View Full Version : O T,,,Whitewater wins again
milkbone
12-14-2013, 07:13 PM
Will play Mt union Friday night. Score today was 16-15
Whitewater & Mt. Union should be D2
TheSultan
12-15-2013, 02:50 PM
Whitewater & Mt. Union should be D2
Why? Both are non-scholarship programs that have been audited by the NCAA. And both have been able to show that athletes get no greater scholarship or financial aid support than the rest of their respective student bodies.
I know that Whitewater actually modeled its program after Mount Union's in terms of strength and conditioning, assistant coach contracts, developing a recruiting network, etc. ...other schools can do the same. And other's will be successful over time.
Goose85
12-15-2013, 03:17 PM
It would be nice for the state to even have an FCS program. Was really hoping UWM would do that.
What in the world does an NCAA audit have to do with anything?
TheSultan
12-15-2013, 08:12 PM
What in the world does an NCAA audit have to do with anything?
Because it is often assumed (not saying you did) that those successful at D3 give their athletes scholarship and financial aid beyond which what they would otherwise deserve.
No way they should be D2. They shouldn't be forced to, nor should they elect to.
DCwarrior
12-15-2013, 08:35 PM
Have 2 schools ever dominated a sport at any level over a decade like UW-Whitewater and Mt. Union have in D3 football? I think it's pretty cool.
MUMac
12-15-2013, 08:43 PM
Have 2 schools ever dominated a sport at any level over a decade like UW-Whitewater and Mt. Union have in D3 football? I think it's pretty cool.
I agree. I think it's pretty cool as well. Both had come from behind 1 point wins yesterday. It might not have happened. Glad it did.
Wasn't implying that at all. Mount Union has played in 15 of the last 17 title games. Whitewater in 8 of the last 9.
I think we all know that these two teams have more than dominated D3 football. It is time for them to move up to either D2 or FCS.
Lets look at our surrounding states.....
Iowa - 2 BCS teams, 2 FCS teams, 1 D2 team
Illinois - 3 BCS teams, 4 FCS teams, 2 D2 teams
Indiana - 4 BCS teams, 3 FCS teams, 2 D2 teams
Michigan - 5 BCS teams, 8 D2 teams
Minnesota - 1 BCS team, 9 D2 teams
Lets look at this by population......
Illinois - 12.8 million ~ 9 scholarship programs
Michigan - 9.8 million ~ 13 scholarship programs
Indiana - 6.5 million ~ 9 scholarship programs
Minnesota - 5.3 million ~ 10 scholarship programs
Iowa - 3 million ~ 5 scholarship programs
Wisconsin - 5.7 million ~ 1 scholarship program
That's a freaking joke.
TheSultan
12-15-2013, 09:34 PM
Wasn't implying that at all. Mount Union has played in 15 of the last 17 title games. Whitewater in 8 of the last 9.
I think we all know that these two teams have more than dominated D3 football. It is time for them to move up to either D2 or FCS.
Lets look at our surrounding states.....
Iowa - 2 BCS teams, 2 FCS teams, 1 D2 team
Illinois - 3 BCS teams, 4 FCS teams, 2 D2 teams
Indiana - 4 BCS teams, 3 FCS teams, 2 D2 teams
Michigan - 5 BCS teams, 8 D2 teams
Minnesota - 1 BCS team, 9 D2 teams
Lets look at this by population......
Illinois - 12.8 million ~ 9 scholarship programs
Michigan - 9.8 million ~ 13 scholarship programs
Indiana - 6.5 million ~ 9 scholarship programs
Minnesota - 5.3 million ~ 10 scholarship programs
Iowa - 3 million ~ 5 scholarship programs
Wisconsin - 5.7 million ~ 1 scholarship program
That's a freaking joke.
So Whitewater should increase it's costs (D2 scholarships...travel), and decrease the likelihood of winning a national championship, because the fact that Wisconsin has only one scholarship program is a "joke?"
The only way Whitewater does it is if the entire WIAC does it, and there is almost zero chance that that happens. WIAC schools have a real good niche where they can get the glory of national championships without the costs associated with D2. SP in basketball...LAX in cross country...WTW in football. Why would they change that?
Goose85
12-16-2013, 11:58 AM
Ok, so maybe a small community like Whitewater as a school is only meant for the D3 level and that is fine. I just think it is too bad that so many state kids have to go to school out of state if they want to play scholarship level football. UWM really missed the boat. MU could have a really good FCS level program too.
It is just unusual for a state the size of Wisconsin to have just one scholarship program. As a football fan I wish there were more.
Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"
12-17-2013, 01:02 PM
I'm just not sure Milwaukee going FCS would be a good move for them. Their fans have shown in basketball that they pretty much only show interest when the team is competing for league titles, and even then in Jeter's best years they weren't really breaking any attendance records. Their program would take time to come around, and there's the question of getting up enough money for a stadium and drawing fans to campus. How can they hope to do that with a second-tier football league when they can't do it for their marquee D1 sport? There's a ton of questions around that idea and I just don't see enough answers. It's football, so they'd still draw a bit, but they are still the third banana school in their own city. Will they get enough neutral interest to make it worthwhile? I'm not convinced.
For Marquette, as nice as it might be, it would never happen. Unless someone donates enough for a stadium, full start-up, and enough to sustain a legitimate D1 program for a decade or so, I can't see the board going along with it. If we couldn't at least be a middle-of-the-road team in the highest tier, I can't see them embracing the idea.
DCwarrior
12-17-2013, 01:58 PM
My question for IWB and others who believe there should be another scholarship program or two in the state is -- would having another (say at UWM) or two scholarship programs really affect the quality of Whitewater's program if they decided to stay at the D3 level? Maybe a few of the players Whitewater recruits are good enough high school players that they'd garner D2 scholarship offers and take them, but I don't think too many. To me, it just seems that Whitewater has a great coaching staff, facilities, and player development system.
I like the fact that the UW state school conference is far and away the best D3 sports conference in the country (football, basketball, hockey, baseball, track & field). To me, that's preferrable than a few of those schools moving up and being the equivalent of Michigan Tech or Mankato St.
TheSultan
12-17-2013, 02:22 PM
My question for IWB and others who believe there should be another scholarship program or two in the state is -- would having another (say at UWM) or two scholarship programs really affect the quality of Whitewater's program if they decided to stay at the D3 level? Maybe a few of the players Whitewater recruits are good enough high school players that they'd garner D2 scholarship offers and take them, but I don't think too many. To me, it just seems that Whitewater has a great coaching staff, facilities, and player development system.
.
Whitewater has a number of players who have turned down D2 scholarships, or who have transferred from D2 and FCS programs. But it would definitely have an impact.
The other issue is what conference affiliation would Whitewater have? The closest D2 conferences that play football are the Northern Sun (Minnesota, Nebraska, Dakotas) and the Great Lakes Athletic Conference (Michigan, Ohio). And this would be fine for football, but sending the women's soccer team to Grand Rapids instead of Platteville becomes a pretty expensive proposition.
unclejohn
12-17-2013, 02:47 PM
Ok, so maybe a small community like Whitewater as a school is only meant for the D3 level and that is fine. I just think it is too bad that so many state kids have to go to school out of state if they want to play scholarship level football. UWM really missed the boat. MU could have a really good FCS level program too.
It is just unusual for a state the size of Wisconsin to have just one scholarship program. As a football fan I wish there were more.
I guess I just don't see what the point is. Athletes in Milwaukee have plenty of opportunity to play scholarship football reasonably nearby, whether they do it in the state or not. How far is DeKalb, IL from Milwaukee? Probably a good deal closer than Des Moines, is from many parts of Iowa. I can see state universities and colleges adding programs that are clearly needed. UWM is building its engineering program. The state paid for a good chunk of Marquette's new dental school because it is the only one the state has. But is there really a need for another scholarship football program? Why?
MU Viking
12-17-2013, 03:27 PM
I don't see the upside for Whitewater to move to D2. The notoriety the school gets for athletic success across all sports is invaluable. Whitewater is not just good at football-- the school has won a men's basketball title recently, has made it to the finals in women's basketball, has won gymnastics titles, been near the top in men's and women's soccer, volleyball and wrestling.
Having this sort of dominance within the state has value to the school. The draw of playing schools within the state and being able to compare the school's success to that of other UW schools is a benefit to the university. Whitewater now plays on national TV this week for the championship. Also great (free) publicity.
What's the value of a D2 designation really?
Jimmy Lemke
12-17-2013, 03:46 PM
As the resident expert on UWM and it's prospective football program, I can say that it just wouldn't be worth it. I'll expand later when I'm not sitting on my phone in the office.
Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"
12-17-2013, 04:02 PM
If UWW moved to D2 in football, would they have to do the same for their other sports? If so, then I can't see any way it would be worth it. I already don't think it'd be worth it, but there'd be no sense in making the jump unilaterally.
mufansince72
12-17-2013, 04:24 PM
I believe you can play in different divisions for different sports if you can find a home. I don't know why Whitewater would want to move up a level though. There is no one in the general vicinity to play.
Goose85
12-17-2013, 04:31 PM
An FCS level program at another state school probably wouldn't impact Whitewater much at all. Big jump from D3 to D1. You see more movement the other way, as in football most redshirt in year one and don't want to lose a transfer year going from one FCS to another.
There are plenty of kids from Wisconsin on D1 college rosters that may have chosen to play closer to home if a free ride was available. I'd guess more than a few that walked on at Wisconsin may have accepted a scholarship offer from an in state program if it was at least FCS. Plenty of Wisconsin kids on rosters at Northern Illinois and the MAC conference, Missouri Valley conference (FCS), etc.
It's not so much Whitewater, as it is just another school in the state. Whitewater is likely too small to support an FCS level program, but an FCS level program at Milwaukee could have helped them get out of the Horizon and into a conference like CUSA or Missouri Valley.
I am a college football fan, and not just a fan of one team, but I do understand that people here like that Wisconsin has no in state competition for state kids, and that all other schools play at the D3 level so no schollie options.
I just think an FCS program could be a positive for creating more of a campus feel for a school like Milwaukee and a link to the school for alum. I also think MU could build a very competitve FCS program that would be fun for MU fans as well.
Goose hit on the main reasons that I feel are the answer. I know a local high school coach that has sent MANY players on to D1, D1-AA, D2 and D3. He has also sent a handful on to the NFL. He says it bothers him that, unless a kid has an offer from Wisconsin, he has to send them out of state.
Look at how many kids from this state go on to play college football out of state - why? Why is there only one scholarship option in Wisconsin? Bordering state like Minnesota and Indiana are about the same size as Wisconsin, and they combine for 19 scholarship football programs. Wisconsin has 1. Wisconsin is almost twice the size of Iowa, they have 5, we have 1.
The reason why I suggest Whitewater is obvious. They, along with Mount Union, have proven that they are too good for DIII.
So the Whitewater community isn't large enough to support a team? Bullsh*t. Let's take a quick look at the D2 schools from bordering states...
Schools by Enrollment
<colgroup><col style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:4534;width:93pt" width="124"> <col style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:6509;width:134pt" width="178"> <col style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:2889;width:59pt" width="79"> </colgroup><tbody>
Michigan
Wayne State
28,900
Michigan
Grand Valley State
21,000
Minnesota
St. Cloud State
16,200
Michigan
Ferris State
14,000
Minnesota
Minnesota State
13,400
Wisconsin
Oshkosh
13,000
Wisconsin
Eau Claire
11,000
Wisconsin
LaCrosse
10,000
Wisconsin
Whitewater
10,000
Wisconsin
Stevens Point
9,500
Minnesota
Minnesota–Duluth
9,200
Wisconsin
Stout
9,000
Michigan
Northern Michigan
8,500
Michigan
Saginaw Valley State
8,190
Wisconsin
Platteville
7,900
Minnesota
Minnesota State
7,000
Wisconsin
River Falls
6,900
Michigan
Michigan Tech
5,600
Minnesota
Bemidji State
5,300
Illinois
Quincy
4,600
Indiana
Indianapolis
4,200
Minnesota
Concordia
2,784
Illinois
McKendree
2,240
Michigan
Northwood
1,987
Minnesota
Minnesota–Crookston
1,800
Michigan
Hillsdale
1,400
Indiana
St. Joe's
1,074
Iowa
Upper Iowa
877
</tbody>
Schools by city population
<colgroup><col style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:3035;width:62pt" width="83"> <col style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:5485;width:113pt" width="150"> <col style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:4571;width:94pt" width="125"> <col style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:2925;width:60pt" width="80"> </colgroup><tbody>
State
School
City
Population
Indiana
Indianapolis
Indianapolis
800,000
Michigan
Wayne State
Detroit
681,000
Minnesota
Concordia
St. Paul
285,000
Michigan
Ferris State
Big Rapids
188,000
Minnesota
Minnesota–Duluth
Duluth
86,000
Wisconsin
Oshkosh
Oshkosh
66,000
Minnesota
St. Cloud State
St. Cloud
65,800
Wisconsin
Eau Claire
Eau Claire
65,000
Wisconsin
LaCrosse
La Crosse
51,000
Michigan
Northwood
Midland
41,800
Illinois
Quincy
Quincy
40,000
Minnesota
Minnesota State
Mankato
39,000
Minnesota
Minnesota State
Moorhead
38,000
Michigan
Saginaw Valley State
Bay City?
34,000
Wisconsin
Stevens Point
Stevens Point
26,700
Michigan
Northern Michigan
Marquette
21,300
Michigan
Grand Valley State
Allendale
17,500
Wisconsin
Stout
Menomonie
16,000
Wisconsin
River Falls
River Falls
15,000
Wisconsin
Whitewater
Whitewater
14,000
Minnesota
Bemidji State
Bemidji
13,400
Wisconsin
Platteville
Platteville
11,000
Michigan
Hillsdale
Hillsdale
8,300
Minnesota
Minnesota–Crookston
Crookston
7,900
Michigan
Michigan Tech
Houghton
7,700
Indiana
St. Joe's
Rensselaer
5,900
Illinois
McKendree
Lebenon
5,523
Iowa
Upper Iowa
Fayette
1,338
</tbody>
TheSultan
12-17-2013, 06:18 PM
I believe you can play in different divisions for different sports if you can find a home. I don't know why Whitewater would want to move up a level though. There is no one in the general vicinity to play.
You can only move up for selected sports that don't have large participation...like Johns Hopkins in lacrosse and a number of schools in hockey.
UWW could not play D2 football and play D3 in other sports.
TheSultan
12-17-2013, 06:25 PM
IWB, you don't understand something. UWW isn't going to lift its program to D2 to satisfy people's yearning for a place for in-state kids to play if Wisconsin doesn't offer them a scholarship.
UWW is going to stay where it is because they have developed a national championship image for football (and other sports) without the costs associated with Division 2. As MU Viking points out, there is very little marginal benefit for being a D2 school versus D3.
mufansince72
12-17-2013, 07:14 PM
Division III schools with Division I programs[edit]
Twelve D-III schools currently field Division I programs in one or two sports (one maximum for each sex).
Seven of them are grandfathered schools that have traditionally competed at the highest level of a particular men's sport prior to the institution of the Division classifications in 1971 (a decade before the NCAA governed women's sports). Presumably due to Title IX considerations, grandfathered schools are also allowed to field one women's sport in Division I, and six of the seven schools choose to do so. These schools are allowed to offer athletic scholarships in their Division I men's and women's sports to remain competitive with their opponents.[10]
Clarkson University (men's and women's ice hockey)
Colorado College (men's ice hockey and women's soccer)
Hartwick College (men's soccer and women's water polo)
Johns Hopkins University (men's and women's lacrosse)
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (men's and women's ice hockey)
Rutgers–Newark (men's volleyball)
St. Lawrence University (men's and women's ice hockey)
(State University of New York at Oneonta was previously grandfathered in men's soccer but moved totally to Division III in 2006.)
The other five schools choose to field Division I programs in one sport for men and optionally one sport for women, but they are not grandfathered and thus are not allowed to offer athletic scholarships. Academic-based and need-based financial aid is still available, as is the case for Division III.
Franklin and Marshall College (men's wrestling)
Hobart College (men's lacrosse)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (women's rowing)
MIT also fields men's rowing, but not as an NCAA program because college men's rowing has never been an NCAA sport.
Rochester Institute of Technology (men's and women's ice hockey)
Union College (men's and women's ice hockey)
In addition, Lawrence University was formerly a non-grandfathered program in fencing, but the NCAA no longer conducts a separate Division I fencing championship. Lawrence continues to field a fencing team, but that team is now considered Division III (see below).
Football and basketball may not be grandfathered Division I programs because their revenue-enhancing potential would give them an unfair advantage over other Division III schools. In 1992, several Division I schools playing Division III in football, most notably Georgetown University, were forced to make their football programs Division I.
In August 2007, the NCAA instituted a moratorium on all division moves, including moves of individual programs.[11] That moratorium expired in August 2011, but the NCAA has indicated they will no longer allow individual program moves to another division, as a general policy (though at least one exception has been made in women's ice hockey due to the lack of Division II competition in that sport).
Goose85
12-17-2013, 07:31 PM
IWB, you don't understand something. UWW isn't going to lift its program to D2 to satisfy people's yearning for a place for in-state kids to play if Wisconsin doesn't offer them a scholarship.
UWW is going to stay where it is because they have developed a national championship image for football (and other sports) without the costs associated with Division 2. As MU Viking points out, there is very little marginal benefit for being a D2 school versus D3.
Why not consider D1 with FCS level for football? Green Bay and UWM play D1, why not add another to the mix?
I get it, they don't want to incur the costs and are happy with D3 and playing with the other small state schools. I just personally think it would be fun to have more than one college team in the state.
TheSultan
12-17-2013, 07:39 PM
Why not consider D1 with FCS level for football? Green Bay and UWM play D1, why not add another to the mix?
I get it, they don't want to incur the costs and are happy with D3 and playing with the other small state schools. I just personally think it would be fun to have more than one college team in the state.
You answered the question. Really the only way this happens is if some donor really wants to invest a lot of money in Whitewater athletics. Maybe T. Boone's wife is an alum???
Jimmy Lemke
12-17-2013, 10:00 PM
This is the truth, and if you really want to see Marquette play football then this makes more sense for you guys than us.
Neither of us would be a powerhouse in football, even at the FCS scholarship level. We don't have the resources to begin with at MKE, whereas at MU I think anyone with influence would balk at taking money out of men's basketball (as they rightly should).
HOWEVER...football could be financially smart for MU at the FCS non-scholarship level in the Pioneer League. This is the conference that is far-flung across the country, but features all the D-I schools who were forced to bring their D-III football programs up to D-I when the NCAA ruled that you couldn't go lower in any sports than the rest of your program. These schools created the PL, and it works for them. We're talking about Drake, Butler, Valparaiso, Dayton etc. Schools that are not all that different from Marquette. They agree to not allow scholarships in their football programs, and they play for their own championship at the end of the season. Starting this year they got an automatic bid to the FCS tournament, but don't expect a non-scholarship team to really compete with the cream of the crop FCS programs in that tournament. It's more about having the team and the pageantry of college football than being a big dollars revenue producer.
The reason Marquette may want to consider it, and more so than us at Milwaukee, is that you guys have much higher tuition. A Pioneer League team can have upwards of 80+ players who wouldn't be at their respective schools if it weren't for the football team they are a part of. What is tuition at Marquette, 25k annually? At 80 guys that's $2 million in income that you wouldn't otherwise be getting. Obviously there's the cost of the team and added class space etc., but you get college football and make a profit off of it - most PFL teams spend about 800k in the sport.
The other thing about it is that a small expansion to Valley Fields would take care of capacity; most PFL teams average about 3k attendance tops.
Otherwise, it just may not be worth it. Georgetown and Villanova make it work, so it's not to say that Marquette cannot, it is just that they might be spending at a Marquette or Duke level in basketball if they didn't have the teams to pay for. And at the FCS level, you're just not getting the television dollars to make up for it.
Let's also not discount the fact - and this is a big reason why I went from being MKE's biggest football drum-beater to against the idea - that CTE is going to put football on the downswing in the not-so-distant future, and the entire sport may be irrelevant on a national scene in 40-50 years. As crazy as that sounds, that's the same thing fans of Horse Racing and Boxing would have thought in the 1940's when those two sports were on top of the world.
Personally - and I think this is the path both of our schools should take - I think the commitment needs to be made to the current fall sport, and that is soccer. I was forever not a fan of the sport. I grew up, as many people did, in a world where soccer was seen in a feminine light compared to the masculine sport of football. Ever hear a kid say the term "field fairies" when you were growing up? It made sense to most of us - football players are hitting each other constantly, whereas soccer players fall down and start crying at a chance collision. I covered the MKE team while I was in college but I didn't really get the sport, and then my cousin implored me this past May to sit down and watch the sport on TV with him a few times. He said I'd "get it," and he's right. I do. I'm still learning, but it's an exciting sport to watch once you train yourself to look at the whole field while the ball is in play.
This is what I've learned from watching soccer that has made me, a television fan, enjoy it:
1. There are something like 4-5 commercial breaks for the entire game. It's fantastic. Instead of commercials, advertisers get their logos on uniforms. So pro teams still make a ton of money off of one or two advertisers. I imagine eventually when America's marketing-heavy world gets into it as a major sport, you'll see more on-the-field advertising etc. So there's few commercials.
2. It's year-round. MLS is Spring to Fall, Europe is end of summer to beginning of summer. National teams play. College is all fall. If you can get into soccer, you have no off-season. It's fantastic.
At the college level, I'd love to see Milwaukee and Marquette adopt the things that make college football great - marching bands, widespread tailgating, etc. - and bring it to the pitch. It would certainly be a better investment than piling millions into football programs that will never be what we would want them to be.
Jimmy - I thought it was more of a possibility for Milwaukee because the scholarships were already skewed towards women's sports?
Jimmy Lemke
12-18-2013, 01:40 PM
Jimmy - I thought it was more of a possibility for Milwaukee because the scholarships were already skewed towards women's sports?
From that point of view, definitely. To be in compliance with the NCAA, a school needs to have the men-to-women scholarship ratio percentage within five points of the overall student body. MKE has 51% female student body, so we need at least 46% female scholarships in athletics. Right now we have about 62%.
I don't know what Marquette's student body is, but I know the scholarship ratio is more towards the men's side. A football team at MU may require women's sports to be added, but neither school would have to add women's sports if you start PFL football, since the Pioneer League doesn't add any scholarships for men.
TheSultan
12-18-2013, 01:46 PM
Jimmy, I am pretty sure that is not correct. My understanding is that you also have to have as many "participation opportunities" for men:women equal to the same ratio as the overall student body. So even a non-scholarship football program would require additional slots for a woman's sport.
I just wish there was something. My whole rant on the lack of FCS or D2 wasn't geared to just Whitewater, I just feel Whitewater has the best shot to succeed because of what they have done at the D3 level. As I said, they are too good for D3.
As I showed through the charts above, the student body size and city population is in check with what is around us. The fact that all of these states have opportunities and we do not, is a joke.
Also, I don't necessarily think a donor has to pony up the cash. The state supported Wisconsin's program for decades before they were able to function alone, there is no reason the state can't support another program. I know they never will, but the surrounding states all do.
Jimmy Lemke
12-18-2013, 02:05 PM
The plus side of scholarship football at Milwaukee or Marquette is it would just destroy the Badgers and turn them into Minnesota.
Wisconsin's biggest strength is not farm boys or money or anything like that. It's the walk-on program. Because there's no other scholarship program in this state, kids who want to play football for the Badgers but aren't good enough to get one of those 85 scholarships will still go there to play because the program takes two years and transforms them into what they want. I was a few years ahead of Ricky Wagner at Nathan Hale, and he went from a 6'8'' 220 lb power forward in bball (we had an offer to him) to a 6'8'' 340 lb tackle that moves like he's still a basketball player. And he's not the only one. Jimmy Leonhard, Jared Abbrederis, Chris Maragos, Jason Doering, Luke Swan...the list goes on. Mark Tauscher...Joe Panos...some guy named JJ Watt. These are all players who came to Wisconsin as walk-ons.
I'd love to see another scholarship team destroy that walk-on tradition at Wisconsin, but I wouldn't want to pay for one at Milwaukee unless you had major, major benefactors who were willing to cover a ton of the cost.
Great point Jimmy - I know Goose has talked about that for years.
GOMU1104
12-18-2013, 02:47 PM
The plus side of scholarship football at Milwaukee or Marquette is it would just destroy the Badgers and turn them into Minnesota.
Wisconsin's biggest strength is not farm boys or money or anything like that. It's the walk-on program. Because there's no other scholarship program in this state, kids who want to play football for the Badgers but aren't good enough to get one of those 85 scholarships will still go there to play because the program takes two years and transforms them into what they want. I was a few years ahead of Ricky Wagner at Nathan Hale, and he went from a 6'8'' 220 lb power forward in bball (we had an offer to him) to a 6'8'' 340 lb tackle that moves like he's still a basketball player. And he's not the only one. Jimmy Leonhard, Jared Abbrederis, Chris Maragos, Jason Doering, Luke Swan...the list goes on. Mark Tauscher...Joe Panos...some guy named JJ Watt. These are all players who came to Wisconsin as walk-ons.
I'd love to see another scholarship team destroy that walk-on tradition at Wisconsin, but I wouldn't want to pay for one at Milwaukee unless you had major, major benefactors who were willing to cover a ton of the cost.
It would take 30 years for this to happen. Even then it still may not.
mufansince72
12-18-2013, 02:49 PM
JJ Watt started out at Central Michigan
TheSultan
12-18-2013, 03:00 PM
It would take 30 years for this to happen. Even then it still may not.
And it is based on the assumption that a player will not turn down a scholarship to the likes of UWM, Marquette or Whitewater so that they can walk on in Madison.
If these players are already turning down scholarships to D2 or FCS programs now, why would they accept them to one of these schools? Simply because they are "in-state?"
I don't believe these guys are turning down FCS scholarships now. That is part of the problem. Most FCS & D2 schools recruit the hell out of their home state because that is where the majority of their roster comes from.
With no in-state FCS or D2 school, this state is hugely under-recruited. I have known dozens of players that could easily have played mid-major or D2 that were never recruited by those types of schools. A scholarship is a scholarship. Its not just tuition, it is everything else that goes along with it.
Goose85
12-18-2013, 04:27 PM
I don't think an FCS program would have too much impact on Wisconsin. Sure some walkons at UW would likely take a schollie from MU or Milwaukee if they were playing good FCS level football with some players going to the NFL, but that wouldn't impact the high level guys they recruit with the 85 schollies. Facilities wouldn't be close either.
FCS level shouldn't impact Whitewater either as D3 is far from FCS.
Sure some do turn down schollies to walk on at UW, distance and instate tuition help that. Others miss out waiting for UW to decide as well.
If you think recruiting basketball is a tough thing to do, football is a real crap shoot which is why the walkon program at UW has paid dividends. What do you do with a kid from a small school that has never played against even D1 or D2 high school competition? In hoops they go on the AAU circuit so you can see them. In Wisconsin, high school kids get 9 games a year, that's it.
An in state FCS team wouldn't hurt Wisconsin or Whitewater, it would hurt those that rely on our prospects heavily....
Mankato - 31 kids on roster from Wisconsin
Northern Michigan - 11 kids on roster from Wisconsin
Winona State - 18 kids on roster from Wisconsin
St. Cloud State - 31 kids on roster from Wisconsin
Michigan Tech - 20 kids on the roster from Wisconsin
That is only five of the schools and that is 111 kids from Wisconsin - yep, keep sending 'em out of state!
mufansince72
12-18-2013, 10:50 PM
IWB - I really don't get what the big deal is here! So what if they go out of state. UWM has D1 baseball. A DI baseball ride scholarship at UWM is worth about 30% of tuition. 40% if you are a pitcher. That does not include room, board and books, just tuition. Most good students will get more than that in academic scholarships and aid. I don't see what the attraction is for non high D1 full ride football.
unclejohn
12-18-2013, 11:26 PM
Again, I guess I am having a hard time seeing why this is a problem. For who exactly? The state? The state universities? The players? The state has a good reason to want to keep at least a certain number of doctors, dentists, and engineers home. That is why the state has invested a fair amount of money in those fields. I can see little reason to want to keep high school football players home. Why? Is the state in danger of running out of high school coaches or something?
The state universities? Any one moving to D-2 or higher would have to sink a huge amount of money, and for what? Whitewater, which is easily the best at this point, would hardly benefit more from a higher division program. It gets plenty of publicity from the program it has. It is hard to see any of these programs turning scholarship football into a financial positive. Any university that did so would have to drop out of the state's popular and practical state university conference.
The players? Sorry, but it does not trouble me that they might have to travel to the next state over to get a scholarship. Such is the cost of going to college for free. And travelling to Minnesota or Illinois or Iowa is not a terrible burden. Actually, it might well be a good thing for most students. If they are good enough to play D-1 ball, the state university will probably recruit them. If they are really good, so will other big universities. If there were more in-state options, some of the players recruited would go out of state anyway.
I do see your point that the state is under-recruited, so perhaps high school players have fewer chances to get a scholarship. I will take your word for that, as I do not pretend to know the numbers. But to this, I say, "So what?" The point of giving scholarships is that it benefits the school in some way, or it serves some larger societal purpose. So universities give scholarships to really smart kids, or really creative kids, or in the case of Purdue, chicks with big tits who can twirl a baton. And from a societal point of view, they give them to minorities who make the campus a more diverse place and who otherwise might not be able to go to college, or something like that. In the case of athletic scholarships in revenue-producing sports, it often comes down to cold hard cash of course, and D-2 and FCS scholarship players almost certainly cost the university more than they bring in. I doubt there are many campuses who are really deprived of guys who played high school football. Nor do I know that the failure of schools in state to provide more football scholarships prevents even one student from attending college. Perhaps it does, but I find that dubious. I also have to question whether having a scholarship-level athletic program for that purpose is a good idea. If the point is to get deserving but disadvantaged high school students a chance to attend college, there are more direct, cheaper, and better ways to do it.
mufansince72
12-18-2013, 11:52 PM
I know a bunch of kids who went on to play D@ football. They certainly did not get anything close to a full ride. More like what UWM D1 baseball Players get. 30 % of tuition. No discount off books, room or board.
I know a bunch of kids who went on to play D@ football. They certainly did not get anything close to a full ride. More like what UWM D1 baseball Players get. 30 % of tuition. No discount off books, room or board.
Yes, but they took it. They didn't go to Whitewater, they didn't go to LaCrosse. they took out of state the D2 partial.
TheSultan
12-19-2013, 09:31 AM
Again, I guess I am having a hard time seeing why this is a problem. For who exactly? The state? The state universities? The players? The state has a good reason to want to keep at least a certain number of doctors, dentists, and engineers home. That is why the state has invested a fair amount of money in those fields. I can see little reason to want to keep high school football players home. Why? Is the state in danger of running out of high school coaches or something?
The state universities? Any one moving to D-2 or higher would have to sink a huge amount of money, and for what? Whitewater, which is easily the best at this point, would hardly benefit more from a higher division program. It gets plenty of publicity from the program it has. It is hard to see any of these programs turning scholarship football into a financial positive. Any university that did so would have to drop out of the state's popular and practical state university conference.
The players? Sorry, but it does not trouble me that they might have to travel to the next state over to get a scholarship. Such is the cost of going to college for free. And travelling to Minnesota or Illinois or Iowa is not a terrible burden. Actually, it might well be a good thing for most students. If they are good enough to play D-1 ball, the state university will probably recruit them. If they are really good, so will other big universities. If there were more in-state options, some of the players recruited would go out of state anyway.
I do see your point that the state is under-recruited, so perhaps high school players have fewer chances to get a scholarship. I will take your word for that, as I do not pretend to know the numbers. But to this, I say, "So what?" The point of giving scholarships is that it benefits the school in some way, or it serves some larger societal purpose. So universities give scholarships to really smart kids, or really creative kids, or in the case of Purdue, chicks with big tits who can twirl a baton. And from a societal point of view, they give them to minorities who make the campus a more diverse place and who otherwise might not be able to go to college, or something like that. In the case of athletic scholarships in revenue-producing sports, it often comes down to cold hard cash of course, and D-2 and FCS scholarship players almost certainly cost the university more than they bring in. I doubt there are many campuses who are really deprived of guys who played high school football. Nor do I know that the failure of schools in state to provide more football scholarships prevents even one student from attending college. Perhaps it does, but I find that dubious. I also have to question whether having a scholarship-level athletic program for that purpose is a good idea. If the point is to get deserving but disadvantaged high school students a chance to attend college, there are more direct, cheaper, and better ways to do it.
This is really well stated and I agree. I just don't see the fact that Wisconsin is under-recruited, and/or some of the better players having to leave the state for scholarship opportunities being that big of a problem. Certainly nowhere near big enough to warrant the WIAC, UWM or Marquette to invest the money it would take to develop scholarship football programs.
Goose85
12-19-2013, 10:00 AM
It's not that it is a big problem that kids are leaving the state, I just think it is too bad that we don't have more than one college football team in the state.
D2 can give partials, D1 can not for football or basketball. All other D1 sports can give partials because the NCAA doesn't allow for full rides for what would constitute a full team, there are limits. There are some UWM baseball players with full rides, and others that have partials. I think the NCAA allows only 12 baseball schollies.
mufansince72
12-19-2013, 10:03 AM
Yes, but they took it. They didn't go to Whitewater, they didn't go to LaCrosse. they took out of state the D2 partial.
Yes, but only because they wanted to play football in college at a slightly higher level than D3. In all actuality, they would have been better off going to Whitewater or Oshkosh in most cased because the quality of play is pretty similar to what they would have had at those D2 schools, and the tuition would have been lower at the instate programs.
I also know a D1 player, who also had a short ride in the NFL. He told me unless you are going to be an NFL player, it's probably not even worth it to play D1 football. He said D2 and D3 are very similar. The coaches own you for four or five years and run your life from 5 am - 10 pm or so every day. You lift when they tell you to lift. You eat what and when they tell you. You study when they tell you to study. Probably not an overly enjoyable college experience unless you are getting a full ride or can make it to the NFL.
TheSultan
12-19-2013, 10:09 AM
It's not that it is a big problem that kids are leaving the state, I just think it is too bad that we don't have more than one college football team in the state.
Wisconsin has about 20 college football teams.
The quality of WIAC football to D2 football is pretty close, and right now Whitewater outdraws all but 15 D2 football programs.
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/Attendance/2012.pdf
What exactly are you looking for that you can't get right now?
slightly higher level than D3......better off going to Whitewater or Oshkosh in most cased because the quality of play is pretty similar to what they would have had at those D2 schools
unless you are going to be an NFL player, it's probably not even worth it to play D1 football. He said D2 and D3 are very similar.
I don't put any stock in his comments at all. D2 and DIII are not 'slightly different'. Every level is different. I agree with him in the line about giving you 'their time', but it is different.
"It's not worth it to play D1 unless you are going pro"? BS. Have him come running out of a tunnel into a stadium of 1,000 and tell me it wasn't worth it.
Goose85
12-19-2013, 01:29 PM
Personally I am not interested in watching a D3 game unless I know kids. D3 is not close to D1 FCS. I don't think the WIAC is close to D2. I know kids personally that play at 5 WIAC schools as well as a few D2 kids, kids at the FCS level and a handful of kids at Wisconsin. Each level, depending on position can be a huge jump. I know kids that did not go D2 and are playing at good WIAC schools because they did not think they would play due to size / speed.
Goose85
12-19-2013, 01:32 PM
"It's not worth it to play D1 unless you are going pro"? BS. Have him come running out of a tunnel into a stadium of 1,000 and tell me it wasn't worth it.
Tell that to the 80 of 110 kids on the Badger roster every year.
mufansince72
12-19-2013, 01:50 PM
Tell that to the 80 of 110 kids on the Badger roster every year.
He meant from the standpoint that your life revolves around what the coaches have you do 365 days a year, rather than just being a normal college kid.
TheSultan
12-19-2013, 02:14 PM
Personally I am not interested in watching a D3 game unless I know kids. D3 is not close to D1 FCS. I don't think the WIAC is close to D2. I know kids personally that play at 5 WIAC schools as well as a few D2 kids, kids at the FCS level and a handful of kids at Wisconsin. Each level, depending on position can be a huge jump. I know kids that did not go D2 and are playing at good WIAC schools because they did not think they would play due to size / speed.
If you get some sort of upsurge in enjoyment from D2 that you won't get from D3, then I really have nothing else to say.
Goose85
12-19-2013, 02:23 PM
If you get some sort of upsurge in enjoyment from D2 that you won't get from D3, then I really have nothing else to say.
Never said I have any interest in going to a D2 game, just indicated that the talent level is higher than D3. I would go to either level of D1.
The point about level of commitment is true if you are referring to D1 and D2 having spring ball. But D3 programs have offseason programs too.
Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"
12-21-2013, 12:14 PM
FWIW, Whitewater crushed Mount Union 52-14 in the DIII title game last night. It was close at halftime, but the Warhawks outscored Mount Union 31-0 in the second half to pull away.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2013/12/20/wisconsin-whitewater-rout-mount-union-to-win-division-iii-championship/4152653/
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.