Mitch Vingle (WV Gazette): A re-set of the Big 12 expansion situation

[HuskyHawk]

Well, this is the part where I jokingly lecture you about trusting wiki as a source (ha ha). But in seriousness, I get your point. It's not necessarily a contradiction because often the NCAA publishes member lists based on full membership, not statistical qualification. So beware assuming it's a contradiction as much as a difference in which criteria the publication is using at the time.

For transitions between divisions, the process is 3-5 years. Although schools are often playing a compliant schedule in year two, those reclassification cycles don't *require* a compliant schedule until year three at which time they count for statistical purposes (aside from records broken). But schools have the option to elect to be counted as soon as they're compliant with scheduling.

The transition between subdivisions, however, is a two-year process and I believe schools are required to be compliant in year two. So I don't see why they wouldn't count for statistical purposes. I know all the schools recently that have made that same transition have started counting in the second season (UMass, Georgia State, UTSA, etc.) I believe that standard has been around a while. I don't know, it's possible some of the documentation contains an error, but I'm fairly certain they were statistically counted toward Division I-A in 2001.

If you're interested, here is the NCAA's policy from its statistics policies guide (page 26). Unfortunately it's not real clear about FBS to FCS reclassifying.

Who cares? The reality is that we were not as bad as some reported. End of story. In fact, as the first and last team to jump from 1AA to a BCS conference, we exceeded every reasonable expectation.

 

[upstater]

They aren't wrong from a historical perspective. UConn basketball and our recent growth in size and academic profile has caused UConn, uniquely really, to be more like state universities are in the midwest. Those schools are the top choice of most students. You know well that Buffalo isn't to NY what U Iowa is to Iowa or OU is to Oklahoma. It's role is minor in the overall landscape. UMass, UNH, UVM, URI...same for all. They simply aren't aware that UConn is different now. By the way, even for football, KU dominates KS everywhere but Manhattan and is #1 in metro KC ahead of Mizzou.

I get your point in this paragraph and agree, but of course, of all the schools listed in New England and New York, Buffalo is the only one in the AAU. It doesn't mean it is a destination for NYC (although I promise you that it has a rep upstate, especially certain colleges inside it) like UConn is for Connecticut residents. I think this has something to do with sports.

 

[huskymedic]

Well, this is the part where I jokingly lecture you about trusting wiki as a source (ha ha). But in seriousness, I get your point. It's not necessarily a contradiction because often the NCAA publishes member lists based on full membership, not statistical qualification. So beware assuming it's a contradiction as much as a difference in which criteria the publication is using at the time.

I lied (slow afternoon) I can't help myself - please see this link for all D1 football stats in 2001: Ranking Summary (note no Connecticut included). As a matter of fact if you select the FCS button instead of the FBS button at the top -- Ranking Summary -- you will find Connecticut there and who their statistics compare to -- kinda neat to see Dan O's Passing Efficiency rating compared to the national leader Tony Romo @ Eastern Illinois)

Now... check this link for all D1 football stats in 2002. Ranking Summary (Note UConn included in Bowl/FBS statistics and all the usual suspects for statistical comparison)

Imagine that..

 

[CL82]

Well, this is the part where I jokingly lecture you about trusting wiki as a source (ha ha). But in seriousness, I get your point. It's not necessarily a contradiction because often the NCAA publishes member lists based on full membership, not statistical qualification. So beware assuming it's a contradiction as much as a difference in which criteria the publication is using at the time.

For transitions between divisions, the process is 3-5 years. Although schools are often playing a compliant schedule in year two, those reclassification cycles don't *require* a compliant schedule until year three at which time they count for statistical purposes (aside from records broken). But schools have the option to elect to be counted as soon as they're compliant with scheduling.

The transition between subdivisions, however, is a two-year process and I believe schools are required to be compliant in year two. So I don't see why they wouldn't count for statistical purposes. I know all the schools recently that have made that same transition have started counting in the second season (UMass, Georgia State, UTSA, etc.) I believe that standard has been around a while. I don't know, it's possible some of the documentation contains an error, but I'm fairly certain they were statistically counted toward Division I-A in 2001.

If you're interested, here is the NCAA's policy from its statistics policies guide (page 26). Unfortunately it's not real clear about FBS to FCS reclassifying.

A reclassifying school cannot be considered for statistical records (game, season or career) in a division until it is a full-fledged member of that division. Although reclassifying schools do not qualify for statistical records in their old or new divisions, they can qualify for “Collegiate Records” since they still are active NCAA members. Individuals or schools that qualify in this situation will be indicated as reclassifying in the records. For individual career records, only the years in which a school is a full-fledged member of a division will count toward career records of that division.

 

[upstater]

Not a matter of believing you or not. Sure appears to be a contradiction @ the NCAA (imagine that) as the info is coming from the same database in theory?

From another wiki source: >>UConn football finally reached Division 1-A status in 2000, was included in official Division 1-A statistics for the first time in 2002, and became a full Big East member in 2004. UConn has been recognized as having the fastest progression out of I-AA in NCAA history, as it was invited into a BCS conference only two years after becoming a full I-A member, was bowl-eligible in its first season in I-A, and was invited to a bowl game in its first season as a conference member. <<

I'm done... Too much time spent on it in the first place. It is what it is.

Before the Penn State scandal, and before Paterno had his wins wiped away, and before Bobby Bowden also had his wins wiped away, there used to be a controversy involving the 2 as to which one had the most wins. Bowden had them against U. of Mexico (not New Mexico, but Mexico), and Tennessee Tech "B" Team, and some other crazy schools that were the equivalent of the Baltimore Ballers, and all these wins counted as D1 wins. So people wondered then why Eddie Robinson wasn't the winningest coach in D1, but the NCAA just said Bowden was.

 

[sportsart]

A reclassifying school cannot be considered for statistical records (game, season or career) in a division until it is a full-fledged member of that division. Although reclassifying schools do not qualify for statistical records in their old or new divisions, they can qualify for “Collegiate Records” since they still are active NCAA members. Individuals or schools that qualify in this situation will be indicated as reclassifying in the records. For individual career records, only the years in which a school is a full-fledged member of a division will count toward career records of that division.

Here Billy, Billy, Billy...c'mon "Bud"dy boy.

 

[upstater]

That board almost universally despises UConn. It's an utter wasteland of bias and ACC homerisms. I enjoy it.

The moderators are Syracuse fans.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I get your point in this paragraph and agree, but of course, of all the schools listed in New England and New York, Buffalo is the only one in the AAU. It doesn't mean it is a destination for NYC (although I promise you that it has a rep upstate, especially certain colleges inside it) like UConn is for Connecticut residents. I think this has something to do with sports.

I didn't mean purely academic chops, but more...."when I grow up I want to go to Buffalo" from every kid in elementary school. I can only explain it by saying that many flagship state universities are a core part of the psyche of the whole state, or a good portion of it. Those in New England, New York and NJ simply don't command that kind of attention, except UConn. UConn likely has more state-wide mindshare than many P5 public schools, but that doesn't mean that most people in those places are aware that UConn is different in that way.

Illinois and California seem like outliers. But both states are so big that even if the state schools don't command a wide following, it's still plenty big.

 

[upstater]

I didn't mean purely academic chops, but more...."when I grow up I want to go to Buffalo" from every kid in elementary school. I can only explain it by saying that many flagship state universities are a core part of the psyche of the whole state, or a good portion of it. Those in New England, New York and NJ simply don't command that kind of attention, except UConn. UConn likely has more state-wide mindshare than many P5 public schools, but that doesn't mean that most people in those places are aware that UConn is different in that way.

Illinois and California seem like outliers. But both states are so big that even if the state schools don't command a wide following, it's still plenty big.

I know what you meant, but I think it's about sports mostly.

 

[kyleslamb]

A reclassifying school cannot be considered for statistical records (game, season or career) in a division until it is a full-fledged member of that division. Although reclassifying schools do not qualify for statistical records in their old or new divisions, they can qualify for “Collegiate Records” since they still are active NCAA members. Individuals or schools that qualify in this situation will be indicated as reclassifying in the records. For individual career records, only the years in which a school is a full-fledged member of a division will count toward career records of that division.

That applies to actual records, not statistics themselves. In other words, they can qualify among statistical leaders for team and individuals and count toward scheduling, but don't qualify for being recognized as setting records.

I realize that distinction sounds silly, and I would agree if you think that, but I have had countless conversations about this with Gary Johnson, the former men's basketball statistician of the NCAA. My confidence level on this subject is very high. I've spent the last 5 years compiling membership lists for the NCAA, NAIA, etc., so I've had to get clarification on many situations and schools. It's a very confusing rule, but basically while schools are in transition, they count toward scheduling and weekly stats/summaries but don't count toward records and don't have voting privileges. Perhaps the most pertinent factor is that during this period, any school would count toward RPI or any other postseason metric, which means they're still considered a countable opponent for that level.

To be clear, I don't agree with Billy Bud's points. My argument here is strictly coming from a technical standpoint because I've spent so much time on this issue with the NCAA. I suppose it's semantics, but just adding input because I've had so many phone calls with the NCAA about these situations.