DIII Disjunction

by | December 1, 2012, 5:00am 0

I coach the University of Puget Sound Postmen. While I only discuss open division teams in this article, there are many examples of the same issues in the women’s division.

Following the 2010 season, USA Ultimate introduced a new structure for the college series which separated Division I and Division III teams. The new structure has resulted in some beneficial changes, but it is far from perfect. In this article, I will describe some problems with the current system, and suggest possible improvements.


Lower level of competition at D-I Regionals

In 2011, Claremont finished the regular season ranked #21 in the country, barely missing out on earning the Southwest Region an additional strength bid to the D-I Championships. Claremont easily won their four-team conference tournament, and earned a bid to the D-III Championships. Claremont was not allowed to play at D-I Regionals, where Stanford, ranked #33 at the end of the regular season, upset #16 San Diego State to earn a bid to the D-I Championships. Claremont went on to win the D-III title without dropping a game.

Last year, Minnesota-Duluth surprised everyone by qualifying for the D-I Championships out of the North Central Region. Minnesota-Duluth didn’t have enough sanctioned games to be ranked at the end of the regular season. In the final rankings, two North Central D-III teams (St. John’s and D-III Champion Carleton-GOP) were ranked higher.

Was 2011 Claremont good enough to make the D-I Championships out of the Southwest? Could Carleton-GOP or St. John’s have grabbed one of the five North Central bids last year? We’ll never know.

Worse competition for the top D-III teams

Under the old system in 2010, D-III teams played against D-I teams at Sectionals and Regionals before competing at the D-III Championships. In 2010, the four semifinalists at the D-III Championships (Carleton-GOP, Whitman, Kenyon, Puget Sound) had a combined record of 32-21, and had the opportunity to play against the top D-I teams in their respective regions. Playing only against other D-III teams in 2012, the D-III semifinals teams (Carleton-GOP, Puget Sound, North Park, Rice) had a combined record of 31-5 leading up to the Championships. The top D-III teams had far fewer opportunities to challenge themselves against teams capable of beating them.

Many of the best D-III teams aren’t at the D-III Championships

Last year, Carleton-CUT, Colorado College, Dartmouth, Luther, Middlebury, Whitman, and Williams chose to play in D-I conferences, making them ineligible for the D-III Championships before the season even started. Other teams like Princeton and Wesleyan opted out of the D-III series to compete at D-I Regionals. In 2011, all four of 2010’s D-III semifinalists (Carleton-GOPWhitmanKenyonPuget Sound) made the same choice to attend D-I Regionals.


How can we improve the D-III system? Here are some ideas, starting with the least ambitious:

Give every team the opportunity to compete at both conference and regional tournaments

This allows D-III teams in the four regions with only a single D-III conference to attend both D-I Regionals and the D-III Championships. It creates more playing opportunities for the D-III teams, provides better competition for the D-I teams and means fewer teams decline bids to the D-III Championships. A change that makes many teams better off and no teams worse off should be a no-brainer. Under this system, we could have seen Claremont at D-I Regionals in 2011, and Whitman at the D-III Championships last year.

Get rid of D-III strength bids and replace them with wildcards

Each region keeps one auto-bid to the D-III Championships, awarded though D-III conference and regionals tournaments. D-III teams can choose to compete at D-I regionals. Six wildcard bids are awarded after regionals to the top ranked D-III teams, regardless of whether they attended a D-III or a D-I regional tournament. Under this system, the wildcards last year could have gone to Whitman, Dartmouth, Williams, Carleton-GOP, Harding, and Princeton, making the D-III Championships a much higher quality tournament.

Make D-III the 11th D-I region

D-III would get one auto-bid to the D-I Championships, and could earn more strength bids. Last year, Carleton-CUT, Luther, and Whitman would have earned three bids for D-III. Teams would compete and their conference tournaments, the D-III Championships, and the top teams would go on to the D-I Championships. This is never going to happen, but it’s interesting to think about.

D-III players, what do you think? Are you happy with the current D-III structure?

Feature photo by Brandon Wu – Ultiphotos.com

Comments Policy: At Skyd, we value all legitimate contributions to the discussion of ultimate. However, please ensure your input is respectful. Hateful, slanderous, or disrespectful comments will be deleted. For grammatical, factual, and typographic errors, instead of leaving a comment, please e-mail our editors directly at editors [at] skydmagazine.com.