Gold, silver, bronze? Doctorate, master's, bachelor's? Division I, II, III? Are the current NCAA classifications a hierarchy in which common sense and appropriate ambition should lead every university to seek Division I glory and a BCS championship? I certainly do not think so.

Grand Valley State is a proud member of the NCAA's Division II and intends to stay there. Let me offer a few thoughts on the value of Division II. I hope these views contribute to the discussion and the continuing diversity of athletics in American higher education. I also hope they temper the enthusiasm of some fans and alumni of successful Division II programs to follow the siren song of Division I membership.

Membership in Division II is a great benefit to Grand Valley State and schools like ours. Put simply, it offers the chance for very competitive athletics but keeps a traditional balance between athletics and other university missions. Division II membership greatly reduces the risk that athletics will become a separate campus culture, or that external competitive pressures will force our hand to make significant capital or operating investments beyond our current commitments.

In Division II, we offer a limited number of scholarships to our student-athletes. The result is that we can enrich the experience of the vast majority of our athletes by filling critical positions with scholarship athletes.

The 115 members of our national- championship football team, for example, had just eight teammates on full scholarship. Those on partial scholarships or without any athletics scholarship had a better experience because we could attract some students who might not have joined our program otherwise. The experience in other sports is similar. A few scholarship athletes make the experience better for all student-athletes. This is a real benefit of Division II. In fact, the experience in other sports may be even better because the differential status between "revenue" sports and nonrevenue sports is much less relevant in Division II.

Our student-athletes, like student-athletes in every division, find that their university experiences are richer because of team sports. The benefits of competition and a tenacious dedication to excellence are common among student-athletes in all divisions. Student-athletes in Division II are part of the mainstream campus community. They experience the same hardships of making class schedules and practice schedules work, and of catching up for missed assignments, but the academic experience is very similar for athletes and non-athletes on Division II campuses. When USA Today's Andy Gardiner recently profiled Grand Valley State, he found our harrier Kara Egan saying it this way: "There is totally a family atmosphere. You can be a student and still be an athlete without feeling like it's a business."

The quality of Division II athletics is high. Other students on campus see and enjoy the distinctive talents of our teams. Success in athletics competition fosters the same kind of pride throughout the campus community that is experienced at every level of collegiate athletics. Our players, fans and parents have great loyalty to our teams.

Among the benefits of Division II athletics is that neither in rules nor as a result of competitive pressures do we have minimum expectations about facilities and size of crowds in attendance at games. Whether public or private, all higher education is under considerable pressure to control costs and to find ways to devote a greater share of resources to academics. While many Division II programs have made facility investments in recent years, we have not experienced the competitive pressures for new facilities that our colleagues in nationally known programs have faced.

A simple example of the more balanced competitive pressures can be seen in coaching salaries. Markets work in every setting. Competitive pressures for top Division I programs have driven up market salaries. In Division II, the pressures to win are real, but more moderate. As a result, Division II market salaries for coaches are still below market salaries for presidents and senior administrators.

Great competition, partial scholarships and more modest facilities are a recipe for ensuring that athletics remains in proper balance with other core missions on our campuses: teaching, public service, research or other aspects of student life.

Whatever polite terms we might use for the large elephant in the living room that requires the periodic gathering of some form of Knight Commission, we know that Division II has largely been spared the headaches and diversions faced in some of the most prominent Division I universities because the structure does not yield the extraordinary competitive pressures faced by the top athletics programs in the country. The overwhelming majority of coaches and athletes in all divisions are honorable, but the ever more intense competitive pressures bring out the worst in a very small number of them -- to the general disgrace of college athletics.

Imagine what a gift it is to a university president to spend as much time worrying about the strength of your music or education program as you do about intercollegiate athletics. It also is a gift to be able to keep annual athletics operating costs in seven digits, rather than eight digits -- sometimes high eight digits. That leaves significant recurring resources for other critical university needs.

This may be one of the easiest points to make with fans and alumni of successful Division II programs who ask why the institution does not "move up." We have found that when they are informed about the added cost of being competitive in Division I, our fans and alumni express appreciation that we are staying in Division II. They are not only fans of athletics, but they are fans of Grand Valley State and they want us to succeed in all our missions; they know how important those resources are elsewhere.

Most of us find big-time college athletics one of life's great pleasures. There is no athletics event I personally like more than the NCAA Division I men's basketball tournament. Our satisfaction with Division II athletics does not cause us to wish ill for our friends in the top Division I programs. But we are concerned about the pressures, and we know that those who spend their working lives in this environment are even more concerned. The stakes are so high.

In Division II, we have the pleasure and tradition of wonderful college athletics, including being able to recruit and provide financial assistance to outstanding athletes. They know the thrill of victory, and they bring great credit to their universities. But athletics remains in good balance with our core educational mission. It is a solid part of the well-balanced university, enriching student life, and firmly under the control of the same administration that controls the rest of the university.

I hope the membership can keep Division II strong in the years ahead, and I hope the NCAA as an organization takes positive steps to assist us in keeping our important place in the diversity of collegiate athletics.

Mark Murray is president of Grand Valley State University.