With schools starting to close or shut down athletic programs, I was interested in what laxpert and Homer posted in the D1 thread "How many schools will drop lacrosse?" and I did a little research and comparison using that Forbes list that graded each school on their financial health. For those who didn't go through it, they graded almost every private school with a gpa, highest rating being a 4.5. After reading this IL article (https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... orts/56338) about conferences opening up the door to cut non-revenue sports, I was interested to see how lacrosse programs looked going forward and how the conferences stacked up. I'm not saying that a low score will result in a program being removed, I just thought it was interesting to look at. I'm going to post each conference for D2 here, and in case anyone is interested, I'll do a similar post in both the D1 and D3 threads.
For starters, D1 has 51 private schools that got a ranking, with an average GPA of 2.81.
D2 has 65 private schools on the list with an average of 1.79.
D3 has 209 schools rated with a GPA average of 2.23.
Here are the conferences ranked:
Sunshine - 1.94 (Highs: Embry-Riddle - 2.65, Palm Beach Atlantic - 2.43 Lows: Saint Leo - 1.48, Florida Tech - 1.03)
ECC - 1.93 (Highs: Mercy - 2.68, St. Thomas Aquinas - 2.00 Lows: Roberts Wesleyan - 1.62, NYIT - 1.55)
SAC - 1.87 (Highs: Queens - 3.23, Anderson (new program in 2021) - 2.68 Lows: Newberry - 1.15, Lenoir-Rhyne - 0.98)
NE10 - 1.86 (Highs: Southern New HAmpshire - 2.79, Bentley - 2.63 Lows: American International - 1.14, Saint Rose - 1.11)
GLVC - 1.76 (Highs: Lindenwood - 2.61, Maryville - 2.44 Lows: Shorter - 1.11, Quincy - 1.01)
G-MAC - 1.71 (Highs: Davis & Elkins - 3.36, Walsh - 2.08 Lows: Alderson-Broaddus - 1.04, Lake Erie - 0.98)
CACC - 1.62 (Highs: Wilmington - 2.72, Georgian Court - 2.00 Lows: Caldwell - 1.09, Chestnut Hill - 1.04)
Carolinas - 1.61 (Highs: Lees-McRae - 2.57, North Greenville - 1.91 Lows: Mount Olive - 1.17, Belmont Abbey - 0.97)
RMAC - 1.45 (2 private schools: Westminster -1.91, Rockhurst - 0.99)
1 current independent school is Davenport - 1.62 and 1 future is Flagler - 2.27.
Again, I'm not sure that this really means anything, just something to do while sitting at home. But it is interesting to see what schools could potentially be in danger in each conference.
Financial Health of D2 Schools
-
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2020 7:51 pm
Financial Health of D2 Schools
Last edited by SpiritInTheStick on Thu Apr 23, 2020 5:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
Just a note that Limestone will be moving to the SAC next year (officially on 7/1) - so who is then next in line at the top of stability for CC?SpiritInTheStick wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 1:21 pm With schools starting to close or shut down athletic programs, I was interested in what laxpert and Homer posted in the D1 thread "How many schools will drop lacrosse?" and I did a little research and comparison using that Forbes list that graded each school on their financial health. For those who didn't go through it, they graded almost every private school with a gpa, highest rating being a 4.5. After reading this IL article (https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... orts/56338) about conferences opening up the door to cut non-revenue sports, I was interested to see how lacrosse programs looked going forward and how the conferences stacked up. I'm not saying that a low score will result in a program being removed, I just thought it was interesting to look at. I'm going to post each conference for D2 here, and in case anyone is interested, I'll do a similar post in both the D1 and D3 threads.
For starters, D1 has 51 private schools that got a ranking, with an average GPA of 2.81.
D2 has 65 private schools on the list with an average of 1.79.
D3 has 209 schools rated with a GPA average of 2.23.
Here are the conferences ranked:
SAC - 1.77 (Highs: Queens - 3.23, Anderson (new program in 2021) - 2.68 Lows: Newberry - 1.15, Lenoir-Rhyne - 0.98)
Carolinas - 1.58 (Highs: Lees-McRae - 2.57, Limestone - 1.93 Lows: Mount Olive - 1.17, Belmont Abbey - 0.97)
Again, I'm not sure that this really means anything, just something to do while sitting at home. But it is interesting to see what schools could potentially be in danger in each conference.
-
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2020 7:51 pm
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
Nice catch! Sorry I missed that, in the D3 section I tried to move teams around and add in new programs but I forgot to double check the D2 list. Next up for the CC is North Greenville - 1.91. In case you were wondering about a specific school in that conference, the rest are Emmanuel (GA) - 1.59, Barton - 1.56, and Chowan - 1.53. I also have to admit my mistake that the conference should have been at 1.65 and this move drops them to 1.61. This move improves the SAC grade to a 1.87 as long as my math is correct.
I went back and edited the original to reflect the change, Thanks Red!
Last edited by SpiritInTheStick on Thu Apr 23, 2020 5:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
I also saw your other posts - interesting to note that the two lowest in DIII USAA are the two DII former schools of Brevard (formerly SAC) and Pfeiffer (formerly CC).SpiritInTheStick wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 5:09 pmNice catch! Sorry I missed that, in the D3 section I tried to move teams around and add in new programs but I forgot to double check the D2 list. Next up for the CC is North Greenville - 1.91. In case you were wondering about a specific school in that conference, the rest are Emmanuel (GA) - 1.59, Barton - 1.56, and Chowan - 1.53. I also have to admit my mistake that the conference should have been at 1.65 and this move drops them to 1.61. This move improves the SAC grade to a 1.87 as long as my math is correct.
BTW, in a year CC adds UNC-Pembroke and Francis Marion (neither of which have lax at this time).
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
Who would have thought D&E would be the most financially stable D2 school with a lax program. Surprising IMOSpiritInTheStick wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 1:21 pm
G-MAC - 1.71 (Highs: Davis & Elkins - 3.36, Walsh - 2.08 Lows: Alderson-Broaddus - 1.04, Lake Erie - 0.98)
Wheeling Jesuit (.77) is the lowest for D2 program (third last on the list with D1 Jacksonville (.82) 5 from the bottom.
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
Just Wheeling now - the Jesuits dropped out of an affiliation with them.jakester wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2020 12:53 pmWho would have thought D&E would be the most financially stable D2 school with a lax program. Surprising IMOSpiritInTheStick wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 1:21 pm
G-MAC - 1.71 (Highs: Davis & Elkins - 3.36, Walsh - 2.08 Lows: Alderson-Broaddus - 1.04, Lake Erie - 0.98)
Wheeling Jesuit (.77) is the lowest for D2 program (third last on the list with D1 Jacksonville (.82) 5 from the bottom.
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
Just saw that Florida Tech eliminated their Football program.
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
The DII Conference Commissioners Assoc has submitted a motion to NCAA DII, to limit the game maximums for the upcoming 20-21 season. The motion would reduce the max number of games that a team could play in a regular season.
All sports would be impacted.
Men's lacrosse would change from 17 to 13.
It would be to help schools save on budget spends.
All sports would be impacted.
Men's lacrosse would change from 17 to 13.
It would be to help schools save on budget spends.
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
Wow, I HATE that idea......bmorelax wrote: ↑Mon May 11, 2020 10:22 pm The DII Conference Commissioners Assoc has submitted a motion to NCAA DII, to limit the game maximums for the upcoming 20-21 season. The motion would reduce the max number of games that a team could play in a regular season.
All sports would be impacted.
Men's lacrosse would change from 17 to 13.
It would be to help schools save on budget spends.
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
That is so short sited. Just because you can play up to 17 doesn't mean you will ! School can reduce their own schedule to help save dollars, as many schools with limited resources and support have. Unintended consequences could be smaller teams at the schools that have good support and staffs, less play time for the individual to help develop the players, less teams, less participation, Let's say we leave it up to the individual schools or Conferences to determine their schedules. Sure a max # makes sense, but 17 is fine, after all how many teams play 17 regular season games ? Bad idea guys.
Your preparations of today, will determine the achievements of tomorrow.
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
Bad idea or not, The Management Council recommended it on Friday.laxmarmot wrote: ↑Sat May 16, 2020 8:18 am That is so short sited. Just because you can play up to 17 doesn't mean you will ! School can reduce their own schedule to help save dollars, as many schools with limited resources and support have. Unintended consequences could be smaller teams at the schools that have good support and staffs, less play time for the individual to help develop the players, less teams, less participation, Let's say we leave it up to the individual schools or Conferences to determine their schedules. Sure a max # makes sense, but 17 is fine, after all how many teams play 17 regular season games ? Bad idea guys.
http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/med ... ms-2020-21
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
Basketball 22 games
Volleyball 20 games
Small courts tightly packed in.
Golf 16 contests
Tennis 17 matches
You have more contact with people at the lunch counter than your opponent in these.
Cross Country, with the exception on the start, which could be modified, 6 meets.
Explain that.
Schools that can afford to properly support their sports should not be limited. Again, if a Athletic department at a school has limited resources they can police themselves by limiting the total support and funds it provides each sport.
Is it the Virus causing this, or something else, poor planning by Athletic Departments, over ambitious AD's ? Again if Institution can fund it's programs, leave it allow, why can't these Presidents and AD police themselves ?
Volleyball 20 games
Small courts tightly packed in.
Golf 16 contests
Tennis 17 matches
You have more contact with people at the lunch counter than your opponent in these.
Cross Country, with the exception on the start, which could be modified, 6 meets.
Explain that.
Schools that can afford to properly support their sports should not be limited. Again, if a Athletic department at a school has limited resources they can police themselves by limiting the total support and funds it provides each sport.
Is it the Virus causing this, or something else, poor planning by Athletic Departments, over ambitious AD's ? Again if Institution can fund it's programs, leave it allow, why can't these Presidents and AD police themselves ?
Your preparations of today, will determine the achievements of tomorrow.
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
I understand your frustration but looking at this part of the article:laxmarmot wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 8:57 am Basketball 22 games
Volleyball 20 games
Small courts tightly packed in.
Golf 16 contests
Tennis 17 matches
You have more contact with people at the lunch counter than your opponent in these.
Cross Country, with the exception on the start, which could be modified, 6 meets.
Explain that.
Schools that can afford to properly support their sports should not be limited. Again, if a Athletic department at a school has limited resources they can police themselves by limiting the total support and funds it provides each sport.
Is it the Virus causing this, or something else, poor planning by Athletic Departments, over ambitious AD's ? Again if Institution can fund it's programs, leave it allow, why can't these Presidents and AD police themselves ?
"The Management Council also considered the results of a Division II membership survey, specific to reducing maximums, that 435 division leaders responded to earlier this week. The survey was taken by 258 athletics directors, 154 presidents and chancellors, and 23 conference commissioners. Roughly 85% of the survey respondents said they supported some form of reduction to the maximum permissible contests for the 2020-21 academic year."
It appears that it is not an isolated incident with just a few colleges in difficulty. What the "some form of reduction" means is up in the air with regards to what each person was thinking when filing out the survey. I do not like the rule but I can certainly see why a school would need to do such a thing. Time will tell and we will see what happens on Tuesday.
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
That has nothing to do with it. Shortening the schedule is not a germ containment strategy. This is entirely about money.laxmarmot wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 8:57 am Basketball 22 games
Volleyball 20 games
Small courts tightly packed in.
Golf 16 contests
Tennis 17 matches
You have more contact with people at the lunch counter than your opponent in these.
Cross Country, with the exception on the start, which could be modified, 6 meets.
Explain that.
I understand what you're saying, but I think there are significant benefits to uniformity in a situation like this. If you say, "Go ahead, do whatever," and some teams play <10 games while others play 16, you're teeing up potentially acrimonious arguments about fairness when it comes to NCAA selection time.
More importantly: so many D2 schools would probably benefit next year fiscally from canceling at least a few road trips. Do you really want each of them to have to make the humiliating announcement that they won't be making the bus trip to play rivalry xyz next year because they're just too d*mn poor? Is it so hard to grasp why there might be a collective interest in lowering the maximum in a way that allows everybody to CYA?
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
Legislation passes for 20-21"Homer wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 11:25 pmThat has nothing to do with it. Shortening the schedule is not a germ containment strategy. This is entirely about money.laxmarmot wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 8:57 am Basketball 22 games
Volleyball 20 games
Small courts tightly packed in.
Golf 16 contests
Tennis 17 matches
You have more contact with people at the lunch counter than your opponent in these.
Cross Country, with the exception on the start, which could be modified, 6 meets.
Explain that.
I understand what you're saying, but I think there are significant benefits to uniformity in a situation like this. If you say, "Go ahead, do whatever," and some teams play <10 games while others play 16, you're teeing up potentially acrimonious arguments about fairness when it comes to NCAA selection time.
More importantly: so many D2 schools would probably benefit next year fiscally from canceling at least a few road trips. Do you really want each of them to have to make the humiliating announcement that they won't be making the bus trip to play rivalry xyz next year because they're just too d*mn poor? Is it so hard to grasp why there might be a collective interest in lowering the maximum in a way that allows everybody to CYA?
https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/me ... ivision=d2
Re: Financial Health of D2 Schools
I noticed that both men's and women's lacrosse has the maximum limit as 13 dates not 13 contests. Could teams pull a Syracuse and play more than one game on a single date? What if several teams got together and played "round robin"? For sports like baseball and softball they specifically say contests, my guess is because they play more then one on a given date regularly. They say the same for Hockey which I do not think routinely play more than a single game in a day.Bart wrote: ↑Wed May 20, 2020 1:28 pmLegislation passes for 20-21"Homer wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 11:25 pmThat has nothing to do with it. Shortening the schedule is not a germ containment strategy. This is entirely about money.laxmarmot wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 8:57 am Basketball 22 games
Volleyball 20 games
Small courts tightly packed in.
Golf 16 contests
Tennis 17 matches
You have more contact with people at the lunch counter than your opponent in these.
Cross Country, with the exception on the start, which could be modified, 6 meets.
Explain that.
I understand what you're saying, but I think there are significant benefits to uniformity in a situation like this. If you say, "Go ahead, do whatever," and some teams play <10 games while others play 16, you're teeing up potentially acrimonious arguments about fairness when it comes to NCAA selection time.
More importantly: so many D2 schools would probably benefit next year fiscally from canceling at least a few road trips. Do you really want each of them to have to make the humiliating announcement that they won't be making the bus trip to play rivalry xyz next year because they're just too d*mn poor? Is it so hard to grasp why there might be a collective interest in lowering the maximum in a way that allows everybody to CYA?
https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/me ... ivision=d2