Other schools moving to DI

[Bisonguy]

Interesting read in The Forum today about other schools making the move to DI:
Schools undeterred by waiting period (http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm?id=96097&section=Sports)

Nice quotes from the AD of Kennesaw State and UC-Davis in the article, as well as Gene Taylor.

[Bison_Kent]

Last year's transition teams included Kennesaw State (GA), New Jersey Institute of Technology and the University of North Florida. The 2005-06 season will be their first as a DI (like NDSU and SDSU were last year).

I would expect these schools to be on NDSU's schedules after this next season (since they will count as a DII this upcoming season).

Non of these three schools have football, however.

[lucchesicourt]

"Mallonee agrees, saying the intent of changing the period from two to five years was to make sure schools were better prepared for Division I athletics in terms of tougher academic standards, higher budgets, scheduling and administration."

I really do NOT believe the academic standards are higher for D1 Vs. D2. If anyhting D2 has higher academic standards.
What do you think?

[Bisonguy]

"Mallonee agrees, saying the intent of changing the period from two to five years was to make sure schools were better prepared for Division I athletics in terms of tougher academic standards, higher budgets, scheduling and administration."

I really do NOT believe the academic standards are higher for D1 Vs. D2. If anyhting D2 has higher academic standards. *
What do you think?



DI has stricter academic requirements than DII does. The GPA and credit requirements are higher in DI. That's why you'll see DI partial qualifiers that don't do well their first year transfer to a DII school.

You can look up the requirements in the DI and DII NCAA Manuals, but it might take a while to dig up the differences.

[kchats]

"Mallonee agrees, saying the intent of changing the period from two to five years was to make sure schools were better prepared for Division I athletics in terms of tougher academic standards, higher budgets, scheduling and administration."

I really do NOT believe the academic standards are higher for D1 Vs. D2. If anyhting D2 has higher academic standards. *
What do you think?



Your thoughts are exactly what division II schools want people to think however it isn't true. Division II schools want people to think that they are more for the student than the athlete part of the student athlete but the NCAA doesn't hold the athletes of division II to the same standards as division I. When student athletes become academically ineligible for division I they usually end up at a division II school.

[SDSUFAN]

I am totally lost for remembering names today. It could be I am getting closer to age 64, but the big basketball star at UND less than 5 years ago. Ahh I remember now Beasley came to UND because he did not meet the academic requirements of D1, so I recall reading somewhere. *
Academic requirements are higher under D1 and that is why there are scandals such as occurred under Haskins at U of M. *With the higher standards, I personally feel there is a greater temptation to cheat as some school have done and have gotten caught. I willing to bet that in the 70 to 80 schools mentioned in the article, there are many clean programs. They dont need to cheat to be successful.

The best course for SDSU and NDSU is to be totally forthright in all affairs relating to D1 academics.

[Bisonguy]

Okay, I looked them up and this is what I found-

Sources- NCAA DI Manual (http://www.ncaa.org/library/membership/division_i_manual/2004-05/2004-05_d1_manual.pdf)
NCAA DII Manual (http://www.ncaa.org/library/membership/division_ii_manual/2004-05/2004-05_d2_manual.pdf)

From Section 14.2(both manuals): DI has a five year eligibilty clock, whereas DII has a 10 semester/15 quarter rule. The difference is that in DI the clock runs from the time a student-athlete is enrolled and is continuous, however in DII the 10 semester rule only applies when a student athlete is enrolled in a full time program of studies (i.e. can take a couple years off or go to school part-time, return to full-time status and won't lose any eligibilty)

From Section 14.3.1 (both manuals)- Freshman academic requirements. Both DI and DII require a minimum of a 820 combined SAT verbal and math score or a 68 sum ACT score. However, DII only requires a GPA or 2.0, but DI requires a GPA of 2.5 for those ACT or SAT scores. A DI student-athlete with a GPA of 2.0 would need a combined SAT verbal and math score of 1010 or an ACT sum score of 86.

From Section 14.3.1.1: DI and DII both currently require incoming freshman to have completed *a minimum of 14 years worth of specified courses in high school, however DII just raised the requirement from 13 this year, and DI will be raising their requirement to 16 in 2008.


Read more in section 14 in both of the division manual links I posted above.

[lucchesicourt]

I guess my having attended UCD where requirements are stricter than most D1 schools has affected my reasoning about standards of requirements. However, a grad student from USC who attended UCD when I was an undergrad, did not fair well at Davis and left to return to USC where according to her classes were less competitive. So, I feel using GPA as a factor determining elgibility is also misleading, as athletes at D1 schools may not be competing with the general school population for grades. Let's face it, Stanford or Duke which have not put a quality football team on the field for several years now (not to fault them, as I believe they and Duke are among the elite of D1 teams academically, and admire both schools) could not be compared to other D1 schools academically. These schools possess greater standards than most D1 schools, and students at other D1 schools may not be able to stay academically qualified at these two schools. So, what I am really trying to say is sometimes it is easier to get good grades at schools where you are not competing with the cream of the crop. I am not going to name names (you probably know who I am talking about), but there is at least one athlete who attended Cal, that would NOT have qualified to attend UCD ( both members of the same scholastic institution). Doesn't sound like the standards are really the same at D1 and D2 to me. I could be wrong overall, but grades are NOT the only way to judge academics, right?

[Bisonguy]

There are individual schools that have different levels as far as academics, but the minimums for DI student athletes are greater than they are for DII.

UC-Davis obviously has much higher standards than required minimums in either DII or DI, so it's probably a poor example (except now UC-Davis is a member of DI, so it helps prove my point ;))

Remember, what many consider to be the top academic schools, the Ivy League, are all members of DI.

[lucchesicourt]

Yeah, I guess attending UCD may have affevted my view of D1 compared to D2, but I also know your institution also put a priority on education as well as athletics. As a matter of fact, didn't your school do well in the civil engineering department, and get some sort of recognition?

[bincitysioux]

Your thoughts are exactly what division II schools want people to think however it isn't true. *Division II schools want people to think that they are more for the student than the athlete part of the student athlete but the NCAA doesn't hold the athletes of division II to the same standards as division I. *When student athletes become academically ineligible for division I they usually end up at a division II school.


The NCAA does hold higher academic standards for DI student athletes than they do for DII student athletes. However, the reason for this is because in general, not all across DII, but in general, the academic standards required by DII schools for ALL students is higher than it is for students at DI institutions. For example, the academic requirements for admission to UND are higher than the academic requirements for admission to NDSU.

[Bisonguy]

The NCAA does hold higher academic standards for DI student athletes than they do for DII student athletes. *However, the reason for this is because in general, not all across DII, but in general, the academic standards required by DII schools for ALL students is higher than it is for students at DI institutions. *For example, the academic requirements for admission to UND are higher than the academic requirements for admission to NDSU.


Whatever.
::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Both schools require the same number of credits from high school, and you can be admitted into either university with a 21 on the ACT and a GPA of 2.5 or above. *

Educate yourself- NDSU minimum admission requirements (http://www.ndsu.edu/prospective_students/requirements/)
UND minimum admission requirements (http://www.go.und.edu/apply.html#2)

The only difference in the admission requirements is how they handle students without the requirements *met. UND limits "provisional" students to 15 credits, NDSU probably states in their admission letter that they should take 15 credits or less. *::) ::) ::) ::)

Wow, UND is the freakin' Harvard of the Great Plains. ::) ::) ::) ::)

[bincitysioux]

The difference is that UND requires an ACT of 21 or SAT of 990, along with a 2.5 GPA. NDSU "recommends" an ACT of 21/ SAT of 970 and 2.5 GPA. UND requires higher academic standards for admission.

[Bisonguy]

The difference is that UND requires an ACT of 21 or SAT of 990, along with a 2.5 GPA. *NDSU "recommends" an ACT of 21/ SAT of 970 and 2.5 GPA. *UND requires higher academic standards for admission.

No, UND does not. That's what the whole "provisional" status is about.

[Bison_Dan]

Yeah, I guess attending UCD may have affevted my view of D1 compared to D2, but I also know your institution also put a priority on education as well as athletics. *As a matter of fact, didn't your school do well in the civil engineering department, and get some sort of recognition?

NDSU's enginneering dept won a couple of contests out in CA last year. The best part was it was against some of the big boys. (Stanford, etc.)

[tony]

The NCAA does hold higher academic standards for DI student athletes than they do for DII student athletes. *However, the reason for this is because in general, not all across DII, but in general, the academic standards required by DII schools for ALL students is higher than it is for students at DI institutions. *For example, the academic requirements for admission to UND are higher than the academic requirements for admission to NDSU.


Not to be harsh, but that is ridiculous.

First, UND raised their standards to match NDSU's - they said so when they did it.

Second, in general DII schools are regional (regional within a state); they are not flagship institutions in their own state; and a large chunk of them don't even offer PHDs. In fact, I disagree with you 100%, the admission standards at DII schools are, in general, much lower than those at DI schools.

Cripes, DII is 70% former NAIA schools right now. DI-AA is about 60% former DII schools. Hmmm... did all the "dumb" schools move up to DI? Was the NAIA kind of like DII's smarter brother all along? :)

Sure, maybe the academic differences between schools with DI-AA football and DII football aren't as great as those between all DI schools and all DII schools, but it is still a very significant difference.

Harvard, Stanford, UC Berkeley, Yale, Cornell, UC San Diego, Penn, UCLA, Wisconsin, Michigan, Washington, Illinois, Duke, Northwestern, Minnesota, Colorado, Vandy, Texas, UC Davis, Penn State, Rutgers, Pittsburgh, USC, North Carolina, Florida, Purdue, Ohio State, Rice, Arizona, Michigan State, Brown, Boston U, *Utah... these are all DI universities which happen to be among the top 100 universities in the entire world. How many DII school have academic standards even close to these schools?

[lucchesicourt]

Granted all these institutions are very good academically (UCD requirements are the same at the D1 level as they were as a D2 school- so it is not fair to include this school along with the other D1's and not use it at the D2 level also), but you failed to mention the Miami, Georgia Tech, etc. schools who academically are not in the same class as the ones you just mentioned. How many University of Miami players could play and be academically elgible at the likes of these schools. Probably not many. But, somehow, they are still elgible, hmmm!!

[tony]

Hehehe, are you just playing with me?

Georgia Tech is a fantastic school and easily one of the top 100 schools in the US. Their average SAT score is high. Of course, there isn't as much academic prestige training engineers as poli sci majors, but maybe that's not GT's problem.

Anyway, this link (http://www.studywonder.com/average.htm) seems to show the average U of Miami freshmen with average SAT of 1180 and ACT of 25 versus 1170 and 24 for a UC Davis frosh. *

In any case, there are darn few DII schools, if any, who can claim to have the academic standards for incoming freshman that either Georgia Tech or Miami do.

[lucchesicourt]

What are the statistics for the ahtletes. Granted, the schools as a whole do well. But, athletic svholarships are much different that academic scholarships. I also have a feeling that I will be seeing exactly the same thing happening at UCD (that the athletic acholarships will cause an overall decline in the academic standards of the past 30+ years). I was not attempting to pick on the whole schools as a whole only the athletic programs.

[lucchesicourt]

Try this link-it is about athletic program progress at the D1 level:

http://www2.ncaa.org/media_and_events/association_news/ncaa_news_online/2005/05_09_05/division_i/4210n20.html

The thing that really jumped out for me is that the men's programs are doing much worse than the women's programs. So, either women are more intelligent than men or men's programs give more slack to academia. It is also obvious that the men's programs bring in more $$. maybe, this is the real reason.

[lucchesicourt]

and this one:

http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/apr2/674_2004_apr.pdf

[kchats]

If you are talking graduation rates it is because men leave for the pros while women usually graduate since their professional leagues don't pay as well.

[lucchesicourt]

The number of athletes who leave for the pros would NOT account for this discrepancy. Let's face it very few players from each university actually make it into the pro level. If you have 83 schollies and 8 leave for the prp level the number would still be under 10%, and 8 is a large number for any program to get to that level in a given year.

[tony]

Hmmm. Well, this is a curious way of showing that DI academics are worse. Where's the comparison to DII's academic reforms? Oh, that's right. There are none because DII has never had any and sure isn't interested in doing anything now (the only "reform" they're interested in is making it easier for former pros to play at DII schools).

Anyway, the graduation rates for DI football players for the last four classes are over 10 percentage points higher than their DII counterparts.

There is a discrepancy between the graduation rates of male and female athletes, but you can't point to DI athletics as being the problem just because it suits your view of the world. First, that same large discrepancy exists in DII. Not only that, a similar but smaller discrepancy exists between guys and gals in the general school population. Second, maybe it's a cultural difference: I mean, if schools are still penalized for students who transfer and graduate from a different institution, then maybe part of the discrepancy is because guys are more likely to transfer to get more playing time.

I dunno, it just seems that "common knowledge" is dead wrong on DI being worse than DII academically. It doesn't help that the President of the NCAA keeps perpetuating this nonsense. Sure, DII schools want to think that they are so much holier than DI schools, yet it is DII schools taking JUCO transfers and HS kids that can't meet DI minimums, not the other way around.