Prouty out at SNHU

[Unregistered]

I am unaware that there are any D1s that don't. Do you have information otherwise?

The reason colleges move to D1 sure as heck is not because of their women's sports programs, but because of Title IX, the D1s do have to fund their women's scholarships, otherwise their men's programs would be in trouble. As is the case with Bryant, their men's basketball, baseball and lacrosse have seen some success. Lacrosse is nationally ranked, and the assistant coach of the basketball is some guy named Al Skinner. Maybe you've heard of him?

Just an interesting FYI. Bryant's teams have seen some success this spring and considering this is only their second year as a full D1, it would seem a good start. A number of their teams have either won the NE Conference and/or qualified for the NCAA tournament. Women's Softball, Women's lacrosse, Men's Tennis heads qualified for their first outing in the NCAA tournament. Men's golf just won their first NEC title. Men's baseball just won their third NEC title and could make their second NCAA appearance. Men's Lacrosse also has had their second NCAA appearance and beat #2 seed Syracuse yesterday. All these teams have had coaching changes during their transition to D1 including the Men's Lacrosse team who hired the former Duke coach who was mired in the false rape controversy.

[Unregistered]

Just an interesting FYI. Bryant's teams have seen some success this spring and considering this is only their second year as a full D1, it would seem a good start. A number of their teams have either won the NE Conference and/or qualified for the NCAA tournament. Women's Softball, Women's lacrosse, Men's Tennis heads qualified for their first outing in the NCAA tournament. Men's golf just won their first NEC title. Men's baseball just won their third NEC title and could make their second NCAA appearance. Men's Lacrosse also has had their second NCAA appearance and beat #2 seed Syracuse yesterday. All these teams have had coaching changes during their transition to D1 including the Men's Lacrosse team who hired the former Duke coach who was mired in the false rape controversy.

Perhaps this is proof that most college ADs could care less about soccer and women's soccer in particular.

[Unregistered]

Just an interesting FYI. Bryant's teams have seen some success this spring and considering this is only their second year as a full D1, it would seem a good start. A number of their teams have either won the NE Conference and/or qualified for the NCAA tournament. Women's Softball, Women's lacrosse, Men's Tennis heads qualified for their first outing in the NCAA tournament. Men's golf just won their first NEC title. Men's baseball just won their third NEC title and could make their second NCAA appearance. Men's Lacrosse also has had their second NCAA appearance and beat #2 seed Syracuse yesterday. All these teams have had coaching changes during their transition to D1 including the Men's Lacrosse team who hired the former Duke coach who was mired in the false rape controversy.

Let's be accurate, this is Bryant's 6th year in D1. Bryant has played a full D1 schedule since it left the NE10 for the NEC. Bryant just wasn't eligible for post season play for the first 4 years due to NCAA transition rules.

[Unregistered]

Perhaps this is proof that most college ADs could care less about soccer and women's soccer in particular.

Is the Bryant coach an Asst. AD?

[Unregistered]

Let's be accurate, this is Bryant's 6th year in D1. Bryant has played a full D1 schedule since it left the NE10 for the NEC. Bryant just wasn't eligible for post season play for the first 4 years due to NCAA transition rules.

They didn't automatically replace their rosters with D1 players the first year. That's why they are giving 4 years to transition.

[Unregistered]

* given

[Unregistered]

They didn't automatically replace their rosters with D1 players the first year. That's why they are giving 4 years to transition.

Agreed, but the way the post was written made it sound like Bryant was only 2 years into D1 play, which is not accurate. It's not like Bryant spent the 4-year transition period playing half D1 and half D2 - they played a full NEC D1 schedule just like every other team in the conference.

With respect to your comment on players: You're assuming it took 4 years to turn the roster over. That ignores the fact that Bryant probably had a number of D1-capable (NEC) players who were at the school for its academics, and that Bryant probably cut some of its lesser talented upper classmen and replaced them with D1 recruits rather than waiting for them to graduate.

[Unregistered]

Agreed, but the way the post was written made it sound like Bryant was only 2 years into D1 play, which is not accurate. It's not like Bryant spent the 4-year transition period playing half D1 and half D2 - they played a full NEC D1 schedule just like every other team in the conference.

With respect to your comment on players: You're assuming it took 4 years to turn the roster over. That ignores the fact that Bryant probably had a number of D1-capable (NEC) players who were at the school for its academics, and that Bryant probably cut some of its lesser talented upper classmen and replaced them with D1 recruits rather than waiting for them to graduate.

Do you have something against Bryant? They still have to play fully qualified D1s and it isn't until they are fully qualified that they are competing apples to apples.

The major point to be made is Bryant went out and got coaches capable of coaching D1 and it seems to have paid off for their spring teams.

[Unregistered]

Do you have something against Bryant? They still have to play fully qualified D1s and it isn't until they are fully qualified that they are competing apples to apples.

The major point to be made is Bryant went out and got coaches capable of coaching D1 and it seems to have paid off for their spring teams.

What is this "qualified" thing you speak of? A team is D1, or not. There is no qualified or not qualified. All the NCAA rules say is that when a team moves up from D2 to D1 there is a 4-year period where the team is not eligible to compete in post-season play. That's it.

I'm not a Bryant hater, I just think you put too much weight on the D1 - D2 labels. The level of talent in a very good D2 conference like the NE-10, where Bryant used to play, is just not that different from the NEC where they are playing now.

[Unregistered]

Yes it is different. That's why Bryant went 17-2-5 in the final year in the NE-10 and 5-9-3, the following year as a Division I member.

[Unregistered]

What is this "qualified" thing you speak of? A team is D1, or not. There is no qualified or not qualified. All the NCAA rules say is that when a team moves up from D2 to D1 there is a 4-year period where the team is not eligible to compete in post-season play. That's it.

I'm not a Bryant hater, I just think you put too much weight on the D1 - D2 labels. The level of talent in a very good D2 conference like the NE-10, where Bryant used to play, is just not that different from the NEC where they are playing now.

Let me simplify this for you. A college starts at D1 the first year with a roster of 3 years of previous D2 players and 1 year of recruited D1 players, assuming you can convince that level of players to come play for your team that in all likelihood they are going to lose most of their games. For one thing the team is going to have to beg, borrow, and steal to even put a schedule together. The second year you've graduated one year of D2s and recruited a second year of D1s, so your team is now 50/50. The third year your team is now 3/4 D1 and 1/4 D2s. The fourth year your team has graduated all D2s and have fully recruited D1s. Now your team is finally playing apples to apples (more or less) with other D1s.

Must we rehash this again? As has been mentioned time and time again, St Rose, coming off a D2 National Championship lost 2-0 to Albany who finished near the bottom of the American East that year. One game I realize, but there have been others cross overs mentioned in this forum in past discussions that support the fact that even the lower D1 conferences are a step above D2 and in this particular example, we are speaking of a D2 team that has been pretty consistently at the top of D2 in recent history.

Additionally, you are talking about 14 scholarships compared to 9.5. Simple math is going to tell you the D1 can field a full team of scholarship players PLUS have 3 reserve players on the bench and the D2 can not. There's your difference in a nutshell. The D1s are simply going to have more depth than the D2s and of all the talk of whether a program is fully funded or not, that is more of a problem for D2 schools than it is for D1s.

If you are looking for reassurance that the NEC is a strong D2 conference, I'll give you that, but the teams in the conference are playing like competition and that is affecting your judgement. As the poster before me showed, Bryant was one of the top NEC teams at D2, but did not fair so well once in D1.

[Unregistered]

Let me simplify this for you. A college starts at D1 the first year with a roster of 3 years of previous D2 players and 1 year of recruited D1 players, assuming you can convince that level of players to come play for your team that in all likelihood they are going to lose most of their games. For one thing the team is going to have to beg, borrow, and steal to even put a schedule together. The second year you've graduated one year of D2s and recruited a second year of D1s, so your team is now 50/50. The third year your team is now 3/4 D1 and 1/4 D2s. The fourth year your team has graduated all D2s and have fully recruited D1s. Now your team is finally playing apples to apples (more or less) with other D1s.

Must we rehash this again? As has been mentioned time and time again, St Rose, coming off a D2 National Championship lost 2-0 to Albany who finished near the bottom of the American East that year. One game I realize, but there have been others cross overs mentioned in this forum in past discussions that support the fact that even the lower D1 conferences are a step above D2 and in this particular example, we are speaking of a D2 team that has been pretty consistently at the top of D2 in recent history.

Additionally, you are talking about 14 scholarships compared to 9.5. Simple math is going to tell you the D1 can field a full team of scholarship players PLUS have 3 reserve players on the bench and the D2 can not. There's your difference in a nutshell. The D1s are simply going to have more depth than the D2s and of all the talk of whether a program is fully funded or not, that is more of a problem for D2 schools than it is for D1s.

If you are looking for reassurance that the NEC is a strong D2 conference, I'll give you that, but the teams in the conference are playing like competition and that is affecting your judgement. As the poster before me showed, Bryant was one of the top NEC teams at D2, but did not fair so well once in D1.

St Rose would crush Bryant and so would AIC! Bryant would be lucky to be in the top 5 in the NE-10. Bryant needs a new coach, the team is fighting among themselves. That my friend is a coaching issue!

[Unregistered]

Let me simplify this for you. A college starts at D1 the first year with a roster of 3 years of previous D2 players and 1 year of recruited D1 players, assuming you can convince that level of players to come play for your team that in all likelihood they are going to lose most of their games. For one thing the team is going to have to beg, borrow, and steal to even put a schedule together. The second year you've graduated one year of D2s and recruited a second year of D1s, so your team is now 50/50. The third year your team is now 3/4 D1 and 1/4 D2s. The fourth year your team has graduated all D2s and have fully recruited D1s. Now your team is finally playing apples to apples (more or less) with other D1s.

Must we rehash this again? As has been mentioned time and time again, St Rose, coming off a D2 National Championship lost 2-0 to Albany who finished near the bottom of the American East that year. One game I realize, but there have been others cross overs mentioned in this forum in past discussions that support the fact that even the lower D1 conferences are a step above D2 and in this particular example, we are speaking of a D2 team that has been pretty consistently at the top of D2 in recent history.

Additionally, you are talking about 14 scholarships compared to 9.5. Simple math is going to tell you the D1 can field a full team of scholarship players PLUS have 3 reserve players on the bench and the D2 can not. There's your difference in a nutshell. The D1s are simply going to have more depth than the D2s and of all the talk of whether a program is fully funded or not, that is more of a problem for D2 schools than it is for D1s.

If you are looking for reassurance that the NEC is a strong D2 conference, I'll give you that, but the teams in the conference are playing like competition and that is affecting your judgement. As the poster before me showed, Bryant was one of the top NEC teams at D2, but did not fair so well once in D1.

So I guess that explains why Bryant's record in 2013 was statistically worse than it was in 2008? It's because they now have all those "D1" recruits? The fact that Bryant competed as well as it did in its first 2 years in D1 in the NEC shows that there's not that much difference between the conferences. Reason being that most college athletes choose a school primarily based on academics and cost and not based on a D1, D2 or D3 label.

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;1268952]St Rose would crush Bryant and so would AIC! Bryant would be lucky to be in the top 5 in the NE-10. Bryant needs a new coach, the team is fighting among themselves. That my fried is a coaching issue!QUOTE]

Somehow I doubt St Rose would crush Bryant, but you may be right about the coaching issue which was probably the point made in an earlier post outlining the success of Bryant's spring teams under new coaches.

[Unregistered]

As an example of what a new coach can do for a program, perennial NEC bottom dweller Fairleigh Dickinson finished second in the conference with first year coach. Unfortunately for FDU the coach has already moved on to greener pastures.