|
Post by sarasota on Dec 17, 2019 0:25:32 GMT -5
It should be noted that there are enormous differences in pay between schools that have heavy graduate programs and schools that do not. That explains much of the the difference between the top four on the above list and the rest of them. I agree. I will try to either break out undergrad data or eliminate schools with significant grad programs.
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on Dec 17, 2019 10:46:42 GMT -5
Need to factor in cost of living for these numbers, other non-salary benefits, etc -- not to mention where's the evidence that the professors from the four at the top are any better than the others -- in terms of liberal arts, at least, it's a buyer's market.
|
|
|
Post by gks on Dec 17, 2019 10:54:15 GMT -5
What D3 conference do those suggesting this suggest Holy Cross join? NESCAC? Forget it. MASCAC? NEWMAC? Liberty?
|
|
|
Post by alum on Dec 17, 2019 11:24:22 GMT -5
Average Salaries for Full Professors based on American Association of University Professors data: Boston $190,000 American 172,800 Fordham 171,900 Lehigh 161,700 Amherst 153,200
Colgate 151,500 Williams 147,900
Holy Cross 135,800 Loyola 127,300 Lafayette 117,000 You get what you pay for. (I'm a little slanted because I was a college professor for eight years.)
I have added Amherst and Williams. Are there any stats about the average salary of assistant professors? I would imagine starting salaries are important to new hires. One doesn't usually get to full professor status for fifteen years or more. The College's 2017 990 (latest I found) shows employee wages and pension contributions of about $70 million. Using rough numbers, if that could be increased by 10%, salaries for professors would be around the same level as Williams. If we assume the College uses 4.5% of the endowment for operating expenses, that would mean that it would take $157 million in additional endowment to get there (or, perhaps, a combination of endowment income and tuition increase could be used.) I don't envy the administration and Trustees in deciding where to put the money. Do you upgrade the dorms, campus center and student facilities? The academic and arts facilities? The athletic facilities? Everyone wants their projects funded.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Dec 17, 2019 13:54:51 GMT -5
No offense, but our D1 identity is basically our biggest selling point to many prospective students in that they can continue to play the so-called Olympic sports at this level. It's basically what our "athletic identity" has become since joining/forming the Patriot League.
In my opinion, we were one of the schools really "hurt or handcuffed" by the Dayton Rule (which essentially says all athletics have to play at the same divisional level).....in terms of hurting our hoop and football programs anyway. In joining the PL for all sports, we basically have put all our athletic teams (in theory anyway) on the same level/footing etc. I'm not necessarily saying this is a bad thing but the focus of our athletic program became less focused on the "major sports" if you will.
Today, many of our students or prospective students want the experience/education that Holy Cross can provide as well as playing a sport at the D1 level. If we drop to D3, I'm really not sure what our brand or selling point would be to many.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 17, 2019 21:46:40 GMT -5
What D3 conference do those suggesting this suggest Holy Cross join? NESCAC? Forget it. MASCAC? NEWMAC? Liberty? Go straight to the NAIA?😁
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 17, 2019 22:01:22 GMT -5
No offense, but our D1 identity is basically our biggest selling point to many prospective students in that they can continue to play the so-called Olympic sports at this level. It's basically what our "athletic identity" has become since joining/forming the Patriot League. In my opinion, we were one of the schools really "hurt or handcuffed" by the Dayton Rule (which essentially says all athletics have to play at the same divisional level).....in terms of hurting our hoop and football programs anyway. In joining the PL for all sports, we basically have put all our athletic teams (in theory anyway) on the same level/footing etc. I'm not necessarily saying this is a bad thing but the focus of our athletic program became less focused on the "major sports" if you will. Today, many of our students or prospective students want the experience/education that Holy Cross can provide as well as playing a sport at the D1 level. If we drop to D3, I'm really not sure what our brand or selling point would be to many. We'd be like Prince Andrew in D-3. Not that we would have done anything wrong or have anything to be embarrassed about, but how relevant would we be?
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Dec 17, 2019 22:45:29 GMT -5
After we conclude this productive discussion on moving out of Division-1, I want to start a new thread on something a little more realistic: moving the school and all its buildings, brick by brick, to North Carolina. That would put us in a population growth area so we can dodge the coming decline in Northeast high school graduations, benefit from better weather, and build brand awareness via the bold move.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Dec 17, 2019 23:07:45 GMT -5
That NCAA rule about all sports needing to be in the same NCAA division is a perfect example of the cookie cutter rules that hamper colleges. As we know, HC neglects the minor sports to the point where we probably have the worst win-loss in the PL over the years. I always felt it's sort of cheating in that we save money on the minors in order to redirect the money to the majors. I have to think many of the minor sport coaches in the PL have a low opinion of this policy at HC. I think I posted a long time ago that the solution for HC is to move the minor sports into a lower NCAA division and keep the majors in Div 1. So simple. So obvious. But it's not allowed by the NCAA. This is why I hate the monopolistic power of the NCAA, which has a stranglehold on colleges. Please don't remind me that Vellacio said the NCAA basically pays HC for the minors. The fact remains that we are at the bottom of the PL. It ought to be embarrassing.
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Dec 17, 2019 23:48:05 GMT -5
the solution for HC is to move the minor sports into a lower NCAA division and keep the majors in Div 1. So simple. So obvious. But it's not allowed by the NCAA. This is why I hate the monopolistic power of the NCAA, which has a stranglehold on colleges. That rule, like all NCAA rules, was proposed by its member schools and passed by its member schools.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 18, 2019 1:41:25 GMT -5
After we conclude this productive discussion on moving out of Division-1, I want to start a new thread on something a little more realistic: moving the school and all its buildings, brick by brick, to North Carolina. That would put us in a population growth area so we can dodge the coming decline in Northeast high school graduations, benefit from better weather, and build brand awareness via the bold move. That's where Prince Andrew is moving to.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Dec 18, 2019 4:10:14 GMT -5
When I said "Get out of DIV I" I never said get into DIV III. What about DIV II, e.g., the Northeast-10 Conference?
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Dec 18, 2019 4:20:24 GMT -5
NCAA DIV I RULES:Division I
Division I member institutions have to sponsor at least seven sports for men and seven for women (or six for men and eight for women) with two team sports for each gender. Each playing season has to be represented by each gender as well. There are contest and participant minimums for each sport, as well as scheduling criteria. For sports other than football and basketball, Division I schools must play 100 percent of the minimum number of contests against Division I opponents -- anything over the minimum number of games has to be 50 percent Division I. Men's and women's basketball teams have to play all but two games against Division I teams; for men, they must play one-third of all their contests in the home arena. Schools that have football are classified as Football Bowl Subdivision (formerly Division I-A) or NCAA Football Championship Subdivision (formerly Division I-AA). Football Bowl Subdivision schools are usually fairly elaborate programs. Football Bowl Subdivision teams have to meet minimum attendance requirements (average 15,000 people in actual or paid attendance per home game), which must be met once in a rolling two-year period. NCAA Football Championship Subdivision teams do not need to meet minimum attendance requirements. Division I schools must meet minimum financial aid awards for their athletics program, and there are maximum financial aid awards for each sport that a Division I school cannot exceed.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Dec 18, 2019 9:50:53 GMT -5
That NCAA rule about all sports needing to be in the same NCAA division is a perfect example of the cookie cutter rules that hamper colleges. As we know, HC neglects the minor sports to the point where we probably have the worst win-loss in the PL over the years. I always felt it's sort of cheating in that we save money on the minors in order to redirect the money to the majors. I have to think many of the minor sport coaches in the PL have a low opinion of this policy at HC. I think I posted a long time ago that the solution for HC is to move the minor sports into a lower NCAA division and keep the majors in Div 1. So simple. So obvious. But it's not allowed by the NCAA. This is why I hate the monopolistic power of the NCAA, which has a stranglehold on colleges. Please don't remind me that Vellacio said the NCAA basically pays HC for the minors. The fact remains that we are at the bottom of the PL. It ought to be embarrassing. On the other hand, I'll bet there are bunches of schools in D-II and D-III that would do the opposite. Raise men's hoops to D-I and leave everything else low. Probably elevate women also just to satisfy Title IX, but not really want to. Not a huge investment but the ability to cash in on the NCAA tournament and name recognition. The schools (big and small) decided in for a penny in for a pound. If a school wants to jump to D-I (Merrimack, U Lowell, Bryant) go right ahead, but really go D-I - don't go part way to get a piece of the pie. Semi-off topic - hockey has always been an exception. U Lowell has been D-I hockey for years. St Lawrence (who came to Hart this year) is D-I hockey but D-III everything else. On the other hand, hockey isn't the cheap revenue sport that basketball is
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Dec 18, 2019 10:09:40 GMT -5
the solution for HC is to move the minor sports into a lower NCAA division and keep the majors in Div 1. So simple. So obvious. But it's not allowed by the NCAA. This is why I hate the monopolistic power of the NCAA, which has a stranglehold on colleges. That rule, like all NCAA rules, was proposed by its member schools and passed by its member schools. Dammit bison137, there you go again with those pesky facts.
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Dec 18, 2019 10:16:00 GMT -5
That NCAA rule about all sports needing to be in the same NCAA division is a perfect example of the cookie cutter rules that hamper colleges. As we know, HC neglects the minor sports to the point where we probably have the worst win-loss in the PL over the years. I always felt it's sort of cheating in that we save money on the minors in order to redirect the money to the majors. I have to think many of the minor sport coaches in the PL have a low opinion of this policy at HC. I think I posted a long time ago that the solution for HC is to move the minor sports into a lower NCAA division and keep the majors in Div 1. So simple. So obvious. But it's not allowed by the NCAA. This is why I hate the monopolistic power of the NCAA, which has a stranglehold on colleges. Please don't remind me that Vellacio said the NCAA basically pays HC for the minors. The fact remains that we are at the bottom of the PL. It ought to be embarrassing. On the other hand, I'll bet there are bunches of schools in D-II and D-III that would do the opposite. Raise men's hoops to D-I and leave everything else low. Probably elevate women also just to satisfy Title IX, but not really want to. Not a huge investment but the ability to cash in on the NCAA tournament and name recognition. The schools (big and small) decided in for a penny in for a pound. If a school wants to jump to D-I (Merrimack, U Lowell, Bryant) go right ahead, but really go D-I - don't go part way to get a piece of the pie. Semi-off topic - hockey has always been an exception. U Lowell has been D-I hockey for years. St Lawrence (who came to Hart this year) is D-I hockey but D-III everything else. On the other hand, hockey isn't the cheap revenue sport that basketball is Hockey is unique in that there's no Division 2. There's D1 and D3. Once the rules were put in regarding an athletic department being all-in on the same Division, some programs were able to be grandfathered.
It's similar in lacrosse with Johns Hopkins having a D1 program in both men's and women's lacrosse. New York Tech is a D2 school that was playing D1 baseball up until a few years ago.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Dec 18, 2019 10:24:40 GMT -5
IIRC the schools with D1 in one sport had that in place before the rules was changed to all sports in the same division.
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Dec 18, 2019 10:51:35 GMT -5
I should clarify that the rules operate in two different ways. If you're a D2 or D3 program, you're allowed to move one sport, either both men and women or one men's sport and another women's sport, to D1, but if you're D1, you can't move anything down to D2 or D3. I should correct myself and mention that schools like Hopkins or the hockey schools weren't necessarily "grandfathered," but are allowed to take their hockey or lacrosse programs to D1 under existing NCAA regulations that have been in place since the early 70s.
I can think of a few other exceptions as well. Lock Haven, a D2 school in PA, plays D1 field hockey. East Stroudsburg in PA, a D2 school, had a D1 wrestling program for several years and made the decision to move it to D2. I remember that being pretty controversial at the time.
Hobart lacrosse was at the D1 level for a few years. Ursinus field hockey was D1 for some time. Hartwick men's soccer and women's water polo were both D1 through 2017 when the school dropped water polo and moved men's soccer to D3. Coincidentally, men's soccer is 3-27-0 in its first two seasons in D3, including an 0-14-0 mark in the first year. A cautionary tale if one believes going from D1 to D3 is a panacea for athletic competitiveness.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 18, 2019 13:00:15 GMT -5
The irony of this thread is apparent and sad. Just at the time, things are looking up for HC sports, out of left field, up pops "Get Out of Div. I." Why? Why now? Is it an attempt to pull the tail? Create a debate where none exists? This thread is a non-starter and ridiculous. HC is a Div. I school and there is no question that it will stay a DivI school. It is not under discussion any where else. Football - championship season with more to come, led by an exciting young coach; M Basketball - a new young coach with promising recruits on the way; W basketball on the upswing with more recruits on the way;M&W hockey on the rebound; Baseball, softball, soccer, lacrosse both M&W all apparently doing better and so on with other teams. HC is showing "it" can be done in the right way in Div.I - fine academics with fine athletes. And, at this time a thread is created questioning our commitment to DivI? Of all the times, in all the places some bring this type of discussion to the fore. Why in God's name, why? Yet this thread continues to rear its ugly, negative, destructive narrative. Why? Do some seek to sabotage athletics for their own purposes? I don't get it. This is my last post on this silly thread. I suggest that others join with me. Throw this thread in the circular file of non-participation. I have vented. I've had enough. And above all else, I LoveHC I'm D-1 until the end of time and agree with your points, but enjoy the discussion because it prompts posters to define their image of Holy Cross and their goals for it's future. There is a positive place for provacueters like Sarasota with this thread and '87 with his Ovah thread because it gets the ideas flowing and anytime researchers like Bison, PP and Ky get coaxed into the discussion with their facts you learn a lot about College Sports.
|
|
|
Post by MeatWilkerson on Dec 18, 2019 17:24:54 GMT -5
After we conclude this productive discussion on moving out of Division-1, I want to start a new thread on something a little more realistic: moving the school and all its buildings, brick by brick, to North Carolina. That would put us in a population growth area so we can dodge the coming decline in Northeast high school graduations, benefit from better weather, and build brand awareness via the bold move. Has a school ever moved states before? Not a bad idea
|
|
|
Post by spenser on Dec 18, 2019 18:12:20 GMT -5
After we conclude this productive discussion on moving out of Division-1, I want to start a new thread on something a little more realistic: moving the school and all its buildings, brick by brick, to North Carolina. That would put us in a population growth area so we can dodge the coming decline in Northeast high school graduations, benefit from better weather, and build brand awareness via the bold move. Has a school ever moved states before? Not a bad idea Not given where our alumni base is located.
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Dec 18, 2019 19:03:16 GMT -5
I should clarify that the rules operate in two different ways. If you're a D2 or D3 program, you're allowed to move one sport, either both men and women or one men's sport and another women's sport, to D1, but if you're D1, you can't move anything down to D2 or D3. I should correct myself and mention that schools like Hopkins or the hockey schools weren't necessarily "grandfathered," but are allowed to take their hockey or lacrosse programs to D1 under existing NCAA regulations that have been in place since the early 70s. I can think of a few other exceptions as well. Lock Haven, a D2 school in PA, plays D1 field hockey. East Stroudsburg in PA, a D2 school, had a D1 wrestling program for several years and made the decision to move it to D2. I remember that being pretty controversial at the time. Hobart lacrosse was at the D1 level for a few years. Ursinus field hockey was D1 for some time. Hartwick men's soccer and women's water polo were both D1 through 2017 when the school dropped water polo and moved men's soccer to D3. Coincidentally, men's soccer is 3-27-0 in its first two seasons in D3, including an 0-14-0 mark in the first year. A cautionary tale if one believes going from D1 to D3 is a panacea for athletic competitiveness. Actually Hobart has been D1 for many years and continues to be D1. Lacrosse has always been regarded as their main sport, and they have fielded a varsity team since the late 1800's.. Their Board of Trustees voted to drop it to D3 a decade ago and their alums went nuts. The Hobart Administration was eventually forced to back down, due to a threat of a massive loss of contributions.
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Dec 19, 2019 20:15:18 GMT -5
You're right... I forgot that they're still in the NEC for lacrosse.
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Dec 24, 2019 8:00:54 GMT -5
Also Im not sure if youre allowed any more to move one mens and womens sport to DI. All the programs you mentioned are grandfathered in after the "Dayton rule" if I'm not mistaken.
Johns Hopkins M/W Lax St. Lawrence and Clarkson M/W hockey LeMoyne Baseball and W LAX Lock Haven FH as was mentioned above Hobart mentioned above Dallas Jesuit baseball (and softball?)
Example: I don't think Tufts could decide tomorrow to move mens and womens lacrosse or soccer to DI.
The only sport with wiggle room is hockey because there is no Division II, ONLY D1 and D3. So D2 schools have the option to play D1 or play D3 but be ineligible for NCAA. Technically Assumption & St. Anselm could go DI in hockey next year and try and play as independents. But they probably wouldn't make such a move unless for example the AHA invited them.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Dec 24, 2019 8:53:19 GMT -5
Bellarmine University, whish has been D-2 for decades but is moving to D-1 next year, was allowed to begin a men's lacrosse program in D-1 a few years ago. I believe that was allowed because there is no D-2 lacrosse?
|
|