Posts: 2,906
Threads: 166
Joined: Jan 2013
05-28-2019, 12:44 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-28-2019, 12:51 PM by
ColoradoTree.)
I'll chime in as I grew up in MIAC country, had a father teach at one school, had a sibling attend another, know countless others who attended a MIAC school, and I've been frustrated by the tenor of much of the media coverage of this story.
It's not just "St. Thomas is winning too much," though that is certainly part of it. And it's definitely not that St. Thomas is winning too much at football alone, because otherwise, St. John's would have been kicked out of the MIAC years ago when John Gagliardi was racking up wins on his way to becoming the NCAA all-time wins leader. (Indeed, St. Thomas finished third in the MIAC in football last year, though that was a recent down year after making the national title game twice in the last ten years.) It fundamentally comes down to a question of priorities and values, and how much money you put behind those values. Here's what I mean:
* The MIAC was formed to allow for intercollegiate athletic competition among small Minnesota-based liberal arts colleges. Indeed, the conference bylaws state that "Members of the MIAC shall be selected from private liberal arts collegiate institutions within the state of Minnesota that offer four year courses of study leading to the attainment of a baccalaureate degree."
* This is Division III we're talking about, where there are no athletic scholarships, but where some schools find a way to get large merit-based scholarships to recruited athletes (looking at you, Mount Union and Wisconsin-Whitewater, and I will confess to having suspicions about this regarding St. Thomas). The MIAC expressly states in its mission statement that college sports are important, but they're important because of the contribution they "can make to the quality of an education experienced in a context in which the academic program is paramount."
* St. Thomas's enrollment has grown to 2-3 times the rest of the conference's members, and that's just counting undergrads (it now has 6,200; the rest of the conference's members range from about 1,600 undergrads to 3,000). It has another 3,700 graduate students, whereas most other MIAC institutions have none or far fewer than St. Thomas. More to the point, it has steadily added graduate programs, starting a law school in the last 10-15 years (which eventually forced fellow MIAC member Hamline to merge with another law school to keep it afloat), and it is adding a nursing school.
* St. Thomas (6,200 undergrads; 10,000 total students) itself no longer considers itself a liberal arts institution, but describes itself on its own website as an "urban Catholic comprehensive university." Think less of archrival St. John's University (~1,700 students; ~3,640 when combined with its sister school, St. Ben's; it's only a "university" rather than a college because of some small theology and divinity graduate programs) and more of Creighton (4,000 undergrads; 9,000 total students) or Marquette (8,500 undergrads; 11,600 total students).
* Yes, sports play a role. St. Thomas has funded its athletic department to a greater degree than its conference foes (paying coaches more, building bigger and better facilities), leading to the overall competitive disparities you mention, and increasing frustration by the other schools who don't want to spend as much on athletic facilities/programs as St. Thomas. And the disparity between St. Thomas and the rest of the schools grows larger each year. Resentment builds. It's not just St. Thomas beating fellow MIAC school St. Olaf 97-0 in football in 2017, though it doesn't help when St. Thomas keeps its starters in for most of the third quarter and goes 5-5 in fourth down conversions (including two when they were already up 60+). St. John's beat St. Scholastica (a non-conference opponent) 98-0 in the same season, but pulled starters very early (they played five QBs, including one who got yanked for throwing early in the third quarter of that game, and they didn't pass again; 14 players ran the ball; 36 players recorded a tackle; they played basically their entire 180-man roster), so it didn't get the same blowback.
* This marriage has been souring for years. A seemingly open secret in the MIAC has been that St. Thomas (recognizing that its aspirations and commitment to sports were no longer a good fit for the MIAC) has been looking for a way out for several years, but preferred to be kicked out so it didn't look like the bad guy. (A friend of mine, a UST alum who helps fundraise for the athletic department, told me that's been a big part of thinking inside UST for a while, but no one at UST wants to say as much publicly, and he'd deny it if ever asked.) If the vote to expel St. Thomas had failed, approximately 2/3 of the current MIAC schools said they would have left the MIAC and started their own conference to compete on their own level. After years of "will they or won't they," the smaller school presidents finally had enough.
Ultimately, this is a thornier question than "let's kick them out because they're too good." At Stanford, we have decided to compete at the highest levels of intercollegiate athletics and spend toward that goal. We are in an athletic conference that shares our desire to compete at the highest level. But many schools opt for the Division III model precisely because they don't want to compete at that level, or fund athletics at that level. They value athletics as a part of student life and school spirit, but only so much. To say, like the talking heads mentioned in this thread, that the proper response to St. Thomas's success is to improve and beat them misses that fundamental point. Many of these schools have no interest in getting into an arms race in athletic department funding, because that's not who they are. It is who we are, and that's fine! Stanford sports has deepened my connection to the university, and it's a big part of why I continue to think of Stanford with affection. But it's not who most of these MIAC schools are.
Saying, "get better and beat them" works if you're talking about Pac-12 football, or Big Ten basketball. We're competing on the same plane, and we've all made the same philosophical choice to spend what it takes to be competitive at the highest level in different sports. St. Thomas has chosen to grow its student population and breadth of graduate offerings. It has chosen to spend more on athletics and facilities than its rivals. And that's fine. But it does mean that its priorities have become out of step with those of the rest of the MIAC, and those schools are increasingly looking at a competitive landscape they no longer recognize, and an arms race to keep up they have no interest in pursuing. Yes, the MIAC basically kicked out St. Thomas, but it's important to keep in mind that it's St. Thomas that has changed in terms of its educational mission and commitment to sports, not the rest of the MIAC.
St. Thomas outgrew the MIAC. Nothing wrong with that.
P.S. To be clear, the MIAC never actually held a vote to expel St. Thomas, but they had the votes to do so. When everyone saw the writing on the wall, the "involuntary departure" agreement was reached in lieu of taking that vote. St. John's and St. Ben's (St. Thomas's chief conference rivals) wanted to keep St. Thomas in the MIAC, but the other side of the issue had the votes. As for what's next, my bet would be St. Thomas joining the WIAC if it stays D-III, or the Northern Sun Conference if it decides to transition to Division II. It could join the Upper Midwest Athletic Conference in D-III, but that would be an even starker competitive disparity than the MIAC. The WIAC is an odd fit, since it's all Wisconsin schools, but the rules don't preclude an out-of-state member, and St. Paul is only 20 minutes from the Wisconsin border anyway. Long term, it might make more sense for St. Thomas to jump in with both feet and commit to Division I. Culturally, they'd fit reasonably well in the Missouri Valley Conference, and while they don't have the basketball pedigree, the school's Catholic identity, size, and endowment all fit in well with the Big East. Geographically, it would be a bit strange, but if Omaha, Milwaukee, and Indianapolis can have a school in the Big East, why not St. Paul? St. Thomas would have to prove itself elsewhere for a bit, of course. But St. Thomas has a larger endowment than Butler, Providence, Seton Hall, and Xavier, and it's right there with Creighton and Marquette. In terms of student population, they'd be right in the middle of the Big East. Of course, it's not like the Big East needs them, so my guess is that they'll level out in Division II eventually, playing up a division in hockey since there is no D-II hockey.
