scholarships there.

Lehigh has ECAC wrestling.

Army & Navy have, of course, their FBS football programs. Army and Navy also are active in ECAC wrestling.

Georgetown has big-time basketball. Fordham would die to have big-time basketball, but are still mid-major basketball in name with a higher profile than PL basketball. The Big East are national players in non-revenue sports, while the A-10 are in certain circumstances too.

Think about that a second. Only American, Bucknell and Lafayette don't have sports in which they are national, scholarship players. In American and Bucknell's case, it's a little debatable because of their mid-major success on the hardwood - but the majority of nearly-full-members and associate members in football have a scholarship "elephant in the room" affecting the debate.

That's what makes HC's foray into scholarship hockey especially interesting. They've gone from being in the Bucknell/Lafayette camp ("just let me compromise on basketball, and we'll be fine") to being in the Colgate/Lehigh camp ("We're OK with 'non-scholarship', just give us our scholarships basketball (of course) but also in (exception sport)"). You could also put Army and Navy in this Lehigh/Colgate nexus, too, because of FBS football.

In summary: The crux of DFW's original post was to compare three successful private, scholarship FB schools, and what's different about them in comparison to the PL football schools.

* He notes that scholarship spending is out of whack for football and the rest of the student body for the "SoCon Three" (Furman, Wofford, Elon)

* He notes that some PL schools are spending "hard" money (Fordham for sure, probably Colgate and Lehigh) on Title IX, others (Lafayette for sure, probably Bucknell) are using "soft money".

It's this last point that requires a lot more emphasis, and has engendered no discussion:

* He notes that the "SoCon Three" offer way fewer sports than PL schools and also don't carry any other big-time national-contender scholarship sports.

To wit: In order to compete for Final Fours, Georgetown has to spend more money on men's basketball than women's basketball. Despite funding an equal amount of scholarships (and share a lot of expenses that could be considered "shared"), the Hoyas spend $1.4 M on men's hoops and $300,000 on women's hoops - a 1.1 million dollar discrepancy.

The same applies to a lesser extent for men's hockey (Colgate, now Holy Cross) wrestling (Lehigh). They all have sports in which they need to spend the big bucks to be competitive nationally. (While Fordham has struggled in men's basketball, I would also lump them in this category too.)

This is not the case with the "SoCon three". Football is the biggest thing on their campus, and the biggest budget item. They survive by offering fewer sports and/or spending less - a lot less - for men (by definition they have to in order to be Title IX compliant).

An interesting question - not posed here - would be the following: in what other sports are the "SoCon Three" offering scholarships at all? Just to grab Elon as an example, they spend $3 million on football (expenses + scholarships). In their EADA report, they spent $3 million on all scholarship aid combined for all men's sports as well. Conservatively, you have to imagine that more than half of their entire men's scholarship budget is devoted to football - probably much, much more.

It seems like the "SoCon Three", anyway, have survived by offering full amounts for football while starving every other men's sport. It's hard to escape that conclusion.

That would never fly in the PL - because a majority of members have other sports which would never allow de-emphasis. And nearly all of them are non-PL sports (Army/Navy FBS football, Colgate ECAC hockey, Lehigh ECAC wrestling, etc.)

[Fordham]

The issue for Colgate is school ranking. This is more important than anything else. The per student endowment needs to stay the same. The fear is that increased spending on football will lower this and drop Colgate's US News and World Report ranking. Colgate is ready to spend the money on scholarships (many board members want to) but they need to figure out how to do so without dropping in the (non-football) polls.

At a school of Colgate's size, I would think that a few significantly lower ranked student athletes admitted could have a pretty big effect, no? Interesting that Colgate (so I was told) was one of the schools most adamant about pushing for a league-wide AI. I would think that the lower league-wide band v. school-specific ones would have a negative effect on incoming class rankings. I know that's not the only input in producing the overall rankings but it certainly is a prominent one.

[Go...gate]

Examining this issue is akin to peeling an onion.

[Franks Tanks]

At a school of Colgate's size, I would think that a few significantly lower ranked student athletes admitted could have a pretty big effect, no? Interesting that Colgate (so I was told) was one of the schools most adamant about pushing for a league-wide AI. I would think that the lower league-wide band v. school-specific ones would have a negative effect on incoming class rankings. I know that's not the only input in producing the overall rankings but it certainly is a prominent one.

Well at Colgate, Lafayette, and Holy Cross about 1 in 13 to 15 men on campus are football players and nearly 1/4 of the student body competes in athletics so AI does matter for us.

[Gater]

Here is the letter I sent to a Colgate board member in favor of scholarships. Some of it has already been posted on Colgate and Lehigh sites.


Colgate estimates the cost of attending at $51,090. Need-based financial aid can offset some of that expense but the family/kid will often be saddled with massive loans.
For low-income families, Colgate is on more equal footing when it comes to recruiting. If your parents make $45,000 a year, it wouldn't cost much to go to Colgate so you might choose Colgate over Stony Brook (and a free ride). But, would you choose Colgate over Penn, Harvard or Yale-- which offer free tuition to families making less than $50k (Penn), $60K (Harvard) or $45K (Yale)? No.

So, Colgate loses a few choice recruits among low-income families--by "choice" I mean very good athletes with great grades. But, where Colgate really loses out is with kids whose parents have higher paying jobs. Would a good student from a family making $150,000 a year choose to pay $200,000 to go to Colgate or pay $0 and go to Richmond or William and Mary or Villanova? If I'm a smart kid and a good football player, I save my family the $200,000 and go to one of those schools every time. Or, if my family says, "Look, we are willing to pay to send you to the best school possible" (as you hope most families would or could) the kid has probably also gotten into an Ivy League school and that's where he ends up. With scholarships, Colgate (with better football and a shot at the playoffs) would land some of the kids who choose Ivy League schools and would get many of the kids we lose to William and Mary or Richmond. Bottom line: with 63 scholarships, Colgate would have 63 chances a year to recruit better students to play football. With Title 9 you would have to match those scholarships (for women), which means that 126 better students as athletes. That's 9% of the school's enrollment. This in turn makes Colgate more selective. The school's national ranking rises. Alumi like seeing Colgate rise in national rankings. It makes them proud of their school. They would also love to see Colgate knock off Syracuse or Army in football (teams that would start playing Colgate because with scholarships Colgate would count towards them being bowl eligible). It would make them proud. Proud people donate more. Donations add to the endowment. A higher endowment helps Colgate in the national rankings. Which makes people proud. Proud people donate more. Etc.

What about the immediate costs? Montana State, will receive $650,000 to play at Michigan State. Arkansas State will make $1,000,000 to play Auburn. Two years ago Appalachian State got $400,000 to take on Michigan in The Big House. Appalachian State won the game and the following year they received the most donations in school history-- $24,700.000.

Here's an article about payouts for smaller schools:

http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/index.php/2009/09/03/for-small-schools-there-s-a-big-payoff-t?blog=2

Imagine Colgate getting paid to play Penn State, Syracuse and Army while actually having the players capable of knocking them off every few years. It would return Colgate to the status of the little school that could as opposed to the little school that didn't try. That would bring excitement and $ to The Chenango Valley.

Giving scholarships to football players=better students=better Colgate.

[OL FU]

It seems like the "SoCon Three", anyway, have survived by offering full amounts for football while starving every other men's sport. It's hard to escape that conclusion.

That would never fly in the PL - because a majority of members have other sports which would never allow de-emphasis. And nearly all of them are non-PL sports (Army/Navy FBS football, Colgate ECAC hockey, Lehigh ECAC wrestling, etc.)


that may be a little bit of a stretch. I am not sure how the PL does in the other sports. But Furman has been consistently ranked in soccer and in past years has had some good golf teams although not in the last few years. Elon I believe has been ranked in baseball and if not ranked has a very good program. Wofford, well I think football is it.

I ask for education, How many other sports do the PL schools compete nationally in. I know Georgetown in basketball obviously and I assume the PL schools may compete in hockey. But do they compete nationally in other sports?

Also, I am not sure how spending money on football would hurt things like wrestling. It might simply be that there was never an emphasis on wrestling. Too be honest I am not sure how many SoCon teams in general have wrestling programs.

I might be incorrect, but I think the correlation is wrong. Hell Furman has spent more money on infrastructure in soccor and tennis over the last ten years than football by millions.

[colorless raider]

Here is the letter I sent to a Colgate board member in favor of scholarships. Some of it has already been posted on Colgate and Lehigh sites.


Colgate estimates the cost of attending at $51,090. Need-based financial aid can offset some of that expense but the family/kid will often be saddled with massive loans.
For low-income families, Colgate is on more equal footing when it comes to recruiting. If your parents make $45,000 a year, it wouldn't cost much to go to Colgate so you might choose Colgate over Stony Brook (and a free ride). But, would you choose Colgate over Penn, Harvard or Yale-- which offer free tuition to families making less than $50k (Penn), $60K (Harvard) or $45K (Yale)? No.

So, Colgate loses a few choice recruits among low-income families--by "choice" I mean very good athletes with great grades. But, where Colgate really loses out is with kids whose parents have higher paying jobs. Would a good student from a family making $150,000 a year choose to pay $200,000 to go to Colgate or pay $0 and go to Richmond or William and Mary or Villanova? If I'm a smart kid and a good football player, I save my family the $200,000 and go to one of those schools every time. Or, if my family says, "Look, we are willing to pay to send you to the best school possible" (as you hope most families would or could) the kid has probably also gotten into an Ivy League school and that's where he ends up. With scholarships, Colgate (with better football and a shot at the playoffs) would land some of the kids who choose Ivy League schools and would get many of the kids we lose to William and Mary or Richmond. Bottom line: with 63 scholarships, Colgate would have 63 chances a year to recruit better students to play football. With Title 9 you would have to match those scholarships (for women), which means that 126 better students as athletes. That's 9% of the school's enrollment. This in turn makes Colgate more selective. The school's national ranking rises. Alumi like seeing Colgate rise in national rankings. It makes them proud of their school. They would also love to see Colgate knock off Syracuse or Army in football (teams that would start playing Colgate because with scholarships Colgate would count towards them being bowl eligible). It would make them proud. Proud people donate more. Donations add to the endowment. A higher endowment helps Colgate in the national rankings. Which makes people proud. Proud people donate more. Etc.

What about the immediate costs? Montana State, will receive $650,000 to play at Michigan State. Arkansas State will make $1,000,000 to play Auburn. Two years ago Appalachian State got $400,000 to take on Michigan in The Big House. Appalachian State won the game and the following year they received the most donations in school history-- $24,700.000.

Here's an article about payouts for smaller schools:

http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/index.php/2009/09/03/for-small-schools-there-s-a-big-payoff-t?blog=2

Imagine Colgate getting paid to play Penn State, Syracuse and Army while actually having the players capable of knocking them off every few years. It would return Colgate to the status of the little school that could as opposed to the little school that didn't try. That would bring excitement and $ to The Chenango Valley.

Giving scholarships to football players=better students=better Colgate.

Go Gater go!! You got the right formula. Go 'Gate!:D

[Franks Tanks]

that may be a little bit of a stretch. I am not sure how the PL does in the other sports. But Furman has been consistently ranked in soccer and in past years has had some good golf teams although not in the last few years. Elon I believe has been ranked in baseball and if not ranked has a very good program. Wofford, well I think football is it.

I ask for education, How many other sports do the PL schools compete nationally in. I know Georgetown in basketball obviously and I assume the PL schools may compete in hockey. But do they compete nationally in other sports?

Also, I am not sure how spending money on football would hurt things like wrestling. It might simply be that there was never an emphasis on wrestling. Too be honest I am not sure how many SoCon teams in general have wrestling programs.

I might be incorrect, but I think the correlation is wrong. Hell Furman has spent more money on infrastructure in soccor and tennis over the last ten years than football by millions.

Lehigh wrestling is a perennial top 25 program. Colgate and Holy Cross have solid Hockey programs, and HC made the frozen four a few years back Neither of these are PL sports however.

Some schools have solid soccer or field hockey teams (lafayette used to be a field hockey power), but I guess Lacrosse is the only other sport where PL teams are truly among the best in the nation on a consistent basis.

[Go...gate]

Here is the letter I sent to a Colgate board member in favor of scholarships. Some of it has already been posted on Colgate and Lehigh sites.


Colgate estimates the cost of attending at $51,090. Need-based financial aid can offset some of that expense but the family/kid will often be saddled with massive loans.
For low-income families, Colgate is on more equal footing when it comes to recruiting. If your parents make $45,000 a year, it wouldn't cost much to go to Colgate so you might choose Colgate over Stony Brook (and a free ride). But, would you choose Colgate over Penn, Harvard or Yale-- which offer free tuition to families making less than $50k (Penn), $60K (Harvard) or $45K (Yale)? No.

So, Colgate loses a few choice recruits among low-income families--by "choice" I mean very good athletes with great grades. But, where Colgate really loses out is with kids whose parents have higher paying jobs. Would a good student from a family making $150,000 a year choose to pay $200,000 to go to Colgate or pay $0 and go to Richmond or William and Mary or Villanova? If I'm a smart kid and a good football player, I save my family the $200,000 and go to one of those schools every time. Or, if my family says, "Look, we are willing to pay to send you to the best school possible" (as you hope most families would or could) the kid has probably also gotten into an Ivy League school and that's where he ends up. With scholarships, Colgate (with better football and a shot at the playoffs) would land some of the kids who choose Ivy League schools and would get many of the kids we lose to William and Mary or Richmond. Bottom line: with 63 scholarships, Colgate would have 63 chances a year to recruit better students to play football. With Title 9 you would have to match those scholarships (for women), which means that 126 better students as athletes. That's 9% of the school's enrollment. This in turn makes Colgate more selective. The school's national ranking rises. Alumi like seeing Colgate rise in national rankings. It makes them proud of their school. They would also love to see Colgate knock off Syracuse or Army in football (teams that would start playing Colgate because with scholarships Colgate would count towards them being bowl eligible). It would make them proud. Proud people donate more. Donations add to the endowment. A higher endowment helps Colgate in the national rankings. Which makes people proud. Proud people donate more. Etc.

What about the immediate costs? Montana State, will receive $650,000 to play at Michigan State. Arkansas State will make $1,000,000 to play Auburn. Two years ago Appalachian State got $400,000 to take on Michigan in The Big House. Appalachian State won the game and the following year they received the most donations in school history-- $24,700.000.

Here's an article about payouts for smaller schools:

http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/index.php/2009/09/03/for-small-schools-there-s-a-big-payoff-t?blog=2

Imagine Colgate getting paid to play Penn State, Syracuse and Army while actually having the players capable of knocking them off every few years. It would return Colgate to the status of the little school that could as opposed to the little school that didn't try. That would bring excitement and $ to The Chenango Valley.

Giving scholarships to football players=better students=better Colgate.

This is terrific. Well done!

[OL FU]

Lehigh wrestling is a perennial top 25 program. Colgate and Holy Cross have solid Hockey programs, and HC made the frozen four a few years back Neither of these are PL sports however.

Some schools have solid soccer or field hockey teams (lafayette used to be a field hockey power), but I guess Lacrosse is the only other sport where PL teams are truly among the best in the nation on a consistent basis.

Thanks. I assumed there were more sports.

I still don't think LFN is correct that we have sacrificed the other sports for football as I stated above. I do think the cost of football at our level certainly impacts the ability to spend on other sports. But his comment was more than a slight exaggeration.

[Go...gate]

Seems to me that Furman has taken basketball pretty seriously over the years. It's not just all about Frank Selvy....

[OL FU]

Seems to me that Furman has taken basketball pretty seriously over the years. It's not just all about Frank Selvy....

Well we have stunk it up for the last 10 or 15 years.

Sometimes spending money on a program can hurt. When I was in school we were rated in the top 20 consistently. WE played in an old auditorium in Gville and we were Greenville's team. We Drew good crowds and had good teams. We moved out to a brand new campus facility for basketball and events that was better for events than basketball to get the students involved and attendance and the quality of the team fell off the cliff.

[TheValleyRaider]

Lehigh wrestling is a perennial top 25 program. Colgate and Holy Cross have solid Hockey programs, and HC made the frozen four a few years back Neither of these are PL sports however.

Some schools have solid soccer or field hockey teams (lafayette used to be a field hockey power), but I guess Lacrosse is the only other sport where PL teams are truly among the best in the nation on a consistent basis.

Slight correction, Holy Cross didn't make the Frozen Four. Just a First Round upset of Minnesota xcoolx

[Go...gate]

Slight correction, Holy Cross didn't make the Frozen Four. Just a First Round upset of Minnesota xcoolx

Has anybody from the ECAC made the Finals other than us since 1990?

[TheValleyRaider]

Has anybody from the ECAC made the Finals other than us since 1990?

Cornell was the last ECAC team to make the Frozen Four, back in 2003

We remain the last ECAC school to play in the National Title game xoopsx

[Go...gate]

That's what I thought, unfortunately.

[Franks Tanks]

Slight correction, Holy Cross didn't make the Frozen Four. Just a First Round upset of Minnesota xcoolx

Yes my facts were screwed up... Gate made the frozen four and HC scored that huge upset:)

[ngineer]

I'm bringing this up again because I think this is important and germane to the original issue.





In summary: The crux of DFW's original post was to compare three successful private, scholarship FB schools, and what's different about them in comparison to the PL football schools.

* He notes that scholarship spending is out of whack for football and the rest of the student body for the "SoCon Three" (Furman, Wofford, Elon)

* He notes that some PL schools are spending "hard" money (Fordham for sure, probably Colgate and Lehigh) on Title IX, others (Lafayette for sure, probably Bucknell) are using "soft money".

It's this last point that requires a lot more emphasis, and has engendered no discussion:

* He notes that the "SoCon Three" offer way fewer sports than PL schools and also don't carry any other big-time national-contender scholarship sports.

To wit: In order to compete for Final Fours, Georgetown has to spend more money on men's basketball than women's basketball. Despite funding an equal amount of scholarships (and share a lot of expenses that could be considered "shared"), the Hoyas spend $1.4 M on men's hoops and $300,000 on women's hoops - a 1.1 million dollar discrepancy.

The same applies to a lesser extent for men's hockey (Colgate, now Holy Cross) wrestling (Lehigh). They all have sports in which they need to spend the big bucks to be competitive nationally. (While Fordham has struggled in men's basketball, I would also lump them in this category too.)

This is not the case with the "SoCon three". Football is the biggest thing on their campus, and the biggest budget item. They survive by offering fewer sports and/or spending less - a lot less - for men (by definition they have to in order to be Title IX compliant).

An interesting question - not posed here - would be the following: in what other sports are the "SoCon Three" offering scholarships at all? Just to grab Elon as an example, they spend $3 million on football (expenses + scholarships). In their EADA report, they spent $3 million on all scholarship aid combined for all men's sports as well. Conservatively, you have to imagine that more than half of their entire men's scholarship budget is devoted to football - probably much, much more.

It seems like the "SoCon Three", anyway, have survived by offering full amounts for football while starving every other men's sport. It's hard to escape that conclusion.

That would never fly in the PL - because a majority of members have other sports which would never allow de-emphasis. And nearly all of them are non-PL sports (Army/Navy FBS football, Colgate ECAC hockey, Lehigh ECAC wrestling, etc.)

I think Furman does give scholarship money for tennis and golf, as a friend of mine's son was recruited for tennis there. But, again, a very low budget sport.

[OL FU]

I think Furman does give scholarship money for tennis and golf, as a friend of mine's son was recruited for tennis there. But, again, a very low budget sport.

I missed that comment from above. Yes we give scholarships in tennis and golf. I believe we give scholarships in all male sports we participate in.

We are not always fully funded. In baseball I believe we only give 6 or 7 scholarships.

I suppose I get more irritated everytime I read LFNs post:D The conclusion that we are starving our other sports to fund football based on how many scholarships we give in other sports is a little off don't you think. We don't have lacrosse (never have) we don't have hockey (never will). I believe we may have dropped wrestling (not sure). But of the other sports we and Elon and others have, do the scholarships even add up to the 63 we give in footballxconfusedx I am sure there are those here that know the scholarship limits for baseball, track and field, soccer, tennis, golf, basketball and cross country. Do they add up to 63?

If you can come to the conclusion that we are starving our other sports for football (which as I have said is ridiculous when you consider that Furman has been ranked nationally for soccer, has spent enormous amounts on a new tennis facility, and track facilities etc and hasn't spent a material amount of money on football infrastructure since the 80s) then I suppose the only logicial conclusion is that the PL teams are sacrificing their competitiveness in football for their other sports. Not that I agree with the statement but if it works one way it works the other. We pick our own poisen I suppose.

[DFW HOYA]

The Equity in Athletics web site reports men's scholarship aid of $3,893,618 for Furman in FY 2008. Assuming the average scholarship offer (tuition, room, and board) is $45,000, that amounts to 86.5 scholarships.

With approx. 60 for football and 13 for men's basketball, that would leave 13.5 for all other men's sports unless some amount of need based or institutional merit scholarships are filling the gap. This suggests Furman would be partially funding some combination of baseball (11.7 maximum), track/cross country (12.6), soccer (9.9), tennis (4.5) and golf (4.5).

[OL FU]

The Equity in Athletics web site reports men's scholarship aid of $3,893,618 for Furman in FY 2008. Assuming the average scholarship offer (tuition, room, and board) is $45,000, that amounts to 86.5 scholarships.

With approx. 60 for football and 13 for men's basketball, that would leave 13.5 for all other men's sports unless some amount of need based or institutional merit scholarships are filling the gap. This suggests Furman would be partially funding some combination of baseball (11.7 maximum), track/cross country (12.6), soccer (9.9), tennis (4.5) and golf (4.5).

Not sure the tuition number is correct. Also not sure we fund the entire 63 scholarships for football. I do know that we don't fund baseball fully, as I said 6 or 7 schollies I believe. I will see what I can find out.

[Ken_Z]

new article from the Morning Call re scholarship impact

http://www.mcall.com/sports/college/all-patriotleaguenotes.7017051sep10,0,1552389.story

[gophoenix]

I missed that comment from above. Yes we give scholarships in tennis and golf. I believe we give scholarships in all male sports we participate in.

We are not always fully funded. In baseball I believe we only give 6 or 7 scholarships.

I suppose I get more irritated everytime I read LFNs post:D The conclusion that we are starving our other sports to fund football based on how many scholarships we give in other sports is a little off don't you think. We don't have lacrosse (never have) we don't have hockey (never will). I believe we may have dropped wrestling (not sure). But of the other sports we and Elon and others have, do the scholarships even add up to the 63 we give in footballxconfusedx I am sure there are those here that know the scholarship limits for baseball, track and field, soccer, tennis, golf, basketball and cross country. Do they add up to 63?

If you can come to the conclusion that we are starving our other sports for football (which as I have said is ridiculous when you consider that Furman has been ranked nationally for soccer, has spent enormous amounts on a new tennis facility, and track facilities etc and hasn't spent a material amount of money on football infrastructure since the 80s) then I suppose the only logicial conclusion is that the PL teams are sacrificing their competitiveness in football for their other sports. Not that I agree with the statement but if it works one way it works the other. We pick our own poisen I suppose.

Define starving the other sports. it is rare for non-BCS schools to fully allot every offered sport with the maximum scholarships.

if you think Furman is starving their sports, just look at the basketball, soccer and tennis funding and results.
Same with Elon for baseball, soccer and tennis
Samford's basketball is pretty good, etc
Richmond with basketball

and the list goes on and on.

There is a 16 sport minimum for FBS, which Elon, Furman, Samford meet. Sports will be added and taken away as demands pushes it. Ie, why Elon has had men's track and field 2 or 3 times.

[gophoenix]

that may be a little bit of a stretch. I am not sure how the PL does in the other sports. But Furman has been consistently ranked in soccer and in past years has had some good golf teams although not in the last few years. Elon I believe has been ranked in baseball and if not ranked has a very good program. Wofford, well I think football is it.

I ask for education, How many other sports do the PL schools compete nationally in. I know Georgetown in basketball obviously and I assume the PL schools may compete in hockey. But do they compete nationally in other sports?

Also, I am not sure how spending money on football would hurt things like wrestling. It might simply be that there was never an emphasis on wrestling. Too be honest I am not sure how many SoCon teams in general have wrestling programs.

I might be incorrect, but I think the correlation is wrong. Hell Furman has spent more money on infrastructure in soccor and tennis over the last ten years than football by millions.

Elon has had ranked soccer, men's tennis, and baseball teams over the past 5 years.

We offer scholarships in every sport offered. Basketball, Women's basketball and football are the only fully allotted sports on campus. But, look at the results, when you're competing well without them, you can put the money elsewhere liek facility upgrades, going varsity with the lacrosses, etc.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

The Equity in Athletics web site reports men's scholarship aid of $3,893,618 for Furman in FY 2008. Assuming the average scholarship offer (tuition, room, and board) is $45,000, that amounts to 86.5 scholarships.

With approx. 60 for football and 13 for men's basketball, that would leave 13.5 for all other men's sports unless some amount of need based or institutional merit scholarships are filling the gap. This suggests Furman would be partially funding some combination of baseball (11.7 maximum), track/cross country (12.6), soccer (9.9), tennis (4.5) and golf (4.5).

Ol FU, I think you have a problem with my characterization of "starving" the other sports to fully fund football. I'm not saying that Furman (or any other member of the "SoCon Three" for that matter) cannot field some good teams. But fully funding football does have consequences, and one is the fact that you can't fund "full scholarships" in other sports. The premise is you can't compete for a national title without "full scholarships", which is almost certainly true in football and definitely true in men's basketball.

And DFW's research bears this out. It seems unlikely that any other sport at Furman is considered "full scholarship". It also seems that way at Wofford and Elon. That's great for you guys, actually.

But it's an option that probably isn't available for PL schools. Army and Navy would rather surrender to the Afghanis rather than lose (or downgrade, for that matter) their FBS football programs, Colgate and HC will never give up a shot at big-time hockey, Lehigh would face an alumni uprising if they de-emphasized wrestling, and Georgetown and Fordham are not going to downgrade from big-time (or upper mid-major) basketball anytime soon.

That's a big part of the PL dilemna. There are large sports outside the scope of the PL that skew the economics and Title IX ratios. And it's not as easy as "offering 1-to-1 men's and women's basketball scholarships" - there's still a speding discrepancy even with that.

[OL FU]

Ol FU, I think you have a problem with my characterization of "starving" the other sports to fully fund football. I'm not saying that Furman (or any other member of the "SoCon Three" for that matter) cannot field some good teams. But fully funding football does have consequences, and one is the fact that you can't fund "full scholarships" in other sports. The premise is you can't compete for a national title without "full scholarships", which is almost certainly true in football and definitely true in men's basketball.

And DFW's research bears this out. It seems unlikely that any other sport at Furman is considered "full scholarship". It also seems that way at Wofford and Elon. That's great for you guys, actually.

But it's an option that probably isn't available for PL schools. Army and Navy would rather surrender to the Afghanis rather than lose (or downgrade, for that matter) their FBS football programs, Colgate and HC will never give up a shot at big-time hockey, Lehigh would face an alumni uprising if they de-emphasized wrestling, and Georgetown and Fordham are not going to downgrade from big-time (or upper mid-major) basketball anytime soon.

That's a big part of the PL dilemna. There are large sports outside the scope of the PL that skew the economics and Title IX ratios. And it's not as easy as "offering 1-to-1 men's and women's basketball scholarships" - there's still a speding discrepancy even with that.


Yes I probably over reacted to the term starving (but note I put a smiley face on the word irritated because I really wasn't:)). I do think schools of our size and level pick and choose emphasis and we certainly emphasize football. But as stated before we certainly have success in other sports just like the PL does. Soccer being the most notable for Furman. We haven't won any NCs but for a school the size of FU to be rated nationally in a sport that has a large participation from almost every D-I school is notable. As much as we pride ourselves on football, our best national program is quite possibly soccer. xnodx

[gophoenix]

Ol FU, I think you have a problem with my characterization of "starving" the other sports to fully fund football. I'm not saying that Furman (or any other member of the "SoCon Three" for that matter) cannot field some good teams. But fully funding football does have consequences, and one is the fact that you can't fund "full scholarships" in other sports. The premise is you can't compete for a national title without "full scholarships", which is almost certainly true in football and definitely true in men's basketball.

And DFW's research bears this out. It seems unlikely that any other sport at Furman is considered "full scholarship". It also seems that way at Wofford and Elon. That's great for you guys, actually.

But it's an option that probably isn't available for PL schools. Army and Navy would rather surrender to the Afghanis rather than lose (or downgrade, for that matter) their FBS football programs, Colgate and HC will never give up a shot at big-time hockey, Lehigh would face an alumni uprising if they de-emphasized wrestling, and Georgetown and Fordham are not going to downgrade from big-time (or upper mid-major) basketball anytime soon.

That's a big part of the PL dilemna. There are large sports outside the scope of the PL that skew the economics and Title IX ratios. And it's not as easy as "offering 1-to-1 men's and women's basketball scholarships" - there's still a speding discrepancy even with that.

Samford, Elon and Furman are all fully funded in Men's and Women's basketball. Elon, Furman and Samford are all at the minimum to be considered fully funded in football. I can't talk about Wofford, because last I knew they weren't fully funded in any sport, but that could be wrong.

What the SoCon private schools have done is sacrifice men's sports to get up funding in others. For instance, moving from NAIA to NCAA D-II, Elon dropped Men's Outdoor and Indoor Track and Field. To add lacrosse, they'll have to add 2 other women's sports.

[ngineer]

I missed that comment from above. Yes we give scholarships in tennis and golf. I believe we give scholarships in all male sports we participate in.

We are not always fully funded. In baseball I believe we only give 6 or 7 scholarships.

I suppose I get more irritated everytime I read LFNs post:D The conclusion that we are starving our other sports to fund football based on how many scholarships we give in other sports is a little off don't you think. We don't have lacrosse (never have) we don't have hockey (never will). I believe we may have dropped wrestling (not sure). But of the other sports we and Elon and others have, do the scholarships even add up to the 63 we give in footballxconfusedx I am sure there are those here that know the scholarship limits for baseball, track and field, soccer, tennis, golf, basketball and cross country. Do they add up to 63?

If you can come to the conclusion that we are starving our other sports for football (which as I have said is ridiculous when you consider that Furman has been ranked nationally for soccer, has spent enormous amounts on a new tennis facility, and track facilities etc and hasn't spent a material amount of money on football infrastructure since the 80s) then I suppose the only logicial conclusion is that the PL teams are sacrificing their competitiveness in football for their other sports. Not that I agree with the statement but if it works one way it works the other. We pick our own poisen I suppose.

I agree. The PL and Ivies have always prided themselves on having such a broad number of sports for such small schools. I think Lehigh sponsors about 25 intercollegiate sports, in addition, to a host of club sports and intramurals. Many schools in FCS land only have about half that number. I remember attending U of Detroit in the mid-1970's in law school, and they had basketball and only three other sports: cross-country, baseball and fencing, so as to keep NCAA eligibility for the basketball team. I am glad to see that ol' U of Detroit (now w/Mercy) is adding sports like lacrosse, and hopefully an FCS level football team in the not too distant future. Many schools are hampered by either budgets or lack of facilities to sponsor a lot of sports. As I said earlier in this thread, the PL 'philosophy' is much more than football. Football is not the 'center ring' sport in the PL that it is in the SoCon. Football is certainly one of the more important sports, but it does NOT drive the engine in any way.

[jimbo65]

Looking at last week's out of conference performance, can the PL afford not to give schollies. If not, things will worsen.

[Go...gate]

I agree. The PL and Ivies have always prided themselves on having such a broad number of sports for such small schools. I think Lehigh sponsors about 25 intercollegiate sports, in addition, to a host of club sports and intramurals. Many schools in FCS land only have about half that number. I remember attending U of Detroit in the mid-1970's in law school, and they had basketball and only three other sports: cross-country, baseball and fencing, so as to keep NCAA eligibility for the basketball team. I am glad to see that ol' U of Detroit (now w/Mercy) is adding sports like lacrosse, and hopefully an FCS level football team in the not too distant future. Many schools are hampered by either budgets or lack of facilities to sponsor a lot of sports. As I said earlier in this thread, the PL 'philosophy' is much more than football. Football is not the 'center ring' sport in the PL that it is in the SoCon. Football is certainly one of the more important sports, but it does NOT drive the engine in any way.

Not at all?

[carney2]

Ol FU, I think you have a problem with my characterization of "starving" the other sports to fully fund football. I'm not saying that Furman (or any other member of the "SoCon Three" for that matter) cannot field some good teams. But fully funding football does have consequences, and one is the fact that you can't fund "full scholarships" in other sports. The premise is you can't compete for a national title without "full scholarships", which is almost certainly true in football and definitely true in men's basketball.

And DFW's research bears this out. It seems unlikely that any other sport at Furman is considered "full scholarship". It also seems that way at Wofford and Elon. That's great for you guys, actually.

But it's an option that probably isn't available for PL schools. Army and Navy would rather surrender to the Afghanis rather than lose (or downgrade, for that matter) their FBS football programs, Colgate and HC will never give up a shot at big-time hockey, Lehigh would face an alumni uprising if they de-emphasized wrestling, and Georgetown and Fordham are not going to downgrade from big-time (or upper mid-major) basketball anytime soon.

That's a big part of the PL dilemna. There are large sports outside the scope of the PL that skew the economics and Title IX ratios. And it's not as easy as "offering 1-to-1 men's and women's basketball scholarships" - there's still a speding discrepancy even with that.

Given this scenario, I am going out on a limb here and am boldly predicting that Lafayette will rule Patriot League football from now until the next ice age. The Pards appear to be the only school in the League that have no "large sports outside the scope of the PL" to divert their attention from the pursuit of pigskin excellence.

I feel much better. I was getting a bit grumpy because, as Pard94 said, I am full of "bad vibes" this year.

[Go...gate]

Looking at last week's out of conference performance, can the PL afford not to give schollies. If not, things will worsen.

Agreed.

[Franks Tanks]

Given this scenario, I am going out on a limb here and am boldly predicting that Lafayette will rule Patriot League football from now until the next ice age. The Pards appear to be the only school in the League that have no "large sports outside the scope of the PL" to divert their attention from the pursuit of pigskin excellence.

I feel much better. I was getting a bit grumpy because, as Pard94 said, I am full of "bad vibes" this year.

It boggles my mind that we cant be really good at something on a national level. We are in a wrestling hotbed , yet we watch Lehigh get all the glory. Bucknell has even started wrestling and is buidling a very good program in Lewisburg. My brother in law is a HS wrestling coach and wrestled D-I and he keeps saying Bucknell will be a force-- why cant Lafayette do the same??

Also our Lacrosse team sucks. Colgate has a very good lacrosse team and they also sponsor Hockey, I hate our athletic admin at times (ok all the time)

[carney2]

It boggles my mind that we cant be really good at something on a national level. We are in a wrestling hotbed , yet we watch Lehigh get all the glory. Bucknell has even started wrestling and is buidling a very good program in Lewisburg. My brother in law is a HS wrestling coach and wrestled D-I and he keeps saying Bucknell will be a force-- why cant Lafayette do the same??

Also our Lacrosse team sucks. Colgate has a very good lacrosse team and they also sponsor Hockey, I hate our athletic admin at times (ok all the time)

Not in favor of rasslin'. (Where I come from, two guys rolling around on the floor grabbing each other isn't called rasslin'.) Why not hoops?! We've got a great tradition that is currently being treated like one of Michael Vick's dogs.

[Franks Tanks]

Not in favor of rasslin'. (Where I come from, two guys rolling around on the floor grabbing each other isn't called rasslin'.) Why not hoops?! We've got a great tradition that is currently being treated like one of Michael Vick's dogs.

I understand about hoops. Our run to the tourney and that piece on ABC news gave us a lot of positive press. Im not a wrestling fan either but with a few bucks we can be a top 25 team. We will never be a top 25 b-ball team, but yes we should be way, way better.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Given this scenario, I am going out on a limb here and am boldly predicting that Lafayette will rule Patriot League football from now until the next ice age. The Pards appear to be the only school in the League that have no "large sports outside the scope of the PL" to divert their attention from the pursuit of pigskin excellence.

I feel much better. I was getting a bit grumpy because, as Pard94 said, I am full of "bad vibes" this year.

Even you, carney, have to admit that Lafayette was the big winner last weekend with their manhandling of "bye". The only thing I have to look forward to is a letdown against Georgetown. xlolx

[Franks Tanks]

Even you, carney, have to admit that Lafayette was the big winner last weekend with their manhandling of "bye". The only thing I have to look forward to is a letdown against Georgetown. xlolx

Well we did only possess the ball for 12 minutes less than you guys last week!

[carney2]

Even you, carney, have to admit that Lafayette was the big winner last weekend with their manhandling of "bye". The only thing I have to look forward to is a letdown against Georgetown. xlolx

Yes! The blowout of Bye was so bad that the national media would not report the score. Did you see it in your Sunday paper? I didn't.

[RichH2]

Good line, Tanksxlolx

[blukeys]

Yes! The blowout of Bye was so bad that the national media would not report the score. Did you see it in your Sunday paper? I didn't.

I've yet to see Bye lose a game.

[Go...gate]

It boggles my mind that we cant be really good at something on a national level. We are in a wrestling hotbed , yet we watch Lehigh get all the glory. Bucknell has even started wrestling and is buidling a very good program in Lewisburg. My brother in law is a HS wrestling coach and wrestled D-I and he keeps saying Bucknell will be a force-- why cant Lafayette do the same??

Also our Lacrosse team sucks. Colgate has a very good lacrosse team and they also sponsor Hockey, I hate our athletic admin at times (ok all the time)

Yes, but Colgate Lacrosse was awful for many years going back to the late 1960's. Nagle has done a wonderful job but a multitude of great players is not necessary.

[ngineer]

It boggles my mind that we cant be really good at something on a national level. We are in a wrestling hotbed , yet we watch Lehigh get all the glory. Bucknell has even started wrestling and is buidling a very good program in Lewisburg. My brother in law is a HS wrestling coach and wrestled D-I and he keeps saying Bucknell will be a force-- why cant Lafayette do the same??
Also our Lacrosse team sucks. Colgate has a very good lacrosse team and they also sponsor Hockey, I hate our athletic admin at times (ok all the time)

I agree...Living in the Easton area, you can't be in a more wrestling crucible in such a small diameter. Yet, to be successful with the academic demands of PL schools, Lafayette with its male/female ratio may have problems which are related to concerns over the scholarship issue for football. If LC wants to focus on a sport to get national attention, Bball is the easiest. There is tradition, and the cost is not exhorbitant. Just need to give the arena some facelift with chairbacks for the season ticket holders. Lehigh has significant difficulty getting local kids because many of the stellar hs wrestlers can't get admitted. I am forever asked why so and so went to Nebraska, Penn State, Oklahoma State, Bloomsburg, etc. Simple answer is they couldn't be admitted. LU has gotten its share of locals who are admissable over the years. But grades/SATs still count and this, despite our now giving scholarships for wrestling.

[blukeys]

Lacrosse has exploded in Delaware. In the last 7 years almost every Delaware high school has added the sport for boys and girls. UD has had some success in the NCAA tournament. I think it can become a money maker in a few years as the kids who have played the game want to see the local team do well. Of course marketing will actually have to happen.

[Franks Tanks]

Lacrosse has exploded in Delaware. In the last 7 years almost every Delaware high school has added the sport for boys and girls. UD has had some success in the NCAA tournament. I think it can become a money maker in a few years as the kids who have played the game want to see the local team do well. Of course marketing will actually have to happen.

I have the same thoughts regarding Lacrosse and the Lehigh Valley. Over the last few years Lacrosse has been gaining popularity quickly.. it is really a unique opportunity.

[Franks Tanks]

I agree...Living in the Easton area, you can't be in a more wrestling crucible in such a small diameter. Yet, to be successful with the academic demands of PL schools, Lafayette with its male/female ratio may have problems which are related to concerns over the scholarship issue for football. If LC wants to focus on a sport to get national attention, Bball is the easiest. There is tradition, and the cost is not exhorbitant. Just need to give the arena some facelift with chairbacks for the season ticket holders. Lehigh has significant difficulty getting local kids because many of the stellar hs wrestlers can't get admitted. I am forever asked why so and so went to Nebraska, Penn State, Oklahoma State, Bloomsburg, etc. Simple answer is they couldn't be admitted. LU has gotten its share of locals who are admissable over the years. But grades/SATs still count and this, despite our now giving scholarships for wrestling.

Sure the AI will always be a challenge and Lafayette's male-female ratio is a hinderance but Bucknell can do it. B-Ball is a natural and most small D-I schools are all over that.

[ngineer]

I have the same thoughts regarding Lacrosse and the Lehigh Valley. Over the last few years Lacrosse has been gaining popularity quickly.. it is really a unique opportunity.

The PL is becoming a power to be reckoned with nationally. Army, Navy, Colgate and Bucknell have all done very well. And Lehigh and Lafayette are in a position to join them. Lehigh especially with it's nice complex and super new coach who is supposedly doing a nice job recruiting. Last year there were several games that were standing room only at the Ulrich Stadium. Which sort of relates back to earlier posts about 'other' sports that PL teams are starting to excel and gain national attention.

[Go...gate]

I've yet to see Bye lose a game.

They will sail along until they face their traditional rivals, Idle and Open Date. Notwithstanding what Princeton, Harvard and Yale might say, Bye, Idle and Open Date are College Football's true "Big Three". :)

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Navy won a lacrosse national championship within recent memory.

Delaware's lacrosse explosion coincides with the explosion of the sport all over the Northeast. But it's in Maryland/DC, IMO, where the epicenter of the interest lies - perhaps also why UD would be very, very interested to ramp up their program. And interestingly for the PL, two potential "expansion candidates" - Johns Hopkins and Loyola (MD) - have lacrosse programs with a national scope and would be naturals for the PL.

I've thought enough of lacrosse to think of it as a driver for league expansion. It really is an up-and-coming sport, and the PL, to their credit, was one of the first conferences to form in that area.

[bison137]

Bucknell has even started wrestling and is buidling a very good program in Lewisburg. My brother in law is a HS wrestling coach and wrestled D-I and he keeps saying Bucknell will be a force-- why cant Lafayette do the same??



Yes, Bucknell wrestling should be very good this year, as the program is now in its 4th year. Last year they were 3rd in the EIWA - behind only Lehigh and Cornell and ahead of Navy/Penn/Army/etc. Also had six wrestlers qualify for the NCAA tournament and had one All-American. They will host Iowa, the nation's #1 team, in Sojka this year.

All it takes to try to do the same is to have an alum who steps to the plate and funds the entire program, as Bill Graham did at Bucknell. He also gave a huge gift to women's rowing, which was necessary for Title IX.

[Franks Tanks]

Yes, Bucknell wrestling should be very good this year, as the program is now in its 4th year. Last year they were 3rd in the EIWA - behind only Lehigh and Cornell and ahead of Navy/Penn/Army/etc. Also had six wrestlers qualify for the NCAA tournament and had one All-American. They will host Iowa, the nation's #1 team, in Sojka this year.

All it takes to try to do the same is to have an alum who steps to the plate and funds the entire program, as Bill Graham did at Bucknell. He also gave a huge gift to women's rowing, which was necessary for Title IX.

Hmmm-- I think our big donors will be giving to football and hopefully a new B-ball arena at some point.

Unless the Kirby's enjoy wrestling that is.

Looks like the guy gave 5 million to start the programs is that correct? Also Bucknell has a water polo team..nice.

[Go...gate]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Navy won a lacrosse national championship within recent memory.

Delaware's lacrosse explosion coincides with the explosion of the sport all over the Northeast. But it's in Maryland/DC, IMO, where the epicenter of the interest lies - perhaps also why UD would be very, very interested to ramp up their program. And interestingly for the PL, two potential "expansion candidates" - Johns Hopkins and Loyola (MD) - have lacrosse programs with a national scope and would be naturals for the PL.

I've thought enough of lacrosse to think of it as a driver for league expansion. It really is an up-and-coming sport, and the PL, to their credit, was one of the first conferences to form in that area.

Close enough. They were in the Finals.

[carney2]

Rasslin'? Lacrosse?! Water polo?! Pardon me while I go and throw up.

[RichH2]

The curmudgeon arises from the swampy depthsxeekx

[bison137]

Rasslin'? Lacrosse?! Water polo?! Pardon me while I go and throw up.



This from a graduate of a school that features a varsity fencing team!

[ngineer]

This from a graduate of a school that features a varsity fencing team!

Lafayette has a varsity fencing team??!!xeekx In honor of the Maquis??;)
Really, I had not heard the 'pards had a fencing team at the NCAA level. A lot of PL schools have club teams in fencing, gymnastics, rugby, water polo, etc. This is news..xrotatehx

[bison137]

Lafayette has a varsity fencing team??!!xeekx In honor of the Maquis??;)
Really, I had not heard the 'pards had a fencing team at the NCAA level.


Yes, definitely a varsity team - coed no less. The Pards even hosted this past year's Mid-Atlantic College Fencing Association championships, where they finished 9th, per their Quick Facts. (http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/lafa/sports/c-fenc/auto_pdf/2008-09QuickFacts.pdf)

Rumor is that Carney was a sabre specialist in his youth. The above Quick Facts refer to the sabre as "hack and slash" version of fencing. xlolx

[RichH2]

"Hack and slash" Now Isee where Carney developed his rapier witxnodx

[ngineer]

Yes, definitely a varsity team - coed no less. The Pards even hosted this past year's Mid-Atlantic College Fencing Association championships, where they finished 9th, per their Quick Facts. (http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/lafa/sports/c-fenc/auto_pdf/2008-09QuickFacts.pdf)

Rumor is that Carney was a sabre specialist in his youth. The above Quick Facts refer to the sabre as "hack and slash" version of fencing. xlolx

Is that club level or NCAA? Why hasn't LC gotten any press on this in Express-Times or Morning Call??
When I was recruited at Lafayette, back in 1969, while taking a walking tour of the campus we came upon a statue of the Marquis near Colton Chapel. His arm was outstretched with his hand in a fist. Given the times, it looked like he was giving a 'Black Power' salute, which we all chuckled about. The guide tersely advised us that Lafayette's sword was, "sawed off a few years earlier by the bastards at Lehigh" prior to The Game. As you can see, I was impressed.;)

[bison137]

Is that club level or NCAA? Why hasn't LC gotten any press on this in Express-Times or Morning Call??



Varsity.

[Native]

A comment in the PL week 1 thread asks this question:



Yes, they exist, but there are three factors which play into the PL issue:

1. Gender equity. Furman, Wofford, and Elon are considerably out of proportion when measuring men's schoalrship aid to the population as a whole. Variances of more than five percent are potential Title IX issues:

Elon: 47% male, 62% of spending (-15%)
Wofford: 51% male, 70% of spending (-19%)
Furman: 43% male, 70% of spending (-27%)

Within the Patriot, everyone is close to five percent, meaning major increases to men's spending could prove difficult:

Bucknell: 49% male, 45% of spending (+4%)
Lafayette: 52% male, 51% of spending (+1%)
Fordham: 47% male, 48% of spending (-1%)
Georgetown: 45% male, 48% of spending (-3%)
Holy Cross: 44% male, 49% of spending (-5%)
Lehigh: 58% male, 63% of spending (-5%)
Colgate: 48% male, 54% of spending (-6%)

2. Football vs. Other Sports. Furman, Wofford, and Elon spend a lot of money on football vs. other sports--they carry fewer male sports and many are not on a major regional or national level.

Furman: 56% of men's spending on football
Elon: 57% of men's spending on football
Wofford: 63% of men's spending on football

The Patriot schools have more men's sports and while most (with one exception) spend comparably on football, they have more sports to fund as well.

Lafayette: 52% of men's spending on football
Fordham: 48% of men's spending on football
Colgate: 46% of men's spending on football
Holy Cross: 45% of men's spending on football
Lehigh: 43% of men's spending on football
Bucknell: 41% of men's spending on football
Georgetown: 11% of men's spending on football

Georgetown's numbers have two important caveats--one, the cost of basketball skews the numbers, and two, its number of men's sports in the Big East (13) require minimum levels of scholarship support that limits what could be spent on football, all things being equal. Villanova spends about 35% on football relative to its other men's sports but sponsors three fewer sports.

3. "Soft money". When football money is already baked in the budget (Fordham), conversion to athletic scholarships is easy, but when "soft" money (financial aid) is covering the difference instead of atheltic aid, a lot less so. This is the issue Lafayette is feeling the heat over and while other schools may not be as public about it, there may be a few others that have been floating on financial aid.

Can it be done? Yes. Will it? Hard to say. Do PL presidents really care if their school can get a money game at Temple or Buffalo instead of the status quo and games with Princeton and Brown instead?

Nicely done, thanks!

I say let the women compete with the men for football and wrestling scholarships. xeekx