SoCon baseball: 2016 conference-only statistics, with a little commentary

I recently wrote about The Citadel’s upcoming baseball campaign. While doing a little research, I wound up with a bunch of league-only stats for all SoCon teams, not just The Citadel. I decided to stick that information in another post, just in case anyone was interested.

Obviously, quite a bit of this is available at the league website, but I’ve also included a few other statistical categories, including team park factors, normalized run totals, and some offshoots of standard stats (like K/9, K/B ratio, etc.). I also delved into the mind of Pythagoras. Well, maybe not…

Anyway, here it is. Keep in mind, these are for conference games only. Each team played 24 league contests during the regular season, 12 at home and 12 on the road.

(Also keep in mind that I’m not exactly a statistical savant. I’m just here to entertain the masses.)

Pitching ERA W L SV IP H R ER
Mer 4.82 16 8 7 213 225 126 114
Sam 5.41 13 11 5 216.3 232 137 130
UNCG 5.56 15 9 6 209 226 144 129
WCU 6.06 15 9 5 215.3 248 162 145
Woff 6.16 12 12 4 209 257 160 143
Fur 6.27 14 10 8 209.7 238 156 146
ETSU 6.96 13 11 4 208.3 252 185 161
TC 7.29 6 18 4 207.3 253 190 168
VMI 7.86 4 20 0 208.3 275 213 182
Totals 6.26 108 108 43 1896.3 2206 1473 1318

 

Pitching BB SO P-HR BAA WP P-HBP BK SHA-SFA
Mer 86 165 29 0.274 23 28 2 13-6
Sam 101 154 21 0.283 21 32 0 21-14
UNCG 117 171 25 0.282 22 25 2 22-13
WCU 137 212 37 0.297 23 22 5 20-9
Woff 95 199 33 0.307 28 18 1 17-7
Fur 106 168 26 0.295 26 23 2 25-12
ETSU 102 172 36 0.300 25 16 6 16-13
TC 118 158 26 0.303 41 27 2 14-8
VMI 110 149 45 0.318 29 29 4 12-16
Totals 972 1548 278 0.296 238 220 24 160-98

 

Pitching AB DER K/BB K/9 BB/9 WHIP PF-Avg Nm-RA
Mer 822 0.697 1.92 6.97 3.63 1.46 111.88 119.26
Sam 821 0.690 1.52 6.41 4.20 1.54 105.00 138.16
UNCG 801 0.686 1.46 7.36 5.04 1.64 103.63 147.15
WCU 835 0.657 1.55 8.86 5.73 1.79 112.75 152.14
Woff 837 0.644 2.09 8.57 4.09 1.68 101.75 166.51
Fur 806 0.673 1.58 7.21 4.55 1.64 105.38 156.76
ETSU 841 0.674 1.69 7.43 4.41 1.70 102.63 190.88
TC 836 0.663 1.34 6.86 5.12 1.79 98.63 203.99
VMI 865 0.671 1.35 6.44 4.75 1.85 111.38 202.51
Totals 7464 0.673 1.59 7.35 4.61 1.68 105.89 163.67

 

DER stands for Defensive Efficiency Rating, not to be confused with fielding percentage. DER is simply the rate at which batted balls put into play are converted into outs by a team’s defense.

The two statistics did not quite match up, which is not surprising. Fielding percentage does not necessarily indicate how well a team fields. If a play is not made, but is not an error, it is still a play that is not made.

Wofford, for example, finished in the middle of the pack in fielding percentage, but was last in DER. Of course, that doesn’t automatically mean the Terriers were the worst-fielding squad in the league. There are sample size issues, for one thing, and park factors can also come into play.

However, Wofford finished only fifth in WHIP despite leading the league in K/BB ratio. The Terriers had the second-highest K/9 and the second-lowest BB/9. Wofford allowed the second-most hits in the league (and the second-most hits that were not homers).

The “PF-Avg” and “NM-RA” categories are, respectively, “Average Park Factors” and “Normalized Runs Allowed”. I averaged park factors for every team’s league schedule, using Boyd Nation’s most recent park effects data. From that, I calculated “normalized” runs; in other words, how many runs a team would have scored (or allowed) during the conference season playing in a league-neutral environment.

As you can see, the average SoCon squad scored 163.67 runs in 24 games. Mercer, which allowed the fewest runs during conference play, fares well in this category as well. The pitching for Western Carolina and VMI looks a little better as their respective parks are taken into account.

Batting AVG AB R H 2B 3B HR BB
WCU 0.337 866 224 292 43 1 48 128
ETSU 0.330 861 211 284 58 5 39 98
UNCG 0.327 830 178 271 52 10 29 97
Mer 0.302 786 175 237 42 3 32 135
Fur 0.294 827 153 243 42 3 31 77
Sam 0.282 859 155 242 48 4 33 121
TC 0.271 814 127 221 44 4 24 112
Woff 0.266 808 137 215 44 9 14 101
VMI 0.247 813 113 201 47 4 28 103
Totals 0.296 7464 1473 2206 420 43 278 972

 

Batting SO SB ATT SB% HBP SAC GIDP SF
WCU 116 49 60 0.817 40 21 18 13
ETSU 147 37 49 0.755 25 9 13 12
UNCG 151 32 40 0.800 25 14 24 12
Mer 170 8 19 0.421 24 45 13 17
Fur 150 19 24 0.792 24 14 11 12
Sam 167 16 20 0.800 19 8 11 7
TC 204 14 21 0.667 21 26 8 16
Woff 199 37 48 0.771 20 14 11 6
VMI 244 21 29 0.724 22 9 8 5
Totals 1548 233 310 0.752 220 160 117 100

 

Batting SLG% OB% OPS PF-Avg NM-R
WCU 0.555 0.439 0.994 112.75 210.37
ETSU 0.545 0.409 0.954 102.63 217.71
UNCG 0.518 0.409 0.927 103.63 181.89
Mer 0.485 0.412 0.897 111.88 165.64
Fur 0.464 0.366 0.830 105.38 153.75
Sam 0.462 0.380 0.842 105.00 156.31
TC 0.424 0.368 0.792 98.63 136.35
Woff 0.395 0.359 0.754 101.75 142.57
VMI 0.418 0.346 0.764 111.38 107.43
Totals 0.475 0.388 0.863 105.89 163.67

 

Based on this, it appears East Tennessee State could make a claim to being the league’s best offense last season (at least, in conference action). I have to say, though, that Western Carolina almost pulling off a 1.000 team OPS in SoCon play is quite impressive, regardless of park effects.

I also ran a Pythagorean theorem check to see if any of the league’s teams were luckier than average. Let me explain…well, I’ll let Wikipedia handle it:

Pythagorean expectation is a formula invented by Bill James to estimate how many games a baseball team “should” have won based on the number of runs they scored and allowed. Comparing a team’s actual and Pythagorean winning percentage can be used to evaluate how lucky that team was (by examining the variation between the two winning percentages). The name comes from the formula’s resemblance to the Pythagorean theorem.

I used the most basic formula, not the revised Pythagenpat calculation, mainly because I’m not sure if Pythagenpat really applies to college baseball. It probably does, but I don’t think it matters much for a league season in which each team plays 24 games.

Here is the table in question:

Team RS RA PyThm Exp W Actual W Diff
WCU 224 162 0.657 15.758 15 -0.758
ETSU 211 185 0.565 13.569 13 -0.569
UNCG 178 144 0.604 14.506 15 0.494
Mer 175 126 0.659 15.806 16 0.194
Fur 153 156 0.490 11.767 14 2.233
Sam 155 137 0.561 13.474 13 -0.474
TC 127 190 0.309 7.412 6 -1.412
Woff 137 160 0.423 10.152 12 1.848
VMI 113 213 0.220 5.271 4 -1.271
Totals 1473 1473 0.500 12.000 12 0.000

The “luckiest” team in the league in 2016 appears to have been Furman. The Paladins scored almost the same number of runs as they allowed, but wound up finishing 14-10.

Wofford finished 12-12 despite allowing almost one more run per game than its opponents. The two “unluckiest” teams in the league, The Citadel and VMI, finished next-to-last and last in the conference standings.

Some of these statistics may be meaningful. Some may not. The bottom line, though, is the only statistic that really matters is how many wins you put on the board.

Big Dance victory droughts: major-conference schools that haven’t won an NCAA tournament game in at least ten years — the 2014 edition

Last year, I wrote about the BCS schools that haven’t won an NCAA tournament game in at least ten years. Thirteen schools fit that description, unfortunately for them. Two things subsequently happened:

1) One of the thirteen, Mississippi, won its first NCAA tournament game since 2001. The Rebels beat Wisconsin in the round of 64 before losing to La Salle.

2) The Big East split into two leagues, the “new Big East” and the American Athletic Conference.

The latter event is leading to a slight change for this year’s post. What, precisely, is a “major conference” in college basketball? Does the Big East count? What about the AAC? And if they do, then perhaps shouldn’t the MWC as well? Does the Atlantic-10 have a case?

For this year, I’ve decided to consider seven leagues as “major conferences”: AAC, ACC, Big 10, Big XII, Big East, SEC, and Pac-12.

For the record, here are the 13 schools in the A-10 and MWC that have not won an NCAA tournament game since at least 2004 (a few of them have never won a tourney game at all): Duquesne, Fordham, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, St. Bonaventure, St. Joseph’s, Air Force, Boise State, Fresno State, San Jose State, Utah State, and Wyoming.

The following 17 major-conference schools have not won an NCAA tournament game since at least 2004:

– Northwestern (no tournament appearances): NU is the cause célèbre of schools to have never played in the NCAA tournament, because it is the only major-conference school to have never competed in the event. You can read about Northwestern and all the other schools that have never made the Big Dance here: Link

At 13-18 this season (6-12 in conference play), the Wildcats would have to win the Big 10 tourney to make the NCAAs for the first time. That would mean winning four games in four days, against Iowa, Michigan State, probably Wisconsin, and possibly Michigan.

No, that’s not happening.

– Nebraska (no NCAA victories): The Cornhuskers are winless in six trips to the Big Dance, and haven’t made the NCAAs at all since 1998.

That “haven’t made the NCAAs” bit is probably going to change this year, though, as Nebraska appears a decent bet to get an at-large bid. Whether it can finally win a game in the tournament is another matter, of course. It should get the opportunity, though.

– UCF (no NCAA victories): The Knights’ football team won a BCS bowl game this past season, but in four trips to the NCAA Basketball Tournament, UCF is 0-fer. All four of those appearances came as a member of the Atlantic Sun.

This year, UCF is 12-17 overall, 4-14 in the AAC, and waiting for football season.

– South Carolina (last won an NCAA game in 1973): It has been more than 40 years since the Gamecocks advanced in the NCAAs. South Carolina’s last victory was actually in a regional consolation game. Its losing streak in NCAA play began with a loss to Furman.

The Gamecocks would have to win five SEC tournament games in five days to earn a trip to the NCAAs this year, which is about as likely as Frank Martin controlling his emotions on the sidelines.

– Houston (last won an NCAA game in 1984): That’s right, the Cougars haven’t won an NCAA tourney game since the days of Phi Slama Jama. That may seem hard to believe, but Houston has only made one trip to the NCAAs since 1992.

In order to return to the grand stage for the first time since 2010, the Cougars would have to win the AAC tourney, a dicey proposition at best. Houston is the 6 seed in a league tournament with five very good teams. Beating three of them in three days is probably not realistic.

– Oregon State (last won an NCAA game in 1982): The Beavers haven’t made the NCAA tournament since 1991, the longest such drought for a BCS school outside of Northwestern, and haven’t won a game in the tourney since 1982, when OSU lost to Georgetown in the West Regional final. The program has two appearances in the Final Four, so it’s not like Oregon State is bereft of hoops tradition.

Only a Pac-12 tourney title will be enough to get Oregon State back to the NCAAs. Raise your hand if you think President Obama’s favorite Pac-12 team can win four games in four days, with the first two coming against Oregon and UCLA. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

– Rutgers (last won an NCAA game in 1983): The last time RU won a tourney game was in 1983, when the Scarlet Knights were in the Atlantic-10. Rutgers has since moved from the A-10 to the Big East to the AAC, and, beginning next season, the Big 10.

In 1976, Rutgers made the Final Four as a member of the ECAC Metro conference. That league was probably a bit easier to navigate than this year’s AAC, in which Rutgers went 5-13 in conference action (11-20 overall). There will be at least one more year on this list for the Scarlet Knights (if not more).

– TCU (last won an NCAA game in 1987): TCU hasn’t made the NCAAs since 1997, when it was in the WAC. TCU’s last victory in the tournament came in 1987, as an SWC team.

This year, as a member of the Big XII, the Horned Frogs were the only program in Division I to go winless in conference play. I wouldn’t put any money on a league tournament run.

– SMU (last won an NCAA game in 1988): The Mustangs’ last win in the Big Dance was an 83-75 victory over Digger Phelps and Notre Dame. SMU was a member of the SWC at the time, as it was for all ten of its appearances in the NCAAs.

Under the tutelage of the remarkable Larry Brown, the Mustangs are poised to return to the NCAA Tournament this year for the first time since 1993, this time as a member of the AAC.

– Providence (last won an NCAA game in 1997): Two notable coaches (Dave Gavitt and Rick Pitino) each led the Friars to the Final Four (in 1973 and 1987, respectively). Providence hasn’t won a game in the NCAAs since losing a regional final to Arizona in 1997, however, and hasn’t made an NCAA appearance at all since 2004.

This year the Friars are a “bubble” team. To make the NCAAs, Providence probably needs to win at least one Big East tournament game. As it happens, the Friars’ first-round opponent is another bubbler…the next team on this list.

– St. John’s (last won an NCAA game in 2000): SJU has only played in two NCAA tournaments since 2000, testimony to the modern struggles of this tradition-rich program (two Final Fours, four Elite Eights).

To have any shot at returning to the NCAAs this season, Steve Lavin’s Red Storm must beat Providence on Thursday (and likely needs to win the following day as well, a potential matchup against Villanova).

– Iowa (last won an NCAA game in 2001): Iowa is another school that has a fine basketball history. The Hawkeyes played in the 1956 NCAA title game, one of three times Iowa has made the Final Four. Since 2001, however, it has only made the NCAAs twice, losing in the first round on both occasions (the latter appearance as a 3-seed, in a gut-wrenching loss to Northwestern State).

The Hawkeyes should be returning to the NCAAs again this year, barring a lot of conference tourney upsets across the country. Fran McCaffery’s squad will get a chance to dance.

– Penn State (last won an NCAA game in 2001): The Nittany Lions got to the Sweet 16 in 2001, upsetting North Carolina in the second round to get there. PSU has only made one tourney trip since (2011).

Barring a spectacular run through the Big 10 tournament, Penn State (15-16 overall, 6-12 Big 10) will have to wait at least one more season to return to the NCAAs.

– Georgia (last won an NCAA game in 2002): UGA has only made two NCAAs since 2002. In 1983, Hugh Durham’s Bulldogs made it all the way to the Final Four before losing to eventual champ North Carolina State. That 1983 appearance was actually UGA’s first trip to the NCAAs in school history.

Despite a 12-6 conference record, Georgia will have to win the SEC tourney in order to return to the NCAAs. Of all the teams on this list that are in “win league tourney or else” mode, though, the Bulldogs may have the best shot. Admittedly, it’s not much of one.

– Auburn (last won an NCAA game in 2003): The last time Auburn made the NCAAs, the Tigers advanced to the Sweet 16 in 2003 before losing by one point in the regional semifinals to Syracuse, which won the national title that year.

The Tigers tend to play well in the NCAAs (12-8 alltime) when they get to the NCAAs. Getting there, however, has been a bit of a challenge at times. This year will be no exception. Only an SEC tournament title will do, and Auburn is the 12 seed in that event.

Seton Hall (last won an NCAA game in 2004): Louis Orr was the coach when Seton Hall last won a game in the Big Dance, winning an 8-9 game against Lute Olson and Arizona in 2004. Orr was also on the bench when the Pirates made their last appearance in the NCAAs, in 2006.

This year, Seton Hall is 15-16, and would have to win four games in four days at Madison Square Garden to qualify for the NCAAs. It would be quite a story.

– DePaul: (last won an NCAA game in 2004): DePaul hasn’t been back to the NCAAs since advancing to the round of 32 in 2004.

This season, the Blue Demons have been dreadful (11-20, last in the Big East), culminating in a horrific 79-46 loss to Butler on Senior Night. That would be Senior Night…at home. In Chicago.

(Speaking of Chicago, it’s been a tough year for college hoops in the Windy City. The five D-1 schools in the metropolitan area (UIC, Chicago State, Northwestern, Loyola-IL, DePaul) have a combined record of 52-103; four of those schools finished in last place in their respective leagues.)

For any of these schools to break through and win a game in the NCAAs, the first step is getting to the tournament. This year, SMU will be there, and Iowa probably will be as well. Nebraska should join them.

Providence and St. John’s could possibly garner at-large bids. The other twelve schools can only get there by winning their respective league tournaments, a tall order. Otherwise, they are guaranteed to be on this list next year.

A brief look at the Knight Commission’s NCAA Division I athletic and academic spending database

On December 4, the Knight Commission unveiled a database comparing spending on academics and athletics at NCAA Division I institutions. You can access the database here: Link

The database covers the years 2005 through 2011 (and adjusts for inflation).

I wouldn’t want to make a definitive statement based on these numbers, in part because…well, I’ll let the Commission explain:

Comparisons between institutions are possible, but some institutions interpret the NCAA financial reporting rules slightly differently despite efforts by the NCAA staff working with the National Association of College and University Business Officers to standardize the definitions and reporting. NCAA legislation requires that the financial reports be subject to agreed-upon procedures conducted by a “qualified independent accountant who is not a staff member of the institution.” Each institution’s president or chancellor is required to certify the financial report before it is submitted to the NCAA.

It’s good to have this kind of information available, however.

(Note: all the schools in the database are public colleges and universities. Private school numbers are, uh, private.)

I put together a couple of spreadsheets of my own, based on this data. The first is a listing of state-supported schools that play football at the FCS level, and includes academic spending per student, athletic spending on a per-athlete basis, and coaching salaries. Link

The other spreadsheet lists state-supported D-1 schools that don’t play varsity football. Link

Some observations, mostly from The Citadel’s perspective…

– Among FCS public schools, The Citadel was one of only two schools to have had spending on a per-athlete basis decline from 2005 to 2011, falling 11%. The only other one of the 80 schools listed to have shown a decline in spending on a per-athlete basis was Morgan State (-6%). FCS schools collectively increased per-athlete spending by 47% from 2005-11.

Note: two other schools (Missouri State and Idaho State) also had declines in this category, but those numbers were clearly based on certain accounting irregularities — for instance, Missouri State’s listed spending per athlete in 2005 was over $3.5 million. Thus, I am not counting them as schools with reduced per-athlete spending.

(Other categories also had occasional obvious outliers, and there are also schools for which the database has incomplete information.)

Other schools of interest in the category of per-athlete spending include (all percentages are increases):

South Carolina State (125%)
Georgia State (116%)
James Madison (109%)
Appalachian State (90%)
North Dakota State (88%)
William and Mary (82%)
Coastal Carolina (71%)
Old Dominion (59%)
UT-Chattanooga (56%)
Georgia Southern (31%)
VMI (26%)
Western Carolina (21%)

– Among non-football Division I schools, VCU leads in increased per-athlete spending (up 178% from 2005 to 2011). Also worth mentioning (all increases):

UNC-Greensboro (63%)
College of Charleston (62%)
UNC-Wilmington (56%)
Charlotte (53%)
UNC-Asheville (44%)
Winthrop (41%)
East Tennessee State (39%)

There are a couple of things worth pointing out here. One is that because the most recent update is from 2011, obviously the move of some schools from FCS to FBS football doesn’t show in these numbers (not to mention Charlotte, which started playing football in 2013).

Also, increased spending doesn’t indicate the amount of total spending. Old Dominion spent over $67,000 per athlete in FY 2011, while Mississippi Valley State spent about $50K less on average.

The Citadel spent $31K per athlete in 2011, just behind Appalachian State ($33K) and Georgia Southern ($32K), and ahead of VMI ($26K). Coastal Carolina spent $47K per athlete; Morgan State, $36K; and South Carolina State, also $36K.

Among non-football schools, College of Charleston spent $35K per athlete in 2011; UNC-Greensboro, $51K; East Tennessee State, $54K; and Winthrop, $42K.

– SEC schools spent on average $160K per athlete in 2011 (up 65%).

The amount of money expended for coach’s salaries at The Citadel increased 68% from 2005 to 2011 (total for 2011: $2.4 million).

– Other FCS schools of interest (total amount expended on coach’s salaries in 2011, percentage increase from 2005-11):

Old Dominion ($5.1 million, 114.34%)
Delaware ($4.6 million, 58.18%)
James Madison ($4.5 million, 31.57%)
William and Mary ($3.7 million, 50.83%)
Georgia State ($3.6 million, 203.56%)
Coastal Carolina ($3.5 million, 93.51%)
Appalachian State ($3.3 million, 78.47%)
North Dakota State ($3.3 million, 88.19%)
UT-Chattanooga ($2.7 million, 26.75%)
Georgia Southern ($2.6 million, 45.42%)
South Carolina State ($2.4 million, 148.21%)
Western Carolina ($2.4 million, 148.21%)
VMI ($2.4 million, 148.21%)
Mississippi Valley State ($942K, 101.23%)

– Some of the non-football schools (total amount expended on coach’s salaries in 2011, percentage increase from 2005-11):

Charlotte ($3.8 million, 57.02%)
George Mason ($3.5 million, 71.26%)
VCU ($3.4 million, 97.46%)
UNC-Wilmington ($2.6 million, 47.77%)
College of Charleston ($2.5 million, 37.64%)
East Tennessee State ($2.3 million, 82.04%)
Winthrop ($2.0 million, 56.24%)
UNC-Greensboro ($2.0 million, 46.77%)
UNC-Asheville ($1.0 million, 36.79%)
Maryland-Eastern Shore ($695K, 5.98%)

However, The Citadel’s increase in coach’s salaries per athlete over the 2005-11 time period was only 1%, despite the jump in overall allocated funds for coaches. In contrast, the FCS average for coach’s salaries per athlete was 51%.

To address football specifically, The Citadel has increased its football spending on a per-athlete basis by 22.5% from 2007 to 2011 (the database did not have 2005-06 numbers for the school). That is in line with the FCS median average over the same time frame (20.9%). In terms of raw numbers, The Citadel spent more money per athlete in 2011 ($53,807) than the FCS median ($36,134).

If you take out scholarship expense considerations, however, The Citadel’s increase in football spending on a per-athlete basis from 2007-11 was only 2%; the FCS median was 14%. That may be telling, though the difference if you only account for scholarship players is not quite as large (7% to 16%, with The Citadel spending more than the FCS median by almost $5K per player).

Football coaching salaries on a per-scholarship player basis were higher for The Citadel than the FCS median. In 2011, the school averaged $13,243 in coach’s salary per scholly player, an increase of 68% from 2005. The FCS average over the same time period was an increase of 42%, with a median per scholarship player of $10,366 in coaching salaries.

Debt service numbers:

In 2011, The Citadel paid $2.2 million in principal/interest on athletic facilities. This was, to say the least, a whole lot more than the FCS median (which was just over $200K).

The total outstanding debt for athletic facilities in 2011 at The Citadel was $17.7 million. That is ten times the FCS median.

$17.7 million seems like a lot (actually, it is a lot). On the other hand, it pales in comparison to Appalachian State’s $49.4 million in athletic facilities debt. A few other schools in this category:

Coastal Carolina ($7.8 million)
William and Mary ($12.0 million)
Jacksonville State ($27.8 million)
James Madison ($48.6 million)
South Carolina State ($455K)
UT-Chattanooga ($1.9 million)
Old Dominion ($49.6 million)
Delaware ($17.0 million)
VMI ($0)
Western Carolina ($7.6 million)

The total outstanding debt for all facilities at The Citadel in 2011 (presumably including those designated for athletics) was $48.8 million, which was actually a decline of over $8 million from 2009.

What do all these stats mean? That’s hard to say. There are caveats on top of caveats.

I’ve written about expenses before in various contexts, but I’m still not sure how to evaluate some of these numbers. What can I say, I’m an unfrozen caveman blogger. All of these statistics frighten and confuse me.

I think that perhaps the takeaway from The Citadel’s point of view may be comparing the numbers of fellow public schools with what isn’t listed in the database — namely, the spending by private institutions. It is increasingly clear that the military college has to act as a private school does in terms of fundraising and recruiting.

The Citadel is always going to be much smaller than most other public universities (in terms of undergraduate enrollment, etc.). While I think that is a good thing, it provides unique challenges for the school as a whole and the department of athletics in particular.

Duty, honor, and respect are priceless concepts — but there are still bills to pay.

Big Dance victory droughts: BCS schools that haven’t celebrated an NCAA tournament win in quite a while

Update: the 2014 edition

This post was partly inspired by a recent recap of a Frank Martin press conference. Now, Frank Martin pressers are often required viewing, because the South Carolina coach doesn’t mince words. What struck me, though, was this note:

Martin said he realized this year marks the 40th anniversary of USC’s last NCAA tournament victory.

You read that correctly. South Carolina hasn’t won an NCAA tournament game since 1973. That’s a long drought for a team in a major conference (even if the Gamecocks weren’t in a BCS league for part of that time).

It got me thinking…what other schools currently in BCS leagues haven’t won a game in the Big Dance in a while? Not just get a bid, mind you, but actually advance in the tournament with a victory?

After looking up some records, I was mildly surprised to discover that 13 current BCS schools have gone at least ten years without such a win. Some have gone a lot longer than that — and two of them have never won an NCAA tournament game.

That group of 13 does not include South Carolina’s fellow Palmetto State school, Clemson, although the Tigers actually haven’t advanced past the round of 64 since 1997. However, two years ago Clemson won a play-in game against UAB, which counts (more or less).

Let’s take a look at our sad list of 13, then. None of these schools has won a tournament game since 2003:

– Northwestern (no tournament appearances): Famously, NU is the only BCS school to have never played in the NCAA tournament (despite hosting the very first NCAA title game in 1939). You can read about Northwestern and all the other schools that have never made the Big Dance here: Link

– Nebraska (no NCAA victories): Here is the only other BCS school to have never won an NCAA tournament game, although the Cornhuskers have at least played in the event. Nebraska is 0-for-6, including three losses as the higher-seeded team. The Cornhuskers last made the NCAAs in 1998.

– South Carolina (last won an NCAA game in 1973): As mentioned above, the Gamecocks haven’t advanced in the NCAAs for four decades. South Carolina’s last victory was actually in a regional consolation game. Since then, the Gamecocks have suffered some particularly excruciating losses, including losing in the first round in consecutive years as a 2 and 3 seed, respectively. South Carolina’s NCAA tourney losing streak began in 1974 with a loss to Furman. Ouch.

– Oregon State (last won an NCAA game in 1982): The Beavers haven’t made the NCAA tournament since 1991, the longest such drought for a BCS school outside of Northwestern, and haven’t won a game in the tourney since 1982, when it lost in the Elite Eight to Patrick Ewing and Georgetown. Oregon State has two final fours in its history; it’s odd the Beavers haven’t been able to put things together for so long.

– Rutgers (last won an NCAA game in 1983): Of course, the Scarlet Knights haven’t always been a major-conference program, but at any rate the last time RU won a tourney game was in 1983 (as a member of the Atlantic 10). In 1976, Rutgers made the Final Four as a member of the long-gone ECAC Metro conference. The Scarlet Knights were undefeated that year until losing to Michigan in the national semis.

– TCU (last won an NCAA game in 1987): Here is another school that hasn’t been in a major conference throughout its history. However, since the Southwest Conference dissolved, the Horned Frogs have only participated in one NCAA tournament (1997, as a member of the WAC). TCU’s last victory in the Big Dance came in 1987, as an SWC team.

– Providence (last won an NCAA game in 1997): The Friars have advanced to two Final Fours and came very close to notching a third trip in 1997, when Pete Gillen’s squad lost in overtime to eventual national champion Arizona in the Elite Eight. Providence has yet to win a game in the NCAAs since then, however, and hasn’t played in the tournament at all since 2004.

– St. John’s (last won an NCAA game in 2000): SJU has only played in two NCAA tournaments since 2000, a major disappointment for a school with a hoops tradition as rich as St. John’s. The Red Storm has never won the NCAA title, but the program does have two Final Four trips and four Elite Eight appearances, including one as recently as 1999.

– Iowa (last won an NCAA game in 2001): Like St. John’s, Iowa is another school with a history of playing quality basketball. The Hawkeyes played in the 1956 NCAA title game, one of three Final Four appearances for Iowa. Since the 2001 season, however, it has only qualified for two NCAA tournaments.

– Penn State (last won an NCAA game in 2001): The Nittany Lions got to the Sweet 16 in 2001, upsetting North Carolina in the second round before losing to Temple. Since then, Penn State has only made one NCAA tournament (in 2011).

– Mississippi (last won an NCAA game in 2001): Mississippi got to the Sweet 16 in 2001, and returned to the NCAAs in 2002 (losing in the first round that year). That 2002 appearance is the Rebels’ most recent in the event. Mississippi has only played in six NCAA tournaments, and is probably most remembered for being on the wrong side of Bryce Drew and “Pacer” back in 1998.

– Georgia (last won an NCAA game in 2002): UGA has only made two NCAAs since 2002. Georgia had never played in the NCAA tournament before 1983. That year, though, the Bulldogs (led by Vern Fleming) made it all the way to the Final Four before losing to Jim Valvano’s destined North Carolina State squad. Georgia has only managed to get to the Sweet 16 once since that year.

– Auburn (last won an NCAA game in 2003): The Tigers advanced to the Sweet 16 in 2003, losing by one point in the regional semifinals to Carmelo Anthony and eventual national champ Syracuse. That was the last time Auburn made the Big Dance. Oddly, the Tigers have a winning record in NCAA tournament play (12-8), despite never advancing to the Final Four (one Elite Eight appearance).

When Auburn gets to the tournament, it’s a solid bet to win a game or two; the one time AU didn’t win its first-round tourney game, a loss to Richmond, its star was one Charles Barkley. The problem is that the Tigers don’t get there that often — which is something that can be said for several of the schools on this list.

Will any of these schools break through and win a game this year? Well, first they have to make the tournament, and there is a good chance not one of them will get a bid. Iowa and St. John’s are bubble teams (arguably on the wrong side of the bubble), while the others would have to win their respective conference tourneys to get there.

In other words, there is a good chance all of them will remain on this list next year.

If FBS schools no longer play FCS schools in football, what are the ramifications?

If you follow college football at all, you probably are familiar with last week’s story out of Wisconsin, where Barry Alvarez was quoted as saying that Big 10 schools would not schedule FCS opponents going forward:

“The nonconference schedule in our league is ridiculous,” Alvarez said on WIBA-AM. “It’s not very appealing…

“So we’ve made an agreement that our future games will all be Division I schools. It will not be FCS schools.”

A couple of quick points:

– Obviously, FCS schools are members of Division I. You would think the director of athletics at a D-1 institution would know that.

– Alvarez claimed that the Big 10’s non-conference schedule “is ridiculous”, yet he is the same AD who in recent years scheduled multiple FCS schools from all over the country, including The Citadel, Wofford, Northern Iowa, South Dakota, Austin Peay, and Cal Poly. The Badgers will play Tennessee Tech in 2013.

Alvarez’s comment drew a lot of attention, understandably so, although it is not a lock that the Big 10 will enforce such an edict. Northern Iowa’s AD was blunt:

I would tell you the loss of the Big Ten schools will be devastating, to UNI and to a lot of our peers. Not just because we wouldn’t play Iowa and have the guarantee, if you think this will stop at the Big Ten…I look at things happening in the equity leagues in fives, and so I have to believe this might lead to additional dominoes…It impacts our ability to generate money in football. It closes the ranks, it closes us out a little bit more.

Samford’s AD had a similar reaction:

If the SEC and ACC make the same decision, we’ve all got to sit back and reevaluate how we’re going to replace our money. If you eliminate those guarantee teams, it puts us in a tough situation at a private school where we don’t get any state funding.

Of course, not everyone is upset. Some in the media welcome the move, eager for what they perceive as “better” scheduling (though suggesting New Mexico State would be a significant improvement over a decent FCS squad strikes me as a bit puzzling). Most members of the college football press/blogosphere, however, understand the potential issues associated with such a decision and the nuances at play. Not all of them do, though — or if they do, they simply don’t care.

The best (worst?) example of this attitude is probably Yahoo! Sports columnist Frank Schwab, who couldn’t be more thrilled with the no-FCS proposal. After writing (in a headline) that “hopefully everyone follows [the Big 10’s] suit”, he added:

…hopefully other conferences (and by “other conferences” we mostly mean you, SEC) stop the practice of wasting a precious Saturday afternoon in the fall on FCS opponents. The FCS teams benefit with a large payday, and that’s great for the bean counters at those schools. It’s not good for anyone else.

It stinks for the season-ticket holders that have to pay for a sham of a game. It’s nothing worth watching on television. The FBS team has nothing to gain, because a win is expected but a loss goes down in infamy. And while the FCS team will get enough money to build a new weight room, the most common result is getting pounded by 40 or 50 points, which can’t be that enjoyable for those players.

Some Big Ten-Sun Belt game in September might not be a ratings bonanza either, but at least it’s better than a parade of FCS opponents.

I thought Schwab’s overall tone was a bit much, to be honest. I sent him a tweet, trying to be as polite as possible:

You seem to have a very flippant attitude about the FCS.

His reply:

Oh, make no mistake, no “seem” about it

Okay, then…

My first thought when I read Schwab’s piece was that it was clearly the work of someone who does not understand FCS football, or who has no connection to it at all (Schwab is a Wisconsin alum). Saying that FCS players can’t enjoy the experience suggests he has never spoken to any of them about it. Most small-school players relish the challenge of “playing up”. In fact, such games are often a recruiting tool for FCS coaches. It’s not all about the money.

Earlier in this post I listed six FCS schools Wisconsin has played in recent years. Of those matchups, the Badgers had to hang on to beat Northern Iowa by five points, were tied at halftime with The Citadel, and frankly should have lost to Cal Poly (winning in OT after the Mustangs missed three extra points). I’m not really getting the “sham of a game” vibe with those contests. Now if you want to talk about the 2012 Big 10 championship game against Nebraska in those terms, go right ahead.

Schwab singles out the SEC as the worst “offender” when it comes to playing FCS schools. I think it is only fair to point out that Big 10 schools currently have a total of 37 FCS teams on their future schedules, while SEC schools have 32. (I’m sure the SEC will eventually add a few more.)

Oh, and to quickly dispose of one canard (which in fairness to Schwab, he does not suggest): some people occasionally claim that allegedly easy FCS matchups have given the SEC a leg up on winning BCS titles, because they play fewer quality non-conference opponents. You only have to look at the Big 10 to see that isn’t the case.

The SEC has played more FCS schools in the past than has the Big 10. However, despite that, Big 10 schools have actually lost more games to FCS opposition since 2005 than has the SEC. In fact, no BCS league has lost as many such games (six) or had as many different schools lose them (four) in that time period.

Not playing FCS schools won’t hide the Big 10’s real problem, which is illustrated to a degree by this article, written in August of 2012:

Iowa has four nonconference football dates. It has chosen to fill two of them this year with games against teams from the Mid-American Conference

The reason for this: The Hawkeyes wanted two games they would have very good chances to win.

That’s not exactly a revelation. But perhaps you aren’t aware of just how pronounced Iowa’s (and the Big Ten’s) dominance over MAC teams has been.

The columnist wrote that the MAC was “the Big 10’s football piñata”, which in years past it may have been. Unfortunately for the Big 10 (and to the undoubted surprise of the writer), it would lose three games to MAC schools in 2012, and that was just part of a trend — MAC teams have beaten Big 10 squads twelve times since 2008. (MACtion, indeed.)

As for the Hawkeyes and the “two games they would have very good chances to win”…Iowa lost one of them by one point, and won the other by one point.

The truth is the Big 10 just hasn’t been that good in football in recent years, which doesn’t have anything to do with playing FCS opposition. Dropping FCS schools from Big 10 schedules won’t change things, either. SEC schools aren’t winning all those BCS titles because they play FCS teams; they’re winning them because SEC schools have the best players and (in some cases) the best coaches.

So what happens if the Big 10 follows through and has its members drop all FCS opponents? What happens if other leagues do the same thing?

You’ve seen the quotes from ADs at schools that would be affected. Then there is this take from agent/event promoter Jason Belzer:

If other conferences follow the Big Ten’s lead and stop scheduling games against FCS opponents, the institutions that compete at that level will have two options: 1) look to make up the funds elsewhere, or 2) essentially be forced to stop competing at the same level as the larger institutions. Because it is  unrealistic to believe that any institution can begin to make up the difference in loss of football guarantee revenue by playing any number of additional such games in basketball, it is more likely that the second option will occur. With the loss of revenue, the gap between schools in BCS conferences and those who are not will continue to grow ever wider, leading to what may be the eventual breakup of the approximately 340 schools that compete at the NCAA Division I level.

How soon this may occur remains to be seen, but the the additional millions in revenue the new college football playoff will provide BCS conferences, coupled with their decision to eliminate the one source in which smaller schools could obtain a piece of those funds, will almost certainly accelerate the timetable for any such  fracturing.

I think that is a distinct possibility. I also think it may be the ultimate aim of the Big 10.

Not everyone agrees that the outlook is so dire, and at least one observer believes there are other ways for smaller schools to generate revenue:

FCS schools can take steps to enhance revenue streams outside of the on-field competitions with big schools. For example, very few schools FCS schools have media rights deals. Yet there are an increasing number of regional sports networks (RSNs) and national networks that are looking for programming. In fact, NBC Sports Network signed a media rights deal with the FCS Ivy League to “broadcast football, men’s basketball. and lacrosse.” FCS schools can and should continue to pursue these deals to be less dependent on paycheck changes…
…many institutions do not lobby at the federal or state level for their athletic programs or rely the schools’ lobbyists for their athletic programs. As schools like UNI receive more state funding, it is unclear how much of that funding will go to its athletic department. Therefore, FCS can and should make larger commitments to lobby on their athletic programs’ behalf, especially if paycheck games are eliminated.

That comes from a blog by a group (or maybe just one individual) called Block Six Analytics. I’ll be honest. I don’t buy either of those options.

I think many smaller institutions already lobby on varsity sports interests, and at any rate in most cases there would be a ceiling for actual results. To use The Citadel as an example, the school has in recent years begun to play Clemson and South Carolina in football on a more regular basis, as do several other FCS schools in the Palmetto State.

This outcome was basically due to a request by the state legislature to the two larger schools, neither of which had any real problem with it. However, The Citadel can’t play Clemson and/or South Carolina every year, since there are numerous other FCS programs in the state (Furman, Wofford, South Carolina State, Coastal Carolina, Presbyterian, and Charleston Southern).

The first point, that FCS schools should have media rights deals…um, it’s not like they haven’t tried. I’m sure the Southern Conference would like to have a profitable contract with CBS or ESPN or Al-Jazeera, but that’s not likely to happen. Even the mid-major conferences that do have deals (like the CAA has with NBC Sports) usually only get the benefit of exposure. That’s great, but it’s not a big cash situation.

I’m trying to imagine what reaction SoCon commissioner John Iamarino would have if he was told that he should go right out and find a big-money media rights deal for his league. Eye-rolling? Uncontrollable laughter?

Speaking of Iamarino, he had some comments on the FCS vs. FBS situation that were fairly ominous:

The only reason to have 63 scholarships is to be eligible to play FBS teams and count toward their bowl eligibility. If those games go away, the entire subdivision would have to look at if 63 is the right number. Could we save expenses by reducing the number of scholarships? It would seem to me that’s one thing that would have to be looked at.

I disagree with Iamarino that “the only reason” to have 63 scholarships is to play FBS schools (but I digress).

I’m guessing it hasn’t occurred to some of the more FBS-focused among the media that there could be a potential loss of football scholarships if the Big 10’s big idea comes to pass. No one thinks that would be good for the health of the sport. It would also be an sizable number of lost opportunities for potential students.

Iamarino doesn’t give a number, but I could see the FCS maximum dropping to around 50, based on scholarship costs and the lost income from not playing those games. That’s not much more than the D-2 maximum of 36.

This wouldn’t be the first time a Big 10 proposal had the potential to eliminate athletic scholarships at other schools, of course. As far back as 1948 the NCAA, then largely controlled by the Big 10, enacted the Sanity Code, an attempt to get rid of all athletic scholarships. It was a rule seen by many as benefiting the Big 10 at the expense of mostly southern schools.

Famously, the Sanity Code would not last long, and it is a pleasure to note that The Citadel was one of the “Seven Sinners” at the heart of its eventual destruction. I would hate to see the school have to reduce opportunities for prospective students after all these years.

Block Six Analytics did make one good point, which is that the FCS schools do have one other string in their collective bow, namely the NCAA basketball tournament:

One may argue that it is madness to have such a seemingly large organization completely dependent on one deal. However, this deal also means the NCAA will do everything in its power to ensure that there are enough Division I basketball programs to continue “March Madness” (also known as the Division I Men’s Basketball Championship). This requires that schools outside of the BCS have basketball programs that compete at the Division I level. In addition, this dynamic may allow smaller schools to actually ask for an increased amount of subsidies from the NCAA – especially given the elimination of paycheck games.

This may be the biggest obstacle to the Big 10 (and other power leagues) breaking away from the NCAA sooner rather than later. There is a lot of money in that tournament, and the event works in part because the country is enchanted with the “David vs. Goliath” component that is traditionally the major drawing card of the first two rounds. A basketball tournament only open to 65-75 larger schools wouldn’t be nearly as valuable (whether administrators at the BCS schools all understand this point is another issue).

Having said that, I have my doubts the smaller schools could extract a larger pound of flesh for their participation in the event.

A couple of other thoughts:

– If the Big 10 eliminates games against FCS schools, it will be harder for its member institutions to become bowl-eligible. This could be even more of a problem if the league moves to a 10-game conference schedule, which is reportedly under consideration.

If dropping FCS schools from FBS schedules was done across the board, there wouldn’t be enough eligible teams for all the existing bowl spots. Either the rules would have to be changed to allow 5-7 teams to play in bowls, or a bunch of bowl games would have to be cut.

– Frank Schwab wrote that a “Big Ten-Sun Belt game in September might not be a ratings bonanza either, but at least it’s better than a parade of FCS opponents”. I believe all but one of the current Sun Belt schools were once FCS (I-AA) programs. It’s not that big a difference from playing these schools versus competing against a quality FCS squad.

In addition, if FBS-FCS matchups go by the wayside, then a bunch of FCS schools will likely move up to FBS — more than are already planning to do so.

It’s possible that Alvarez’s comments to a local radio station are just the rantings of one man. I hope so, but I’m not confident that is the case. I think this is probably going to happen (though perhaps not next year). It will have a limited impact unless leagues like the SEC and ACC do the same thing. Then it will become a problem.

When it comes to maintaining financially stable sports programs, smaller schools already have too many problems.

Schools that have never made the NCAA Tournament — the 2012 edition

Updated: The 2016 edition

Now updated: the 2015 edition

The 2013 edition

Previous entries on this subject:  The 2011 edition   The 2010 edition

It’s that time of year again, as in late February teams can see the end of the regular season finish line, and the anticipation of the conference tourneys begins. It’s also that time when we see if any of the schools with many years in Division I but no NCAA tournament appearances will finally get to become debutants in the Big Dance.

I want to start this post, however, by acknowledging that there have been a few schools which have an NCAA history but  have not appeared in the tournament for a very long time (in some cases, forty years or more). Of this group, the longest drought is that of Harvard, which made its first and only tourney trip in 1946. Harvard currently leads the Ivy League, however, and is favored to win the conference and make a long-overdue return to the NCAAs this season.

Other schools not so favored: Rice (tourney-free since 1970), Bowling Green (1968), Columbia (1968), Tennessee Tech (1963), Yale (1962), and Dartmouth (1959).

I wouldn’t mind seeing any of those schools get back into the NCAAs someday, to be sure, but the focus of this post is on the twenty schools to have been in Division I the longest without making even one appearance in the NCAA tournament. Each of these schools has been in D-1 for at least 25 seasons (counting the 2011-12 campaign) with no appearances on any bracket.

Will any of these 20 schools finally break through this season? Last season, none of them did. The season before that…none of them did. The list of 20 has changed this year, however, because Centenary completed its 50-year run in D-1 last season with no tournament appearances. Since Robert Parish’s alma mater has dropped out of the division, it no longer appears on our list. Replacing Centenary this season (and #20 in terms of “seniority”) is UMKC.

Tangent: if you’re wondering how Centenary never made the NCAA tournament despite having Robert Parish in its lineup for four years, it’s because the Gents were on probation all four seasons he played for the school, thanks to the recruitment of…Robert Parish. Reading the link, it becomes clear that the NCAA hasn’t changed much over the years. This is not a good thing.

Now for this year’s review of our hopeful little group of perennial non-contenders. Please note that there are other schools in Division I that have yet to make an NCAA trip, but all of those schools are “newbies” — they all became members of D-1 after 1990. They haven’t suffered enough to be listed here.

[Note: all records listed below are for games through February 22]

The NCAA Tournament began in 1939. In 1948, the NCAA was re-classified into separate divisions (university and college). There are five schools which have continuously been in what we now call Division I since 1948 that have never made the tournament field. (That doesn’t include the aforementioned Harvard, which made its solitary appearance in 1946.) All five of those schools theoretically could have been in the tournament beginning in 1939, so for them the wait is actually longer than their history as official D-1 programs.

The five schools are known as the “Forgotten Five”. The class  of 1948 (or 1939, if you will):

— Northwestern: NU is easily the cause célèbre of the Forgotten Five, as the only school in a BCS league never to have made the tournament. The Wildcats (16-11) have had a frustrating “so close, but so far away” kind of season, including Tuesday night’s overtime loss to Michigan. To break through this year and finally bring joy to the likes of Michael Wilbon or Darren Rovell, Northwestern needs to win its last three regular season games or make a big run in the Big 10 tourney. Neither is likely, particularly the former, as one of those three games is against Ohio State and the other two are on the road.

— Army: The Bulldogs of the Hudson are 12-16 overall and currently in sixth place in the eight-team Patriot League. Army would probably have to beat all three of the league heavyweights (Bucknell, Lehigh, and American) to win the conference tournament. Don’t bet on it.

— St. Francis (NY): The Terriers sport a modest 15-12 record, but are one of the better teams in the Northeast Conference, having won seven of their last nine games. SFC has to be considered a dark-horse threat to win the NEC tourney. When it comes to making the NCAAs, St. Francis is one of the more promising possibles among our group of 20.

— William and Mary: There has been some hot-and-heavy “bubble talk” about whether the CAA deserves to be a two-bid league, but none of that discussion has revolved around the Tribe (624). It’s been a long year for Jon Stewart’s alma mater.

— The Citadel: At 622,  it’s been a long year for my alma mater too (despite the recent two-game winning streak). Of course, this isn’t the first time the Bulldogs have had a long year…

Okay, that’s the Forgotten Five. What about the other schools?

— New Hampshire (which began Division I play in 1962): The Wildcats are 12-15, which is actually a better mark than their historical norm; UNH’s basketball program has a “lifetime” winning percentage of under 40%. That’s good enough for sixth in the America East. That’s not good enough to garner an NCAA bid.

— Maine (also from the class of 1962): This season Maine is matching New Hampshire win for win (12-15; both teams are also 7-9 in America East play). When you match New Hampshire win for win in basketball, that’s generally a sign that you aren’t headed for postseason glory.

— Denver (D-1 from 1948 to 1980, then back to the division in 1999): Unlike most of the teams on this list, the Pioneers are actually good. Denver already has 20 victories this season, including wins over St. Mary’s and Southern Mississippi. Another of the Pioneers’ victories came against Sun Belt rival Middle Tennessee State, but the Blue Raiders will still be solidly favored to capture the Sun Belt tourney crown. That’s important, because Denver has no realistic shot at getting an at-large bid. It must win the league tournament.

— UT-Pan American (class of 1969): It’s not like UTPA is completely devoid of hoops history; Lucious “Luke” Jackson played for the Broncs, and he later won both an Olympic gold medal in basketball and an NBA title. Abe Lemons and Lon Kruger both coached at UTPA. However, the school has not been rolling up victories in recent years. This season’s 11-17 campaign to date is a big improvement over the last two years, both 6-win debacles. Ultimately, though, that improvement doesn’t matter much; as a member of the Great West conference, a league without an automatic bid, UTPA has no shot at an NCAA berth.

— Stetson (class of 1972): The most famous hoopster in Hatters history is probably Ted Cassidy, the actor who played Lurch on The Addams Family. Alas, no amount of bell-ringing will bring an NCAA bid to Stetson this season, as the Hatters are 9-18 and in danger of not qualifying for the Atlantic Sun tournament.

— UC Irvine (class of 1978): The Anteaters are 10-17, seventh place in the Big West, and a million miles behind league leader Long Beach State in terms of basketball prowess this season. It’s too bad UCI has never made the NCAAs, as “Zot, Zot, Zot” is surely a much better chant than “Rock, Chalk, Jayhawk”.

— Grambling State (class of 1978): The Tigers are 3-21 overall and in last place in the SWAC, which makes them a strong contender for being considered the worst team in Division I. Indeed, Grambling is ranked 345th and last in the Pomeroy Ratings.

— Maryland-Eastern Shore (D-1 in 1974-1975, then back to the division in 1982):  The Hawks are 6-20 and in next-to-last place in the MEAC. I’m not forecasting a deep league tourney run this year for UMES.

— Youngstown State (D-1 in 1948, returning in 1982): The Penguins are a respectable 14-13 and a middle-of-the-pack team in the always solid Horizon League. It’s hard to see YSU getting past Valparaiso, Butler, and Cleveland State in the league tournament, however.

— Bethune-Cookman (class of 1981): B-C missed a great opportunity last season after winning the MEAC regular season title, as the Wildcats lost in the conference tourney semifinals. Bethune-Cookman isn’t as good this year (13-14) but is one of six or seven teams with a reasonable shot at winning the MEAC tournament. If it were to do so, it would probably land in one of the dreaded 16-seed play-in games.

— Western Illinois (class of 1982): The Leathernecks are 14-12 and comfortably situated in the middle of the Summit League standings, a vast improvement over last year’s seven-win squad, which lost its last 13 games (including one to Centenary, the Gents’ only win in their farewell D-1 season). It’s been a nice bounceback year for WIU, but it’s unlikely Western Illinois can get past Oral Roberts and South Dakota State in the league tournament.

— Chicago State (class of 1985): Like Texas-Pan American, Chicago State competes in the Great West conference and thus has no opportunity at snagging an automatic bid to the NCAAs. Unlike UTPA, however, the Cougars haven’t been competitive, with a record of 4-23.

— Hartford (class of 1985): The Hawks are the third America East team on our list. Hartford is ahead of UNH and Maine in the league standings but has a much worse overall record (8-20). Hartford can count singer Dionne Warwick among its alums, but you don’t need a psychic to know that the Hawks are not making their first NCAA appearance this season. You don’t even need a friend.

— Buffalo (class of 1985):  The Bulls have come closer than most of these schools to finally grabbing the brass ring. This season, Buffalo is 16-9 overall and in second place in the MAC East, the superior of that league’s two divisions. While Akron is probably the favorite to win the conference tournament, Buffalo is a team to watch, having recently gone on an eight-game winning streak (before dropping its last two contests).

— UMKC (class of 1988): The newest member of the countdown, the Kangaroos are only 10-19 overall and tied for last place in the Summit League. It’s quite possible UMKC may not qualify for the league tournament, much less the NCAAs, which would definitely upset all the sportos, motorheads, geeks, sluts, bloods, and wastoids at the school, not to mention UMKC alum Edie McClurg.

Well, that’s this year’s rundown. St. Francis (NY), Denver, Buffalo, and possibly Northwestern have not-improbable chances of finally getting the call on Selection Sunday. However, it’s more likely that once again, none of the never-beens will realize the dream. It’s too bad. However, it won’t stop fans of those programs from continuing to support them, hoping that one day they will get that moment in the sun.

For this season, though, the skies appear to be cloudy.

The ugly truth about the Nevin Shapiro/Miami story

My blogging sabbatical is coming to an end…

I just wanted to make a quick point about the incredible takedown of the University of Miami football program by Yahoo! Sports.  Obviously Nevin Shapiro set high standards when it came to “making it rain” for the Hurricane football players, but near the end of a fine column by Dan Wetzel about the former Miami booster, he quotes Shapiro as saying something that should concern anyone who follows college football (or basketball, for that matter):

“Miami is not the school where payouts are made to prospective student athletes,” Shapiro said. “Miami is a private institution, it’s in a transient city. We didn’t have the money to pay recruits. There is so much more money in big public universities. In the SEC, the money is an endless river.

“If Miami relied on cash payoffs for players to come to Miami, they’d be out of business. They’d lose every bidding war.

“Eighty percent of the players came from the area, from Miami-Dade, Overtown, Liberty City, Belle Glade. The other 20 percent fell in love with the city. While the school obviously isn’t in Miami Beach, it’s considered the hottest scene in the country.”

He said he heard all the stories of how other programs recruit from the Miami players who considered going elsewhere. He was also a confidant to various assistant college and high school coaches. And he regularly entertained players from other schools who were friends with Hurricanes.

The reality of college football, he said, is nothing like it’s presented on television. The cheating is rampant.

“It’s everywhere,” he said. “Everywhere that it matters. Most people can’t even understand it.”

Think about that for a second.  Here we have a guy willing to go far more than the extra mile for his beloved football program.  Since he was the architect of a $930 million Ponzi scheme, I think it is fair to say he would have had no scruples about paying players and would have been willing to bid high — yet he didn’t think Miami could compete in that manner with larger state schools.

It may be impossible to overstate the amount of cheating that occurs in big-time college athletics.

Although I don’t have a specific rooting interest for a particular major college football/basketball school, I enjoy watching big-time college football and basketball and follow both avidly.  However, there is no denying the seedy underbelly of the sports, which is exacerbated by the NCAA’s own rules. (In his column Wetzel states that the NCAA maintains its standard of amateurism “in an effort to avoid having to pay taxes or its players”, a comment that is perhaps overly harsh but does have an element of truth to it.)

I was going to write that Nevin Shapiro was probably an outlier, even considering all the scandals we’ve witnessed this year (Ohio State, North Carolina, Oregon, etc.), but then I remembered that this is the third Ponzi-related debacle involving college athletics this month.  (It is the only one of the three that featured “bounties” for celebration penalties and injuring opposing players, however.)

Shapiro may be a symbol of college athletics at its worst, but it was dirty before he burst onto the scene, and there is still plenty of mud out there.  That’s the ugly truth.