DavidsonCats.com

We are 10-40-2 as a school in conference play in all sports so far this year.

It can't get much worse than that.

I know men's basketball will get it together. But our other team sports are in the dumpster thus far.

Lack of scholarships are killing us. Where are the new schollies that the administration promised upon our move to the A-10?

For that poster who argued that we don't have one of the worst athletic programs in America. Here are our conference records for this year so far for our team sports.

9-28-1 for our women's teams.
4-18-1 for our men's teams.


13-46-2

I challenge someone to find another school with with a cumulative conference record that poor.

It ain't the kids fault.

The question becomes whether the A10 is an "overreach" for Davidson. If so, does some other conference make more sense given the will and/or ability to support athletics at the A10 level.

rbarney wrote:The question becomes whether the A10 is an "overreach" for Davidson. If so, does some other conference make more sense given the will and/or ability to support athletics at the A10 level.

Currently, there would be very few conferences, DI, DII or DIII that we would be competitive in. Certainly none that would be in line with our school's profile.

Unfortunately we would be in the bottom half of the SoCon in about everything as well.
Our fortunes have declined

I agree with some of these comments relative to conference affiliation.

My question is "What made you think that moving to the A-10 made sense for any sport but men's basketball?"

oldcat62 wrote:I agree with some of these comments relative to conference affiliation.

My question is "What made you think that moving to the A-10 made sense for any sport but men's basketball?"

To quote myself: "Baseball." As for the other sports, as Cobb has stated, we would be doing just as poorly in the SoCon.

Also, we have the additional revenue from multiple hoops tournament slots and cable network TV contracts. Is all that being spent on men's basketball? Are the additional travel expenses taking it all?

Swimming, track, and golf. We have more individual performers doing well and advancing to regional and national championships more often.

One advantage to being in the A10 is that every sport except football can compete for a conference championship. Previously, lacrosse and swimming had to compete as associate members of another conference or as a member of a specially created conference.

Our sub-mediocrity in nearly every sport is not a recent development. Davidson was bad in nearly every sport prior to coeducation because we competed in so many sports and had almost no scholarship money. We were good in golf and tennis as long as they were upper class sports, but when middle class kids started playing those sports, our fortunes declined.

Dr. Spencer wanted Davidson to be a D3 school. He refused to accept money to endow scholarships. He added women's sports without dropping men's sports. He brought in an Athletic Director with a non-scholarship background.

Spencer's legacy lived on after he left. The AD of the '80s was a D3 advocate. He asked a men's basketball coaching candidate in '89 if he would stay if the school moved to D3. In the mid-'80s, when the economy was robust and tuition was relatively cheap, the college did not raise money for athletic scholarships. (Very little for any scholarships. What was raised was squandered.)

In the '90s, small amounts were raised for scholarships, but not with enthusiasm. Terry Holland turned down money for swimming because the donors wanted to restrict it to male swimmers.

During my memory, we have been good in baseball during the late '80s when George Greer was the coach, men's soccer when Slagle was the coach, women's tennis when we were D3, women's basketball in the late '90s, and men's basketball for over 20 years. The last two have scholarships.

It is not correct to say our fortunes have declined since we moved to the A10. We are continuing our historic sub-mediocrity. Why would anyone expect that to change by moving to a different conference?

PS. Some predicted baseball would finish higher in the A10. We have and played for the championship last year. Our scholarship deficit is not as acute in a league largely made up of private schools and our location is a plus.

Spencer didn't want a successful athletic program. He and the board undercut Homer Smith immediately after he won the SoCon championship. The manner of cutting his budget was an insult so Smith resigned of course.

Lefty did not want to leave Davidson. He wanted a raise and around the time Maryland was making him the offer (according to the story told to me and others directly by Lefty) Lefty went to Spencer and offered to stay at Davidson if Spencer would make him AD and BB coach when Dr. Tom Scott retired. Spencer refused the offer. That was the best chance Davidson ever had to become a school with a good overall athletic program. Lefty was smart, was a tireless worker, had the desire to win, and had the ability to raise money that would have made the athletic program successful at the time and given us the opportunity to start winning traditions in multiple sports. I'm not aware that Lefty was ever unsuccessful at any job he took. And he could raise money. A friend of mine was the VP at Ga. State responsible for overseeing the negotiation of Lefty's contract. When they got to within about $15,000 per year from an agreement my friend offered to meet Lefty's request if he would agree to doing a few fundraisers for the school during the term of his contract. Lefty agreed and ended up doing more fundraisers than required by his contract. Lefty's fundraising work repaid Ga. State by a large multiple of his salary increase during the term of his contract.

Whether success in the early 70s could have survived Title IX and coeducation in the mid 70s ... even with someone of Lefty's ability in charge ... is a good question.

Two great posts.

They also help fill in some gaps for me. I had minimal contact with the sports programs while I was in Texas. Then in the late '70s and early '80s I was apparently removed from the alumni rolls after a conflict with Dr. Spencer. (An exercise for the reader is to decide what if anything to make of that post hoc.)

Then in the mid-'80s they decided they could get a little money out of me, so I became an alumnus again. They even visited my home. Then they wanted that little money to go to a scholarship fund. Fine with me. Then they wanted me to name the scholarship fund. OK. (And for perspective, if you are figuring I was someone making somewhat less than $25,000 a year, and therefore not a big target, you would be correct.) Then I got word that they'd rather piss away the money rather than keep up with a bunch of tiny scholarship funds, and that was fine, too.

My limited perspective seems to fit with what has been said about those times.

oldcat62 wrote:I agree with some of these comments relative to conference affiliation.

My question is "What made you think that moving to the A-10 made sense for any sport but men's basketball?"

I won't reiterate numbers comparing conferences, but except for basketball the A-10 is not more competitive than the Socon, or a number of other conferences. There are hits or misses (very top of A-10 is better in volleyball in good years, Socon better in baseball, etc.), but our relative competitiveness in the A-10 is not because the conference is tougher. Same as it ever was, per citycat.

The competition did, however, get much better for both basketball programs. In women's basketball, there are 7 Socon teams higher in Massey ratings. But only 2 of those teams are above 212, while we're at 281. We've already beaten one of those teams this year. So we could be competitive with all but 2 Socon teams (and we did play one of those 2 teams very close this year). In the A-10, our Massey rating is 13th, with 7 of the teams being better than 160. Massey would put us at a 12 point underdog to the 160th ranked team. And you know our record.

Men's basketball's conference competitiveness also declines. In kenpom ratings, we're the 6th best A-10 team, projected to go 8-10 in the conference. Nationally, the team's rating is about the same as the average of our last 3 years in the Socon, which were the best non-Curry years in the last 40. The A-10 gives us a better (i.e. non-zero) chance of an at-large bid, but it would appear that we will actually go to the NCAAs less in the A-10, unless the team's average performances returns to the outlier year of 14-15.

I'm optimistic about men's basketball though. I don't think Bob has figured out what to do in the A-10 yet, but I believe that he probably will. And A-10 home games are uniformly more fun than the last few years the Socon, where in some years our average home margin of victory approached 30 points.

It helped during those games to pretend it was a contest between the SoCon opponent vs. just Jake Cohen. Jake frequently had the lead, but then the game would tighten during his rests and then when he sat out the ends of games.

oldcat62 wrote:I agree with some of these comments relative to conference affiliation.

My question is "What made you think that moving to the A-10 made sense for any sport but men's basketball?"

Because our President and Athletic Director stood at a podium in front of staff, athletes, alums and press and said that we would make this move for more than just basketball and they would elevate our sports to be competitive in the A10.

Outside of using the additional money from being in the A10 to cover our increased travel, where have we significantly increased scholarships? None of the sports, in fact, we are below the amount in scholarships in almost all of our sports than we were 5 years ago. How many new full time assistant positions have been added to get us near our competitors and closer to the NCAA limits? I believe other than men's basketball - none.

I have heard there is a campaign to increase athletic scholarships. No one with the school has asked my family for a contribution. We've given money to the school for many years.

Someone might consider having an event at a local country club and invite alums, parents, and others who have supported the school in the past. Put a few shills in the crowd to create excitement. Have people who are interested in making contributions sign something so they can be followed up with.

The school knows how to do this kind of event. My mother received an invitation to an event in Greensboro, but not for athletic scholarships.

TiredCat88 wrote:

oldcat62 wrote:I agree with some of these comments relative to conference affiliation.

My question is "What made you think that moving to the A-10 made sense for any sport but men's basketball?"

Because our President and Athletic Director stood at a podium in front of staff, athletes, alums and press and said that we would make this move for more than just basketball and they would elevate our sports to be competitive in the A10.

Outside of using the additional money from being in the A10 to cover our increased travel, where have we significantly increased scholarships? None of the sports, in fact, we are below the amount in scholarships in almost all of our sports than we were 5 years ago. How many new full time assistant positions have been added to get us near our competitors and closer to the NCAA limits? I believe other than men's basketball - none.

Some people may have fallen for that, TiredCat. But I know you didn't.