Was listening to The Roundtable today...a local sports radio show in Birmingham...and they began an interesting topic.
You're probably not familiar with Gene Hallman, but he's a sports marketing guru from Birmingham and a South Carolina graduate. Keep in mind, this guy has been in Birmingham for decades and has worked with SEC officials on multiple projects so I'm sure he has some of the best insight one could find on a topic like this.
After speaking to Hallman on a regular basis, one of the hosts of the show said there could be a major shift in how the Power leagues are structured by 2025. According to Hallman, he speaks with other people in the industry who believe this will be how it plays out:
The crux of it being that the Power leagues would finally separate and form their own division. The G5 as we currently know them would also have their own division and their own playoff.
Notice, this isn't a proclamation of a split from the NCAA, but a split from what we understand as FBS.
I wasn't able to listen to the whole conversation, but I found the topic interesting and certainly that people in influential positions of college athletics thinks its heading that way sooner than later.
A couple of questions for the gallery to discuss assuming this all plays out...
1. How does this affect realignment within the Power leagues?
2. Are there any G5s that make it into the club for the purpose of maintaining competitive balance?
(09-29-2016 04:03 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]Was listening to The Roundtable today...a local sports radio show in Birmingham...and they began an interesting topic.
You're probably not familiar with Gene Hallman, but he's a sports marketing guru from Birmingham and a South Carolina graduate. Keep in mind, this guy has been in Birmingham for decades and has worked with SEC officials on multiple projects so I'm sure he has some of the best insight one could find on a topic like this.
After speaking to Hallman on a regular basis, one of the hosts of the show said there could be a major shift in how the Power leagues are structured by 2025. According to Hallman, he speaks with other people in the industry who believe this will be how it plays out:
The crux of it being that the Power leagues would finally separate and form their own division. The G5 as we currently know them would also have their own division and their own playoff.
Notice, this isn't a proclamation of a split from the NCAA, but a split from what we understand as FBS.
I wasn't able to listen to the whole conversation, but I found the topic interesting and certainly that people in influential positions of college athletics thinks its heading that way sooner than later.
A couple of questions for the gallery to discuss assuming this all plays out...
1. How does this affect realignment within the Power leagues?
2. Are there any G5s that make it into the club for the purpose of maintaining competitive balance?
For the sake of a structure that produces an on field champion the P5 becomes the P4 and the G5 becomes the G4. The rest is pretty easy.
(09-29-2016 04:07 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2016 04:03 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]Was listening to The Roundtable today...a local sports radio show in Birmingham...and they began an interesting topic.
You're probably not familiar with Gene Hallman, but he's a sports marketing guru from Birmingham and a South Carolina graduate. Keep in mind, this guy has been in Birmingham for decades and has worked with SEC officials on multiple projects so I'm sure he has some of the best insight one could find on a topic like this.
After speaking to Hallman on a regular basis, one of the hosts of the show said there could be a major shift in how the Power leagues are structured by 2025. According to Hallman, he speaks with other people in the industry who believe this will be how it plays out:
The crux of it being that the Power leagues would finally separate and form their own division. The G5 as we currently know them would also have their own division and their own playoff.
Notice, this isn't a proclamation of a split from the NCAA, but a split from what we understand as FBS.
I wasn't able to listen to the whole conversation, but I found the topic interesting and certainly that people in influential positions of college athletics thinks its heading that way sooner than later.
A couple of questions for the gallery to discuss assuming this all plays out...
1. How does this affect realignment within the Power leagues?
2. Are there any G5s that make it into the club for the purpose of maintaining competitive balance?
For the sake of a structure that produces an on field champion the P5 becomes the P4 and the G5 becomes the G4. The rest is pretty easy.
I guess what I'm getting at is if this P4 emerges(and I know it probably will) then does that really affect our perspectives on expansion?
If it's all about maximizing revenue then there's no need to get anything done anytime soon. That means the leagues wait and take a select handful of Big 12 schools. Most of them aren't worthy of inclusion unto themselves.
So if the administrators have this approach as their end game then are they in cooperation or is it every man for himself?
Personally, I don't see any way much less a reason why the leagues would divide up the remnants amongst themselves. Not enough money in it.
(09-29-2016 04:18 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2016 04:07 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2016 04:03 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]Was listening to The Roundtable today...a local sports radio show in Birmingham...and they began an interesting topic.
You're probably not familiar with Gene Hallman, but he's a sports marketing guru from Birmingham and a South Carolina graduate. Keep in mind, this guy has been in Birmingham for decades and has worked with SEC officials on multiple projects so I'm sure he has some of the best insight one could find on a topic like this.
After speaking to Hallman on a regular basis, one of the hosts of the show said there could be a major shift in how the Power leagues are structured by 2025. According to Hallman, he speaks with other people in the industry who believe this will be how it plays out:
The crux of it being that the Power leagues would finally separate and form their own division. The G5 as we currently know them would also have their own division and their own playoff.
Notice, this isn't a proclamation of a split from the NCAA, but a split from what we understand as FBS.
I wasn't able to listen to the whole conversation, but I found the topic interesting and certainly that people in influential positions of college athletics thinks its heading that way sooner than later.
A couple of questions for the gallery to discuss assuming this all plays out...
1. How does this affect realignment within the Power leagues?
2. Are there any G5s that make it into the club for the purpose of maintaining competitive balance?
For the sake of a structure that produces an on field champion the P5 becomes the P4 and the G5 becomes the G4. The rest is pretty easy.
I guess what I'm getting at is if this P4 emerges(and I know it probably will) then does that really affect our perspectives on expansion?
If it's all about maximizing revenue then there's no need to get anything done anytime soon. That means the leagues wait and take a select handful of Big 12 schools. Most of them aren't worthy of inclusion unto themselves.
So if the administrators have this approach as their end game then are they in cooperation or is it every man for himself?
Personally, I don't see any way much less a reason why the leagues would divide up the remnants amongst themselves. Not enough money in it.
Of course they wait. And they are on the same page. The conflict between interested parties will be over 3 to 5 properties and where they go. ESPN has a lasso on 2 of them. FOX has a lasso on 1 of them. And the other two kind of control their own deals, but then they don't have an ally in this fight either.
(09-29-2016 04:07 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2016 04:03 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]Was listening to The Roundtable today...a local sports radio show in Birmingham...and they began an interesting topic.
You're probably not familiar with Gene Hallman, but he's a sports marketing guru from Birmingham and a South Carolina graduate. Keep in mind, this guy has been in Birmingham for decades and has worked with SEC officials on multiple projects so I'm sure he has some of the best insight one could find on a topic like this.
After speaking to Hallman on a regular basis, one of the hosts of the show said there could be a major shift in how the Power leagues are structured by 2025. According to Hallman, he speaks with other people in the industry who believe this will be how it plays out:
The crux of it being that the Power leagues would finally separate and form their own division. The G5 as we currently know them would also have their own division and their own playoff.
Notice, this isn't a proclamation of a split from the NCAA, but a split from what we understand as FBS.
I wasn't able to listen to the whole conversation, but I found the topic interesting and certainly that people in influential positions of college athletics thinks its heading that way sooner than later.
A couple of questions for the gallery to discuss assuming this all plays out...
1. How does this affect realignment within the Power leagues?
2. Are there any G5s that make it into the club for the purpose of maintaining competitive balance?
For the sake of a structure that produces an on field champion the P5 becomes the P4 and the G5 becomes the G4. The rest is pretty easy.
You think G5 board members are irritable now, a G5 only playoffs and separation from the P5 schools they loath would make then apoplectic.
(09-29-2016 05:09 PM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2016 04:07 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-29-2016 04:03 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]Was listening to The Roundtable today...a local sports radio show in Birmingham...and they began an interesting topic.
You're probably not familiar with Gene Hallman, but he's a sports marketing guru from Birmingham and a South Carolina graduate. Keep in mind, this guy has been in Birmingham for decades and has worked with SEC officials on multiple projects so I'm sure he has some of the best insight one could find on a topic like this.
After speaking to Hallman on a regular basis, one of the hosts of the show said there could be a major shift in how the Power leagues are structured by 2025. According to Hallman, he speaks with other people in the industry who believe this will be how it plays out:
The crux of it being that the Power leagues would finally separate and form their own division. The G5 as we currently know them would also have their own division and their own playoff.
Notice, this isn't a proclamation of a split from the NCAA, but a split from what we understand as FBS.
I wasn't able to listen to the whole conversation, but I found the topic interesting and certainly that people in influential positions of college athletics thinks its heading that way sooner than later.
A couple of questions for the gallery to discuss assuming this all plays out...
1. How does this affect realignment within the Power leagues?
2. Are there any G5s that make it into the club for the purpose of maintaining competitive balance?
For the sake of a structure that produces an on field champion the P5 becomes the P4 and the G5 becomes the G4. The rest is pretty easy.
You think G5 board members are irritable now, a G5 only playoffs and separation from the P5 schools they loath would make then apoplectic.
If a comatose state of existence follows the acute bout of apoplexy then I'm all for it! And my wife and kids too! My God that would be a wonderful feeling. Imagine posting on the main board and having a rational discussion without the inane at best and frequently acidic bile posts of the G5 cult of victimization constant interrupting the thread! Outstanding!
There are a few things to work out first.
I would imagine that all leagues would have to agree to schedule the same way (# of conference games, # of games against other P4 etc.)
The leagues would have to decide on the # of schools per league in both the P and G classifications and how the divisions would be structured and played.
If separation is to occur some of the decisions like those above would need to be worked out before the final pieces of CR are put into place.
(09-30-2016 07:11 AM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]There are a few things to work out first.
I would imagine that all leagues would have to agree to schedule the same way (# of conference games, # of games against other P4 etc.)
The leagues would have to decide on the # of schools per league in both the P and G classifications and how the divisions would be structured and played.
If separation is to occur some of the decisions like those above would need to be worked out before the final pieces of CR are put into place.
I don't think anything would be required but the # of P games to be the same. The PAC could stay at 12, and the number of schools in the SEC, Big 10 and ACC could all vary as long as each conference produced a champion on the field and each played the same # of P games (conference & OOC combined).
How do you draw the line between the new divisions? If you set the bar to high some current P schools would have to drop out. Set it to low & there would be a swarm of G5 schools suing to get in. About 80 in the new division would take care of the ones with the best cases & give W's to the top teams, don't you think?
(09-30-2016 09:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ]How do you draw the line between the new divisions? If you set the bar to high some current P schools would have to drop out. Set it to low & there would be a swarm of G5 schools suing to get in. About 80 in the new division would take care of the ones with the best cases & give W's to the top teams, don't you think?
You set minimum standards on a variety of things that influence profitability.
You set a minimum investment level for athletic Departments: 80 million plus or minus 5 million.
You set a minimum for stadium capacity: 75,000 for starters
You set limits and maximums for the stipends of players: Can be voted on by existing P members.
You set an academic mean and permit membership if schools come within a certain percentage of that mean.
You require a certain number of men's and women's sports to be offered and require a core of certain sports within those: Football, Baseball, Basketball, Softball, Soccer, Swimming and Diving, Track & Field (Indoor & Outdoor), Gymnastics
Then if a G5 school wants inclusion they know the metrics and the levels of investment required to make the move.
Then you set a requirement that when G5 programs grow to P levels that conferences must wait until they can add them in pairs. Therefore when two G5 schools meet the minimums they may be assimilated in an orderly fashion based primarily upon geography, but in ways that enable scheduling for existing conference members to be reshuffled easily.
(09-30-2016 09:56 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 09:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ]How do you draw the line between the new divisions? If you set the bar to high some current P schools would have to drop out. Set it to low & there would be a swarm of G5 schools suing to get in. About 80 in the new division would take care of the ones with the best cases & give W's to the top teams, don't you think?
You set minimum standards on a variety of things that influence profitability.
You set a minimum investment level for athletic Departments: 80 million plus or minus 5 million.
You set a minimum for stadium capacity: 75,000 for starters
You set limits and maximums for the stipends of players: Can be voted on by existing P members.
You set an academic mean and permit membership if schools come within a certain percentage of that mean.
You require a certain number of men's and women's sports to be offered and require a core of certain sports within those: Football, Baseball, Basketball, Softball, Soccer, Swimming and Diving, Track & Field (Indoor & Outdoor), Gymnastics
Then if a G5 school wants inclusion they know the metrics and the levels of investment required to make the move.
Then you set a requirement that when G5 programs grow to P levels that conferences must wait until they can add them in pairs. Therefore when two G5 schools meet the minimums they may be assimilated in an orderly fashion based primarily upon geography, but in ways that enable scheduling for existing conference members to be reshuffled easily.
The general logic makes sense, but you do realize there are only 21 schools with stadiums bigger than 75k....that high of a minimum standard would never be agreed upon.
(09-30-2016 09:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ]How do you draw the line between the new divisions? If you set the bar to high some current P schools would have to drop out. Set it to low & there would be a swarm of G5 schools suing to get in. About 80 in the new division would take care of the ones with the best cases & give W's to the top teams, don't you think?
If they completely blow everything up then 80 would be an interesting number because you could have 8, 10 team leagues with 9 game conference schedules and 3 OOC games.
Then you could have a 8 team playoffs with the 8 conference champs getting bids, of course I'd think they would want some sort of minimum ranking for the conference champ...or else lose your automatic slot in that year's playoff.
If you could somehow get all 80 together to negotiate combined media rights then the bargaining power would be incredible...the networks would have little choice not to agree if they wanted any quality CFB to air.
(09-30-2016 09:56 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 09:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ]How do you draw the line between the new divisions? If you set the bar to high some current P schools would have to drop out. Set it to low & there would be a swarm of G5 schools suing to get in. About 80 in the new division would take care of the ones with the best cases & give W's to the top teams, don't you think?
You set minimum standards on a variety of things that influence profitability.
You set a minimum investment level for athletic Departments: 80 million plus or minus 5 million.
You set a minimum for stadium capacity: 75,000 for starters
You set limits and maximums for the stipends of players: Can be voted on by existing P members.
You set an academic mean and permit membership if schools come within a certain percentage of that mean.
You require a certain number of men's and women's sports to be offered and require a core of certain sports within those: Football, Baseball, Basketball, Softball, Soccer, Swimming and Diving, Track & Field (Indoor & Outdoor), Gymnastics
Then if a G5 school wants inclusion they know the metrics and the levels of investment required to make the move.
Then you set a requirement that when G5 programs grow to P levels that conferences must wait until they can add them in pairs. Therefore when two G5 schools meet the minimums they may be assimilated in an orderly fashion based primarily upon geography, but in ways that enable scheduling for existing conference members to be reshuffled easily.
If you are not going to set membership numbers or games against other P4 schools, there is no way that you will institute that litany of requirements.
(09-30-2016 11:56 AM)tcufrog86 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 09:56 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 09:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ]How do you draw the line between the new divisions? If you set the bar to high some current P schools would have to drop out. Set it to low & there would be a swarm of G5 schools suing to get in. About 80 in the new division would take care of the ones with the best cases & give W's to the top teams, don't you think?
You set minimum standards on a variety of things that influence profitability.
You set a minimum investment level for athletic Departments: 80 million plus or minus 5 million.
You set a minimum for stadium capacity: 75,000 for starters
You set limits and maximums for the stipends of players: Can be voted on by existing P members.
You set an academic mean and permit membership if schools come within a certain percentage of that mean.
You require a certain number of men's and women's sports to be offered and require a core of certain sports within those: Football, Baseball, Basketball, Softball, Soccer, Swimming and Diving, Track & Field (Indoor & Outdoor), Gymnastics
Then if a G5 school wants inclusion they know the metrics and the levels of investment required to make the move.
Then you set a requirement that when G5 programs grow to P levels that conferences must wait until they can add them in pairs. Therefore when two G5 schools meet the minimums they may be assimilated in an orderly fashion based primarily upon geography, but in ways that enable scheduling for existing conference members to be reshuffled easily.
The general logic makes sense, but you do realize there are only 21 schools with stadiums bigger than 75k....that high of a minimum standard would never be agreed upon.
Yes I did know that. I think the SEC has 12 of them and the Big 10 most of the rest. I think though the rule would be for new applicants only and that existing P5's would be grandfathered in with the recommendation to grow their facilities. The point here is not to exclude present members, but rather to make sure that a G5 stepping up was dead serious about competing and not just looking to get their snout in the trough.
(09-30-2016 12:01 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 09:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ]How do you draw the line between the new divisions? If you set the bar to high some current P schools would have to drop out. Set it to low & there would be a swarm of G5 schools suing to get in. About 80 in the new division would take care of the ones with the best cases & give W's to the top teams, don't you think?
If they completely blow everything up then 80 would be an interesting number because you could have 8, 10 team leagues with 9 game conference schedules and 3 OOC games.
Then you could have a 8 team playoffs with the 8 conference champs getting bids, of course I'd think they would want some sort of minimum ranking for the conference champ...or else lose your automatic slot in that year's playoff.
If you could somehow get all 80 together to negotiate combined media rights then the bargaining power would be incredible...the networks would have little choice not to agree if they wanted any quality CFB to air.
Or, 4 conferences with 20 members and regionally grouped divisions. Everyone forgets that each conference office takes 1 full share of the conference profits for overhead and salaries. By having 8 conferences you double your overhead and lose 4 full shares of revenue.
(09-30-2016 12:51 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 11:56 AM)tcufrog86 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 09:56 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 09:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ]How do you draw the line between the new divisions? If you set the bar to high some current P schools would have to drop out. Set it to low & there would be a swarm of G5 schools suing to get in. About 80 in the new division would take care of the ones with the best cases & give W's to the top teams, don't you think?
You set minimum standards on a variety of things that influence profitability.
You set a minimum investment level for athletic Departments: 80 million plus or minus 5 million.
You set a minimum for stadium capacity: 75,000 for starters
You set limits and maximums for the stipends of players: Can be voted on by existing P members.
You set an academic mean and permit membership if schools come within a certain percentage of that mean.
You require a certain number of men's and women's sports to be offered and require a core of certain sports within those: Football, Baseball, Basketball, Softball, Soccer, Swimming and Diving, Track & Field (Indoor & Outdoor), Gymnastics
Then if a G5 school wants inclusion they know the metrics and the levels of investment required to make the move.
Then you set a requirement that when G5 programs grow to P levels that conferences must wait until they can add them in pairs. Therefore when two G5 schools meet the minimums they may be assimilated in an orderly fashion based primarily upon geography, but in ways that enable scheduling for existing conference members to be reshuffled easily.
The general logic makes sense, but you do realize there are only 21 schools with stadiums bigger than 75k....that high of a minimum standard would never be agreed upon.
Yes I did know that. I think the SEC has 12 of them and the Big 10 most of the rest. I think though the rule would be for new applicants only and that existing P5's would be grandfathered in with the recommendation to grow their facilities. The point here is not to exclude present members, but rather to make sure that a G5 stepping up was dead serious about competing and not just looking to get their snout in the trough.
Yep the SEC has 8 and Big 10 has 6 already over that 75k mark. PAC 12, ACC, and Big 12 all each only have 2...then there is ND.
Somewhere in the 50k to 60k range would likely be most logical...today that is where you really see the cutoff between today's power conference stadiums and the non power conference stadiums (especially if you take out the NFL stadiums that non power 5 teams play in).
Washington State (32k) and Wake (31k) are the only two that I see that appear to be on the extreme small side.
(09-30-2016 12:53 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 12:01 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 09:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ]How do you draw the line between the new divisions? If you set the bar to high some current P schools would have to drop out. Set it to low & there would be a swarm of G5 schools suing to get in. About 80 in the new division would take care of the ones with the best cases & give W's to the top teams, don't you think?
If they completely blow everything up then 80 would be an interesting number because you could have 8, 10 team leagues with 9 game conference schedules and 3 OOC games.
Then you could have a 8 team playoffs with the 8 conference champs getting bids, of course I'd think they would want some sort of minimum ranking for the conference champ...or else lose your automatic slot in that year's playoff.
If you could somehow get all 80 together to negotiate combined media rights then the bargaining power would be incredible...the networks would have little choice not to agree if they wanted any quality CFB to air.
Or, 4 conferences with 20 members and regionally grouped divisions. Everyone forgets that each conference office takes 1 full share of the conference profits for overhead and salaries. By having 8 conferences you double your overhead and lose 4 full shares of revenue.
Definitely the overhead would need to be taken into account....although in my scenario (albeit extremely far fetched) i envisioned a single governing body of the 80 power teams similar to how the NFL or MLB governs all their teams. But i never expect things to fully blow up and get re-organized so a model like you talk of would be more likely with the Big 12 going away and everyone else moving to 20 teams.
(09-30-2016 12:51 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 11:56 AM)tcufrog86 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 09:56 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 09:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ]How do you draw the line between the new divisions? If you set the bar to high some current P schools would have to drop out. Set it to low & there would be a swarm of G5 schools suing to get in. About 80 in the new division would take care of the ones with the best cases & give W's to the top teams, don't you think?
You set minimum standards on a variety of things that influence profitability.
You set a minimum investment level for athletic Departments: 80 million plus or minus 5 million.
You set a minimum for stadium capacity: 75,000 for starters
You set limits and maximums for the stipends of players: Can be voted on by existing P members.
You set an academic mean and permit membership if schools come within a certain percentage of that mean.
You require a certain number of men's and women's sports to be offered and require a core of certain sports within those: Football, Baseball, Basketball, Softball, Soccer, Swimming and Diving, Track & Field (Indoor & Outdoor), Gymnastics
Then if a G5 school wants inclusion they know the metrics and the levels of investment required to make the move.
Then you set a requirement that when G5 programs grow to P levels that conferences must wait until they can add them in pairs. Therefore when two G5 schools meet the minimums they may be assimilated in an orderly fashion based primarily upon geography, but in ways that enable scheduling for existing conference members to be reshuffled easily.
The general logic makes sense, but you do realize there are only 21 schools with stadiums bigger than 75k....that high of a minimum standard would never be agreed upon.
Yes I did know that. I think the SEC has 12 of them and the Big 10 most of the rest. I think though the rule would be for new applicants only and that existing P5's would be grandfathered in with the recommendation to grow their facilities. The point here is not to exclude present members, but rather to make sure that a G5 stepping up was dead serious about competing and not just looking to get their snout in the trough.
Can they get away with that though?
My understanding is that every current member of the FBS must meet certain requirements to stay in FBS. I think NCAA bylaws require it to be so. The new division would have to take a similar approach if it intended on staying within the NCAA framework.
I know concessions of some sort could be made because everybody wants more money, but I think they'll have to come up with something all current P5s can meet.
(09-30-2016 06:06 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 12:51 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 11:56 AM)tcufrog86 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 09:56 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2016 09:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ]How do you draw the line between the new divisions? If you set the bar to high some current P schools would have to drop out. Set it to low & there would be a swarm of G5 schools suing to get in. About 80 in the new division would take care of the ones with the best cases & give W's to the top teams, don't you think?
You set minimum standards on a variety of things that influence profitability.
You set a minimum investment level for athletic Departments: 80 million plus or minus 5 million.
You set a minimum for stadium capacity: 75,000 for starters
You set limits and maximums for the stipends of players: Can be voted on by existing P members.
You set an academic mean and permit membership if schools come within a certain percentage of that mean.
You require a certain number of men's and women's sports to be offered and require a core of certain sports within those: Football, Baseball, Basketball, Softball, Soccer, Swimming and Diving, Track & Field (Indoor & Outdoor), Gymnastics
Then if a G5 school wants inclusion they know the metrics and the levels of investment required to make the move.
Then you set a requirement that when G5 programs grow to P levels that conferences must wait until they can add them in pairs. Therefore when two G5 schools meet the minimums they may be assimilated in an orderly fashion based primarily upon geography, but in ways that enable scheduling for existing conference members to be reshuffled easily.
The general logic makes sense, but you do realize there are only 21 schools with stadiums bigger than 75k....that high of a minimum standard would never be agreed upon.
Yes I did know that. I think the SEC has 12 of them and the Big 10 most of the rest. I think though the rule would be for new applicants only and that existing P5's would be grandfathered in with the recommendation to grow their facilities. The point here is not to exclude present members, but rather to make sure that a G5 stepping up was dead serious about competing and not just looking to get their snout in the trough.
Can they get away with that though?
My understanding is that every current member of the FBS must meet certain requirements to stay in FBS. I think NCAA bylaws require it to be so. The new division would have to take a similar approach if it intended on staying within the NCAA framework.
I know concessions of some sort could be made because everybody wants more money, but I think they'll have to come up with something all current P5s can meet.
Don't count on the new upper division staying in the NCAA. The tell is moving to 10 conference games. I bet all P4 scheduling is right behind. If football goes exclusively P4 look for basketball to form its own division as well. Bye bye NCAA! Hello more revenue.
Establishing parameters is legally viable if we do remain.
We would have to set attendance to something even more realistic than 50k. It would have to be 30k. Some programs just simply don't have the resources or the fanbase to put an avg of 50k in the stands for an entire season. Including several current P5 programs and that won't change just because of a seperation.