(05-31-2013 09:48 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 09:13 AM)redfan Wrote:  This problem that has been brought up several times.What happens to the p5 conference members that do not play football at a level comparable to most of their conference? Including these schools would start the lawsuits. Would conferences expel schools like Kentucky to get what they want?

It is about $$$, not competition. Kentucky brings money, as does Kansas. Kentucky football brings in more money that their basketball program.

Even though this is hard to type, Yes Kentucky has one of the Best Fan bases anywhere. BB a No Brainer unreal support, FB, If a team playing at Their Best even while not winning will outdraw most SEC , ACC, B1G schools with over 60,000 fans weekly. They travel extremely well in many sports. All They needed is a Good Football coaching staff and They may have it now. Damn, My fingers are Burning !

(05-31-2013 10:47 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 10:36 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 09:54 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  The way D1 split last time was standards were set that you had to meet and if your conference wanted to meet them they could or if not they dropped. Individual schools in conferences that wanted to meet the standards but their conferences didn't could go independent.

The big boys don't want to set minimum standards now, they want new rules that will loosen some of the restrictions on themselves (for better or worse). Fewer restrictions on recruiting. Fewer bullsheet NCAA rules like the one that allowed schools to give a recruit a plain bagel but not a bagel with peanut butter on it. Fewer restrictions on the number of coaches and paid staff members, including this idea about a full-time staff of recruiters in addition to the coaching staff. Increasing the number of football scholarships -- actually that's one area where they might also set a minimum, e.g., a FBS football team would be required to offer at least 85 full scholarships. (The current maximum is 85.)

IMO, the big boys' overall goal is to make top-level CFB more expensive. It's possible that would cause many current FBS schools to reassess whether they want to spend that much money to muddle along at the middle or bottom of one of the "non-contract" leagues. So the big boys might get whatever benefits they think they'll get out of "thinning the herd" without having to forcibly remove any school from FBS.

We are actually talking about the same thing. That if there is a split in the future it will be voluntary just like last time. That schools and conferences will have to decide if they have the financial ability to do the types of things you listed. Yes the goal is the make top level football more expensive, but to make it so expensive that no current G5 schools could do it would probably eliminate the bottom of the P5 as well.

I agree, they're not going to make CFB so expensive that Wake Forest can't keep up. But they don't have to. In revenue, Wake Forest has an annual head start (on "non-contract" teams) of more than $20 million because they're in the ACC. A few schools (including yours) can easily generate enough "other" revenue to spend on football at the level Wake Forest can afford. But many cannot generate significant revenue, and would have some hard decisions to make if the costs of competing are increased.

(05-31-2013 10:47 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 10:36 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 09:54 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  The way D1 split last time was standards were set that you had to meet and if your conference wanted to meet them they could or if not they dropped. Individual schools in conferences that wanted to meet the standards but their conferences didn't could go independent.

The big boys don't want to set minimum standards now, they want new rules that will loosen some of the restrictions on themselves (for better or worse). Fewer restrictions on recruiting. Fewer bullsheet NCAA rules like the one that allowed schools to give a recruit a plain bagel but not a bagel with peanut butter on it. Fewer restrictions on the number of coaches and paid staff members, including this idea about a full-time staff of recruiters in addition to the coaching staff. Increasing the number of football scholarships -- actually that's one area where they might also set a minimum, e.g., a FBS football team would be required to offer at least 85 full scholarships. (The current maximum is 85.)

IMO, the big boys' overall goal is to make top-level CFB more expensive. It's possible that would cause many current FBS schools to reassess whether they want to spend that much money to muddle along at the middle or bottom of one of the "non-contract" leagues. So the big boys might get whatever benefits they think they'll get out of "thinning the herd" without having to forcibly remove any school from FBS.

We are actually talking about the same thing. That if there is a split in the future it will be voluntary just like last time. That schools and conferences will have to decide if they have the financial ability to do the types of things you listed. Yes the goal is the make top level football more expensive, but to make it so expensive that no current G5 schools could do it would probably eliminate the bottom of the P5 as well.

I do not think that this "split" could occur within the NCAA. P5 would have to withdraw to get these things. As many people have mentioned not as easy as it sounds.

(05-31-2013 09:14 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 08:35 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 07:43 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 06:05 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Its going to happen eventually. A P5 FB division within the NCAA is the best compromise.

It's going to happen and no whining from the G5 is going to stop it.

Right now there is pretty sharp divide between the conferences that average 50K+ in attendance (The P5) and the ones that average less than 30K (everybody else)

Ok sure lets make the dividing line 50k in attendance. Not to mention there's at least a dozen P5 that don't average 50k.

Conference average, not individual school average.

Ok then what's stopping ECU from going independent again and playing at the top level? Is ND going to be allowed to be independent but no one else?

(05-31-2013 09:23 AM)redfan Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 09:14 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 08:35 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 07:43 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 06:05 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Its going to happen eventually. A P5 FB division within the NCAA is the best compromise.

It's going to happen and no whining from the G5 is going to stop it.

Right now there is pretty sharp divide between the conferences that average 50K+ in attendance (The P5) and the ones that average less than 30K (everybody else)

Ok sure lets make the dividing line 50k in attendance. Not to mention there's at least a dozen P5 that don't average 50k.

Conference average, not individual school average.

Ok then what's stopping ECU from going independent again and playing at the top level? Is ND going to be allowed to be independent but no one else?

That's a good point. Sounds like a very sound basis for a lawsuit. ND would probably try to join a conference but a court would probably see this as manipulative.

ND won't get left out as an independent. Too much $$$.

Why would this cause them to join a conference? I don't see it.

If a change or breakaway happens, the Big 12 and Pac 12 will have to add programs without a doubt. the other 3 are currently at 14 each. If needed all could reach 16. This would probably mean absorbing the AAC and MWC schools into the new division. Basketball could create a 6th conference by taking the Big East and from the A10 to 16 schools. That would be around 96 schools to chose from at BB tournament time. problem is whom gets whom in the AAC/MWC absorbtion and whom is left behind again.

(05-31-2013 10:53 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 09:48 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 09:13 AM)redfan Wrote:  This problem that has been brought up several times.What happens to the p5 conference members that do not play football at a level comparable to most of their conference? Including these schools would start the lawsuits. Would conferences expel schools like Kentucky to get what they want?

It is about $$$, not competition. Kentucky brings money, as does Kansas. Kentucky football brings in more money that their basketball program.

Even though this is hard to type, Yes Kentucky has one of the Best Fan bases anywhere. BB a No Brainer unreal support, FB, If a team playing at Their Best even while not winning will outdraw most SEC , ACC, B1G schools with over 60,000 fans weekly. They travel extremely well in many sports. All They needed is a Good Football coaching staff and They may have it now. Damn, My fingers are Burning !

It is hard to believe that a school like Kentucky could get expelled from their conference. However the "they make lots of money argument" for inclusion while excluding others would probably not fair well in court. Arbitrary and Capricious?

Eliminate the concept of a G5 school technically able to break into the BCS bowl picture, and don't you really have the predicted split in point of fact? How hard is that? And what really changes for us (at the G5 level)?

(05-31-2013 10:57 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 09:14 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 08:35 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 07:43 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 06:05 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Its going to happen eventually. A P5 FB division within the NCAA is the best compromise.

It's going to happen and no whining from the G5 is going to stop it.

Right now there is pretty sharp divide between the conferences that average 50K+ in attendance (The P5) and the ones that average less than 30K (everybody else)

Ok sure lets make the dividing line 50k in attendance. Not to mention there's at least a dozen P5 that don't average 50k.

Conference average, not individual school average.

Ok then what's stopping ECU from going independent again and playing at the top level? Is ND going to be allowed to be independent but no one else?

(05-31-2013 09:23 AM)redfan Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 09:14 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 08:35 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 07:43 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Ok sure lets make the dividing line 50k in attendance. Not to mention there's at least a dozen P5 that don't average 50k.

Conference average, not individual school average.

Ok then what's stopping ECU from going independent again and playing at the top level? Is ND going to be allowed to be independent but no one else?

That's a good point. Sounds like a very sound basis for a lawsuit. ND would probably try to join a conference but a court would probably see this as manipulative.

ND won't get left out as an independent. Too much $$$.

Why would this cause them to join a conference? I don't see it.

The question was about being independent and not having to meet average conference attendance. If another school like ECU was not allowed to meet attendance requirements by becoming a independent why would ND continue to be allowed to do so. This assumes the rule change to requiring schools to meet conference avg attendance.

(05-30-2013 11:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 10:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 10:43 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I don't see much happening for the time being. It seems as though the SEC is happy with the current setup. And ain't nobody doing nothing without the SEC. Then there are the University Presidents, many of whom would be very reluctant to hand over power to the ADs. Then there are certain P5 schools, which would have trouble keeping up in a football world where they are the very bottom of the totem pole (think Minnesota, Iowa State, Baylor, Indiana, Wake Forest, Washington State, etc.). Then there's the issue of the NCAA basketball tournament.

Then there's another issue. That the G5 schools might simply break away from the NCAA in response.

I'm not so sure that there aren't basketball only schools that would join the P5 to be able to pay stipends. If that were to occur then I believe that the actual breakaway could be as high as 84 - 96 schools with between 65 to 68 of them being football members and the rest basketball only. The implications for this would mean that the NCAA tournament would be in jeopardy as it now stands as well and that those programs would be looking to keep more of their revenue for themselves.

While I don't think such a move is imminent, movement by basketball only schools as well is probably something that has not been considered enough. Imagine if you will what a Big 10 Network could offer in content should it also include basketball only schools from the Big East in its Winter lineup, or if the ACCN or SECN included games from Southern Conference, or Colonial piggybacked onto its network for additional content. For that matter even teams from the MVC could offer content value. They may earn more, gain more exposure, and keep more of their tournament money in a new breakaway association with new governance.

If a split occurs, the biggest question will be--What will define elligibility for inclusion in the top level of college sports? Will it simply be membership in a P-5 conference---or will the division be created by clearly defined criteria that apply to individual schools rather than to whole conferences.

I think for the football playing schools there will be a definite set of criteria and for the basketball only schools a separate but equally definite set of criteria and they would not have to be in one of the P5 conferences. There would probably be room for at least 2 basketball only conferences in the upper tier in addition to the P4 or P5.

(05-31-2013 11:13 AM)redfan Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 10:53 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 09:48 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 09:13 AM)redfan Wrote:  This problem that has been brought up several times.What happens to the p5 conference members that do not play football at a level comparable to most of their conference? Including these schools would start the lawsuits. Would conferences expel schools like Kentucky to get what they want?

It is about $$$, not competition. Kentucky brings money, as does Kansas. Kentucky football brings in more money that their basketball program.

Even though this is hard to type, Yes Kentucky has one of the Best Fan bases anywhere. BB a No Brainer unreal support, FB, If a team playing at Their Best even while not winning will outdraw most SEC , ACC, B1G schools with over 60,000 fans weekly. They travel extremely well in many sports. All They needed is a Good Football coaching staff and They may have it now. Damn, My fingers are Burning !

It is hard to believe that a school like Kentucky could get expelled from their conference. However the "they make lots of money argument" for inclusion while excluding others would probably not fair well in court. Arbitrary and Capricious?

It goes the other way, as well. Good luck to these conferences to expel an educational member based on athletic performance, especially a founding member. You can't be short-sighted about these things, either. I know UK specifically is not the point, but every program has ups and downs (prime example is Colorado). UK's all time football record is 579-583-44 (49.8 winning %). That looks pretty darn average to me, and average, by definition, is where most people/places/things land. It is more about the relationship than the wins and losses. I guarantee that the titans of college football prefer to keep some of the weaker teams with higher prestige/exposure, anyway. The last few years, has there been a major different in UK or WKU football? Not really, but which school turns the dial and gets the BBN marching?

(05-31-2013 01:29 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 11:13 AM)redfan Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 10:53 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 09:48 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 09:13 AM)redfan Wrote:  This problem that has been brought up several times.What happens to the p5 conference members that do not play football at a level comparable to most of their conference? Including these schools would start the lawsuits. Would conferences expel schools like Kentucky to get what they want?

It is about $$$, not competition. Kentucky brings money, as does Kansas. Kentucky football brings in more money that their basketball program.

Even though this is hard to type, Yes Kentucky has one of the Best Fan bases anywhere. BB a No Brainer unreal support, FB, If a team playing at Their Best even while not winning will outdraw most SEC , ACC, B1G schools with over 60,000 fans weekly. They travel extremely well in many sports. All They needed is a Good Football coaching staff and They may have it now. Damn, My fingers are Burning !

It is hard to believe that a school like Kentucky could get expelled from their conference. However the "they make lots of money argument" for inclusion while excluding others would probably not fair well in court. Arbitrary and Capricious?

It goes the other way, as well. Good luck to these conferences to expel an educational member based on athletic performance, especially a founding member. You can't be short-sighted about these things, either. I know UK specifically is not the point, but every program has ups and downs (prime example is Colorado). UK's all time football record is 579-583-44 (49.8 winning %). That looks pretty darn average to me, and average, by definition, is where most people/places/things land. It is more about the relationship than the wins and losses. I guarantee that the titans of college football prefer to keep some of the weaker teams with higher prestige/exposure, anyway. The last few years, has there been a major different in UK or WKU football? Not really, but which school turns the dial and gets the BBN marching?

And every school would be making these same type of arguments. I do not see a easy path to having two sets of rules within the NCAA. It may be possible if the P5 withdraws but that has its own multiple problems political and legal.

(05-30-2013 08:08 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  I can see it happening this way. However, I don't think it's as easy as drawing a line between P5 / G5 and calling it a day.

Get rid of Sunbelt, Conf-USA, and MAC. Keep AAC and MWC. Then add teams from the rest of the crop to round out those 7 conferences.

(05-31-2013 01:51 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 08:08 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  I can see it happening this way. However, I don't think it's as easy as drawing a line between P5 / G5 and calling it a day.

Get rid of Sunbelt, Conf-USA, and MAC. Keep AAC and MWC. Then add teams from the rest of the crop to round out those 7 conferences.

How do you go about getting rid of a conference? They might have something to say about that...

(05-31-2013 01:51 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 08:08 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  I can see it happening this way. However, I don't think it's as easy as drawing a line between P5 / G5 and calling it a day.

Get rid of Sunbelt, Conf-USA, and MAC. Keep AAC and MWC. Then add teams from the rest of the crop to round out those 7 conferences.

Don't think that the NCAA could or would get rid of conferences. They are the only governing body at the moment.

(05-31-2013 02:05 PM)redfan Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 01:51 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 08:08 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  I can see it happening this way. However, I don't think it's as easy as drawing a line between P5 / G5 and calling it a day.

Get rid of Sunbelt, Conf-USA, and MAC. Keep AAC and MWC. Then add teams from the rest of the crop to round out those 7 conferences.

Don't think that the NCAA could or would get rid of conferences. They are the only governing body at the moment.

The NCAA could not and would never order a conference disbanded. The first lawsuit would be filed by the network who contracted with the conference. Immediately followed by the schools who suffered massive financial damage... Let's not be ridiculous...

(05-31-2013 01:51 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 08:08 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  I can see it happening this way. However, I don't think it's as easy as drawing a line between P5 / G5 and calling it a day.

Get rid of Sunbelt, Conf-USA, and MAC. Keep AAC and MWC. Then add teams from the rest of the crop to round out those 7 conferences.

We're not leaving voluntarily this time.

(05-30-2013 10:06 PM)krux Wrote:  If they split, is the math there...as is...to play themselves exclusively? Or would a few more teams/conferences have to be added?

the math is there but would a Duke or an Indiana want to play big boy teams every week instead of a cupcake or two to start off the season?

we all know that the smaller schools make a big chunk of change off of the big boys in playing body-bag games

if a Marshall didn't get the payout from playing Virginia Tech or an Ohio State, the athletic department would take a serious hit and it would fall on the students to make up the shortfall or else the athletic department would be forced to make cuts and fall even further behind the big boys

(05-31-2013 11:11 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 02:05 PM)redfan Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 01:51 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 08:08 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  I can see it happening this way. However, I don't think it's as easy as drawing a line between P5 / G5 and calling it a day.

Get rid of Sunbelt, Conf-USA, and MAC. Keep AAC and MWC. Then add teams from the rest of the crop to round out those 7 conferences.

Don't think that the NCAA could or would get rid of conferences. They are the only governing body at the moment.

The NCAA could not and would never order a conference disbanded. The first lawsuit would be filed by the network who contracted with the conference. Immediately followed by the schools who suffered massive financial damage... Let's not be ridiculous...

I can't imagine the NCAA saying to a conference that they would have disband immediately. They would have to give the schools time to find new homes and I can certainly see giving them enough time for any media contracts to run out.

(05-31-2013 11:54 PM)Theodoresdaddy Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 11:11 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 02:05 PM)redfan Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 01:51 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 08:08 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  I can see it happening this way. However, I don't think it's as easy as drawing a line between P5 / G5 and calling it a day.

Get rid of Sunbelt, Conf-USA, and MAC. Keep AAC and MWC. Then add teams from the rest of the crop to round out those 7 conferences.

Don't think that the NCAA could or would get rid of conferences. They are the only governing body at the moment.

The NCAA could not and would never order a conference disbanded. The first lawsuit would be filed by the network who contracted with the conference. Immediately followed by the schools who suffered massive financial damage... Let's not be ridiculous...

I can't imagine the NCAA saying to a conference that they would have disband immediately. They would have to give the schools time to find new homes and I can certainly see giving them enough time for any media contracts to run out.

Only in bizzarro world.

There is no telling where the lawsuits might lead as the NCAA members devoured each other.

(06-01-2013 12:00 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 11:54 PM)Theodoresdaddy Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 11:11 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 02:05 PM)redfan Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 01:51 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Get rid of Sunbelt, Conf-USA, and MAC. Keep AAC and MWC. Then add teams from the rest of the crop to round out those 7 conferences.

Don't think that the NCAA could or would get rid of conferences. They are the only governing body at the moment.

The NCAA could not and would never order a conference disbanded. The first lawsuit would be filed by the network who contracted with the conference. Immediately followed by the schools who suffered massive financial damage... Let's not be ridiculous...

I can't imagine the NCAA saying to a conference that they would have disband immediately. They would have to give the schools time to find new homes and I can certainly see giving them enough time for any media contracts to run out.

Only in bizzarro world.

There is no telling where the lawsuits might lead as the NCAA members devoured each other.

My point here...