(07-16-2013 07:48 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:45 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:11 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:06 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  Since the P5 teams won't play G5 teams on a level playing field, maybe they might as well break away officially. They've mostly done it already.

So who's going to watch their NCAA March Madness tourney when Washington State plays Boston College while UConn, Georgetown, and Memphis are barred from competing?

Who's to say the P5 wouldn't split (all sports) and take the Big East basketball conference, as well as the West Coast Conference with them..?

That way, Georgetown, Butler and Gonzaga are covered.

I could see that happen very easily in the event of a split from the NCAA.

UConn, Memphis, Cincinnati, Temple > Georgetown, Butler, Gonzaga

That's 5 Men's NCAA championships vs. just 1.

(07-16-2013 08:28 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 05:47 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:11 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 03:37 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/...out_sports

During his remarks at SEC Media Days today, Commissioner Mike Slive made some really curious remarks.

Quote:Speaking at his address to kick off SEC Media Days, Slive said determining the proper role, function, composition and size of the board of directors should be addressed. Slive also questioned whether members need all of the services provided by the NCAA office and wants streamlined NCAA committee processes.

Quote:During an interview after the speech, Slive would not specify what changes he would like to see with the board of directors structure. Rather, he said, the NCAA's ongoing review of its governance structure should be realistic, include all constituents and the NCAA should decide what the nature of the board should be.

Quote:Slive said conferences and their members "must be allowed to meet the needs" of their athletes.

"In recent conversations with my commissioner colleagues, there appears to be a willingness to support a meaningful solution to this important change," he said. "... I think I really do speak for my colleagues when I say we want the NCAA to be an effective organization, and the conversation stops there."

When asked what's the alternative to the NCAA not changing, Slive replied, "I'm going to let you decide that."

To be clear, Slive says he wants changes made to the scope and direction of the Board of Directors (a panel within the NCAA that is comprised of 18 university presidents, 11 from FBS (or former FBS) conferences and 7 from the rest of D1), but does not specify what he thinks those changes should be.

It's almost comical to hear him say these things when his own university presidents are ones who continue to shoot down some of those very same proposals that he advocates. Then the media jumps on the bandwagon to say that the top of FBS needs to break away because the small schools are holding them back. Yet it isn't only the small schools that submit override proposals for new legislation.

I think that the P5 schools should form a new division and the g5 schools would be treated like FCS schools are now. They would have their own thing going on, but they would be allowed to play P5 schools. I think that the biggest difference between the two divisions should be player stipends.

I don't think that a complete break from the NCAA is a good idea.

Nope. The G5 have to say no and send them packing lock, stock, and barrel. No having their cake and eating it to.

No scheduling, no NCAA tourney, no Olympic sports. They can go semi-pro in all sports or none.

There is no way the G5 schools say no. None. Zip. Zero. And everyone knows it. If the G5 can stay with the P5 they will. History shows this.

Sure, their leadership are either weinies or are hoping to be leading Bama someday or both.

Yet I am correct in what they SHOULD do.

They are in a prisoner's dilemma.

If they all stuck together and said NO then the bluff would be called and college sports would be better for it.

The P5 would most likely balk at having to completely break away in all sports and balk at completely losing influence over college sports as a whole.

There isn't enough money to gain to make splitting a great idea and certainly not enough to deal with the blowback of the inevitable litigation.

The far more likely out come?

Rebalancing the Board of Directors to retain the FBS control of legislation and revamping the procedure to call for a full membership vote for challenged items (like the stipend).

Do you know what it costs to be a member of the NCAA? Between $900 and $1800 a year depending on which division you are in.

An NAIA member offering 10 sports will pay roughly $17,000 to $20,0000 per year just to be a member between the membership dues, annual software fee for statistical software used for reporting contest results, participation in the catastrophic insurance program, and their share of dues that their conference must pay.

The NAIA has lost a lot of membership over the past three decades because non-scholarship and low scholarship programs figured out that they could save the cost of an assistant coach simply moving from the NAIA to the NCAA and more importantly when they were selected for a national championship, the NCAA would pick up far more of the cost associated with traveling to play in the championship events.

The decision to not charge the members dues in line with the services provided has increased the size of the NCAA. Couple that with the distribution of cash to Division I members out of the six funds and a school that played scholarship ball and sponsored quite a few sports at the top limit of the NAIA could move to Division II and come out ahead financially. If that same school already offered 14 sports or close to it, could move to Division I, offer 50% of the maximum allowed scholarships to be Division I and if they could land in a geographically sensible conference and make more money than they did in Division II without making in any significant increase in their commitment.

Imagine now an NCAA where 100% of the association's budget came from dues and assessments.
Say $15,000 annually from Division III schools, $25,000 annually from Division II schools, $50,000 from Division I with an added $50,000 for playing FBS. Those dues would pay the overhead of the NCAA and with the membership having to pay the administrative costs many of the "services" and "programs" the NCAA counts toward what it turns back to the members would cease to exist if providing those programs and services increased their annual dues.

So now we have roughly $800 million in unattached NCAA revenue. How to split it up? Well we could just use basketball units. A unit (assuming a six year payout like now) nearly quadruples in value. Or maybe you follow the BCS model and the P5 skim about $125 million each off the top. The G26 would get just over $2 million each with the weakest league getting an added $170,000 and the highest of the G26 getting an added $4.45 million.

(07-16-2013 03:46 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  If they want to go semi-pro let them go semi-pro and deal with all the associated issues.

But make them leave the NCAA in all sports. No cake and eat it too.

As if that makes any f'ing difference?

No matter where those big 5 conferences go they will take all the football and postseason basketball money with them.

(07-16-2013 06:53 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 05:47 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Nope. The G5 have to say no and send them packing lock, stock, and barrel. No having their cake and eating it to.

No scheduling, no NCAA tourney, no Olympic sports. They can go semi-pro in all sports or none.

I think that would hurt the g5 more than the P5.

Only way the G5 or the G5 + say Big East, Valley, WCC, A10 could take on the P5 would be to act united and have the right leadership who spent plenty of time touting how the P5 were too chicken to play them and the G5 champ was the true champ, but last I heard Lamar Hunt and Al Davis were still dead.

(07-16-2013 10:01 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 06:53 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 05:47 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Nope. The G5 have to say no and send them packing lock, stock, and barrel. No having their cake and eating it to.

No scheduling, no NCAA tourney, no Olympic sports. They can go semi-pro in all sports or none.

I think that would hurt the g5 more than the P5.

Only way the G5 or the G5 + say Big East, Valley, WCC, A10 could take on the P5 would be to act united and have the right leadership who spent plenty of time touting how the P5 were too chicken to play them and the G5 champ was the true champ, but last I heard Lamar Hunt and Al Davis were still dead.

Al Davis also went to a P5 school, so I don't think that zombie Al is going to do you any favors, either.

You mean like how the nation believes the FCS champ is the "real" champ because they win their playoff?

(07-16-2013 09:54 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  There isn't enough money to gain to make splitting a great idea and certainly not enough to deal with the blowback of the inevitable litigation.

The far more likely out come?

Rebalancing the Board of Directors to retain the FBS control of legislation and revamping the procedure to call for a full membership vote for challenged items (like the stipend).

I agree. The BoD needs to drop the WAC as a full voting member and could be opened up to conference administrators rather than just university presidents.

(07-16-2013 04:29 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:26 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:22 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:11 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:06 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  Since the P5 teams won't play G5 teams on a level playing field, maybe they might as well break away officially. They've mostly done it already.

So who's going to watch their NCAA March Madness tourney when Washington State plays Boston College while UConn, Georgetown, and Memphis are barred from competing?

They only want to split away in football, I'm sure. Everything is just hunky-dory in the other sports.

I wouldn't be so sure. They give a lot of basketball money up. Everyone says they need the underdogs but I think teams like Miami, Vandy, Baylor or whoever catches fire that year could fill that role.

The biggest issue there is not the money taken by the smaller conferences, but the money taken off the top by the NCAA itself.

Only about 26% of the money received by the NCAA in rights fees from CBS/TBS goes back to the schools in the form of tournament "units". The rest is kept by the NCAA and used/distributed as Emmert & Co. see fit.

See this article, and the calculations I did to arrive at the 26% figure here.

Wedge, the NCAA has rat holed over 400 million that they are drawing interest on. And almost all of that from the NCAA tournament.

(07-16-2013 10:01 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 06:53 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 05:47 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Nope. The G5 have to say no and send them packing lock, stock, and barrel. No having their cake and eating it to.

No scheduling, no NCAA tourney, no Olympic sports. They can go semi-pro in all sports or none.

I think that would hurt the g5 more than the P5.

Only way the G5 or the G5 + say Big East, Valley, WCC, A10 could take on the P5 would be to act united and have the right leadership who spent plenty of time touting how the P5 were too chicken to play them and the G5 champ was the true champ, but last I heard Lamar Hunt and Al Davis were still dead.

Obviously there is no way to surpass the P5. But you don't have to surpass the P5. You just have to craft a better position for yourself than you would have with an all-powerful breakaway P5 football division within the NCAA.

You could rework your rule-set on your own terms without interference and aim it towards carving out some additional market share. You could revisit having a combined television agreement. Freed from protecting their privileged position the remnant NCAA could get a bit more creative.

If there was a breakaway within the NCAA it would indeed be like a demotion to FCS and the disparity would be written in stone. Outside of the NCAA it would at least be a competition between college and semi-pro and you can have a shot at making your own destiny.

I personally think the P5 would back away from a complete all-sports breakaway to semi-pro status.

Unity among the non-P5 will never happen of course, the non-P5 will ultimately choose to vote themselves into a permanent ghetto within the NCAA if it is demanded.

(07-16-2013 04:32 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  I listened to a Slive interview on SIRIUS channel 91 and my interpretation was a bit different. He talked about a desire to "restructure" the NCAA in a way that hints more toward a new division, not a full breakaway. He stated those universities that have the resources to provide a student athlete with the "full cost of attendance" should be able to do so.

I see no impact here except a new division for football that provides a "full" scholarship to include some cost of livings element. No impact on basketball or other olympic sports.

I see another angle here that is going to be played. I think you are correct in that Slive's first desire is a separate division of the NCAA rather than an immediate breakaway, but if the first is not forthcoming with some degree of ease the latter will remain an option. But so far all of realignment has been about consolidation as conferences have been raided to whittle down the existing elite to 5. What better way to thin the heard some more than to take a nose count on who has the desire to pay their athletes.

This could be the issue that culls yet more private institutions and schools who are on the cusp of the P5 from some of the weaker existing members of the P5. It could be just the ticket for Connecticut and for Cincinnati should a Wake Forest decide not to pay its players. (I'm not saying Wake would fail to pay players they are just a good example of a small private school which might otherwise have found itself on the cusp of realignment.) Suddenly the Vanderbilts, Dukes, Northwesterns, and others of their ilk will have a decision to make, "all out or all in". Nobody is going to ever ask them to leave their present conferences, but an issue like this will likely cull a few of them. Then slots could be opened for the elimination of a 5th conference, or at least for the addition of the teams that want to make the commitment to be all in but have been on the fringe of acceptance or rejection.

It will depend on the stipend amounts and the total cost for all sports included in the stipend. I think all 14 SEC schools would make the jump, but I suppose there would be a bit of a decision for Vanderbilt. I think Duke and Wake would be the two in the ACC that would have to think about it, perhaps Boston College. I would think all 14 of the Big 10 would make the jump but Northwestern may have to think about it as well. The PAC may actually have a public school or two have to think about it. I believe Stanford would be all in without hesitation. Anyway if just four or five opted out consolidation could get very interesting again.

(07-16-2013 10:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:29 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:26 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:22 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:11 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  So who's going to watch their NCAA March Madness tourney when Washington State plays Boston College while UConn, Georgetown, and Memphis are barred from competing?

They only want to split away in football, I'm sure. Everything is just hunky-dory in the other sports.

I wouldn't be so sure. They give a lot of basketball money up. Everyone says they need the underdogs but I think teams like Miami, Vandy, Baylor or whoever catches fire that year could fill that role.

The biggest issue there is not the money taken by the smaller conferences, but the money taken off the top by the NCAA itself.

Only about 26% of the money received by the NCAA in rights fees from CBS/TBS goes back to the schools in the form of tournament "units". The rest is kept by the NCAA and used/distributed as Emmert & Co. see fit.

See this article, and the calculations I did to arrive at the 26% figure here.

Wedge, the NCAA has rat holed over 400 million that they are drawing interest on. And almost all of that from the NCAA tournament.

Sounds like that would be an excellent candidate as a source of funding for an NCAA stipend for all student-athletes.

But I don't think the P5 are particularly interested in the poor student-athlete's finances....I think they would rather use their greater capability to fund total cost of attendance as a tool to further increase the talent disparity and make it more difficult for future Boise-type irritations to arise.

But then I'm a pretty cynical fellow. They may really be worried about taking care of student-athletes without thought of money and position.

(07-16-2013 11:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:32 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  I listened to a Slive interview on SIRIUS channel 91 and my interpretation was a bit different. He talked about a desire to "restructure" the NCAA in a way that hints more toward a new division, not a full breakaway. He stated those universities that have the resources to provide a student athlete with the "full cost of attendance" should be able to do so.

I see no impact here except a new division for football that provides a "full" scholarship to include some cost of livings element. No impact on basketball or other olympic sports.

I see another angle here that is going to be played. I think you are correct in that Slive's first desire is a separate division of the NCAA rather than an immediate breakaway, but if the first is not forthcoming with some degree of ease the latter will remain an option. But so far all of realignment has been about consolidation as conferences have been raided to whittle down the existing elite to 5. What better way to thin the heard some more than to take a nose count on who has the desire to pay their athletes.

This could be the issue that culls yet more private institutions and schools who are on the cusp of the P5 from some of the weaker existing members of the P5. It could be just the ticket for Connecticut and for Cincinnati should a Wake Forest decide not to pay its players. (I'm not saying Wake would fail to pay players they are just a good example of a small private school which might otherwise have found itself on the cusp of realignment.) Suddenly the Vanderbilts, Dukes, Northwesterns, and others of their ilk will have a decision to make, "all out or all in". Nobody is going to ever ask them to leave their present conferences, but an issue like this will likely cull a few of them. Then slots could be opened for the elimination of a 5th conference, or at least for the addition of the teams that want to make the commitment to be all in but have been on the fringe of acceptance or rejection.

It will depend on the stipend amounts and the total cost for all sports included in the stipend. I think all 14 SEC schools would make the jump, but I suppose there would be a bit of a decision for Vanderbilt. I think Duke and Wake would be the two in the ACC that would have to think about it, perhaps Boston College. I would think all 14 of the Big 10 would make the jump but Northwestern may have to think about it as well. The PAC may actually have a public school or two have to think about it. I believe Stanford would be all in without hesitation. Anyway if just four or five opted out consolidation could get very interesting again.

Personally (and this is just personal opinion), if this happens, I would prefer that Notre Dame join the other private universities and go "all out".

Now, I firmly believe that ND would go "all in" regarding such a situation, but I would be ok with a different decision.

Hell, I would rather see a true minor league started under the NFL to pay football players ages 18-22 rather than see universities do so.

I am rather cynical about most things and no idealist, but I would rather universities play "college football" than be NFL Lite or a sort or resurrected USFL.

That said, I know the realities of "college football".

(07-16-2013 04:29 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The biggest issue there is not the money taken by the smaller conferences, but the money taken off the top by the NCAA itself.

Only about 26% of the money received by the NCAA in rights fees from CBS/TBS goes back to the schools in the form of tournament "units". The rest is kept by the NCAA and used/distributed as Emmert & Co. see fit.

The basketball money -- basically pays for the structure that is the NCAA - the NCAA doesn't receive FBS money... therefore, it is the basketball tourney money that pays for the organizing, governance, playoffs, and championships of ALL other recognized sports. You want a baseball college world series, a frozen four, FCS playoff... track or swimming and diving meets, lacrosse, tennis, softball, soccer, wrestling, golf, field hockey, rowing, or any other sport (you follow) that schools play to have a playoff and/or championships - well what do you think pays for it? It is NOT cheap to organize nationally and put on championships - especially for non revenue sports!

(07-16-2013 11:04 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 10:01 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 06:53 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 05:47 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Nope. The G5 have to say no and send them packing lock, stock, and barrel. No having their cake and eating it to.

No scheduling, no NCAA tourney, no Olympic sports. They can go semi-pro in all sports or none.

I think that would hurt the g5 more than the P5.

Only way the G5 or the G5 + say Big East, Valley, WCC, A10 could take on the P5 would be to act united and have the right leadership who spent plenty of time touting how the P5 were too chicken to play them and the G5 champ was the true champ, but last I heard Lamar Hunt and Al Davis were still dead.

Obviously there is no way to surpass the P5. But you don't have to surpass the P5. You just have to craft a better position for yourself than you would have with an all-powerful breakaway P5 football division within the NCAA.

You could rework your rule-set on your own terms without interference and aim it towards carving out some additional market share. You could revisit having a combined television agreement. Freed from protecting their privileged position the remnant NCAA could get a bit more creative.

If there was a breakaway within the NCAA it would indeed be like a demotion to FCS and the disparity would be written in stone. Outside of the NCAA it would at least be a competition between college and semi-pro and you can have a shot at making your own destiny.

I personally think the P5 would back away from a complete all-sports breakaway to semi-pro status.

Unity among the non-P5 will never happen of course, the non-P5 will ultimately choose to vote themselves into a permanent ghetto within the NCAA if it is demanded.

The mistake I believe you are making is the assumption that the G5 would not be better off sticking with the P5. The most important consideration for the G5 must be to keep getting to play P5 schools as much as possible. You may believe the P5 would never stop playing G5 schools in football, but I would not bet the farm on it.

My advice to the G5 schools would be to use this opportunity to parlay a new football rule where all teams in the P5 schools would have to play the same number of G5 teams every two years as they play OOC P5 teams. This would give the G5 ultimate access because they would control their own destiny by being able to compete on the field.

(07-16-2013 11:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:32 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  I listened to a Slive interview on SIRIUS channel 91 and my interpretation was a bit different. He talked about a desire to "restructure" the NCAA in a way that hints more toward a new division, not a full breakaway. He stated those universities that have the resources to provide a student athlete with the "full cost of attendance" should be able to do so.

I see no impact here except a new division for football that provides a "full" scholarship to include some cost of livings element. No impact on basketball or other olympic sports.

I see another angle here that is going to be played. I think you are correct in that Slive's first desire is a separate division of the NCAA rather than an immediate breakaway, but if the first is not forthcoming with some degree of ease the latter will remain an option. But so far all of realignment has been about consolidation as conferences have been raided to whittle down the existing elite to 5. What better way to thin the heard some more than to take a nose count on who has the desire to pay their athletes.

This could be the issue that culls yet more private institutions and schools who are on the cusp of the P5 from some of the weaker existing members of the P5. It could be just the ticket for Connecticut and for Cincinnati should a Wake Forest decide not to pay its players. (I'm not saying Wake would fail to pay players they are just a good example of a small private school which might otherwise have found itself on the cusp of realignment.) Suddenly the Vanderbilts, Dukes, Northwesterns, and others of their ilk will have a decision to make, "all out or all in". Nobody is going to ever ask them to leave their present conferences, but an issue like this will likely cull a few of them. Then slots could be opened for the elimination of a 5th conference, or at least for the addition of the teams that want to make the commitment to be all in but have been on the fringe of acceptance or rejection.

It will depend on the stipend amounts and the total cost for all sports included in the stipend. I think all 14 SEC schools would make the jump, but I suppose there would be a bit of a decision for Vanderbilt. I think Duke and Wake would be the two in the ACC that would have to think about it, perhaps Boston College. I would think all 14 of the Big 10 would make the jump but Northwestern may have to think about it as well. The PAC may actually have a public school or two have to think about it. I believe Stanford would be all in without hesitation. Anyway if just four or five opted out consolidation could get very interesting again.

Do you really think that those schools would walk away from their television money like that?

(07-16-2013 11:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:32 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  I listened to a Slive interview on SIRIUS channel 91 and my interpretation was a bit different. He talked about a desire to "restructure" the NCAA in a way that hints more toward a new division, not a full breakaway. He stated those universities that have the resources to provide a student athlete with the "full cost of attendance" should be able to do so.

I see no impact here except a new division for football that provides a "full" scholarship to include some cost of livings element. No impact on basketball or other olympic sports.

I see another angle here that is going to be played. I think you are correct in that Slive's first desire is a separate division of the NCAA rather than an immediate breakaway, but if the first is not forthcoming with some degree of ease the latter will remain an option. But so far all of realignment has been about consolidation as conferences have been raided to whittle down the existing elite to 5. What better way to thin the heard some more than to take a nose count on who has the desire to pay their athletes.

This could be the issue that culls yet more private institutions and schools who are on the cusp of the P5 from some of the weaker existing members of the P5. It could be just the ticket for Connecticut and for Cincinnati should a Wake Forest decide not to pay its players. (I'm not saying Wake would fail to pay players they are just a good example of a small private school which might otherwise have found itself on the cusp of realignment.) Suddenly the Vanderbilts, Dukes, Northwesterns, and others of their ilk will have a decision to make, "all out or all in". Nobody is going to ever ask them to leave their present conferences, but an issue like this will likely cull a few of them. Then slots could be opened for the elimination of a 5th conference, or at least for the addition of the teams that want to make the commitment to be all in but have been on the fringe of acceptance or rejection.

It will depend on the stipend amounts and the total cost for all sports included in the stipend. I think all 14 SEC schools would make the jump, but I suppose there would be a bit of a decision for Vanderbilt. I think Duke and Wake would be the two in the ACC that would have to think about it, perhaps Boston College. I would think all 14 of the Big 10 would make the jump but Northwestern may have to think about it as well. The PAC may actually have a public school or two have to think about it. I believe Stanford would be all in without hesitation. Anyway if just four or five opted out consolidation could get very interesting again.

Duke and Wake are swiming with money. A stipend is nothing to them.

(07-16-2013 11:27 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 11:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:32 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  I listened to a Slive interview on SIRIUS channel 91 and my interpretation was a bit different. He talked about a desire to "restructure" the NCAA in a way that hints more toward a new division, not a full breakaway. He stated those universities that have the resources to provide a student athlete with the "full cost of attendance" should be able to do so.

I see no impact here except a new division for football that provides a "full" scholarship to include some cost of livings element. No impact on basketball or other olympic sports.

I see another angle here that is going to be played. I think you are correct in that Slive's first desire is a separate division of the NCAA rather than an immediate breakaway, but if the first is not forthcoming with some degree of ease the latter will remain an option. But so far all of realignment has been about consolidation as conferences have been raided to whittle down the existing elite to 5. What better way to thin the heard some more than to take a nose count on who has the desire to pay their athletes.

This could be the issue that culls yet more private institutions and schools who are on the cusp of the P5 from some of the weaker existing members of the P5. It could be just the ticket for Connecticut and for Cincinnati should a Wake Forest decide not to pay its players. (I'm not saying Wake would fail to pay players they are just a good example of a small private school which might otherwise have found itself on the cusp of realignment.) Suddenly the Vanderbilts, Dukes, Northwesterns, and others of their ilk will have a decision to make, "all out or all in". Nobody is going to ever ask them to leave their present conferences, but an issue like this will likely cull a few of them. Then slots could be opened for the elimination of a 5th conference, or at least for the addition of the teams that want to make the commitment to be all in but have been on the fringe of acceptance or rejection.

It will depend on the stipend amounts and the total cost for all sports included in the stipend. I think all 14 SEC schools would make the jump, but I suppose there would be a bit of a decision for Vanderbilt. I think Duke and Wake would be the two in the ACC that would have to think about it, perhaps Boston College. I would think all 14 of the Big 10 would make the jump but Northwestern may have to think about it as well. The PAC may actually have a public school or two have to think about it. I believe Stanford would be all in without hesitation. Anyway if just four or five opted out consolidation could get very interesting again.

Personally (and this is just personal opinion), if this happens, I would prefer that Notre Dame join the other private universities and go "all out".

Now, I firmly believe that ND would go "all in" regarding such a situation, but I would be ok with a different decision.

Hell, I would rather see a true minor league started under the NFL to pay football players ages 18-22 rather than see universities do so.

I am rather cynical about most things and no idealist, but I would rather universities play "college football" than be NFL Lite or a sort or resurrected USFL.

That said, I know the realities of "college football".

Ivy League for the 21st century:

EAST:

BC
Army
Navy
ND
Northwestern
Duke
Wake
Miami

WEST:

Vanderbilt
Tulane
SMU
TCU
Baylor
Rice
BYU
Stanford



I suggested this to SMU President Pye when I was a student 25 years ago. He politely told me that it could never happen. But maybe it (or something like it) is not so crazy.

(07-16-2013 06:37 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:06 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  Since the P5 teams won't play G5 teams on a level playing field, maybe they might as well break away officially. They've mostly done it already.

What's a level playing field? G5 schools have TV contracts, conference affiliations, etc. If you want a level playing field, raise your enrollment to 30,000, and build a stadium that holds more than 25,000. It is just a fact that a bigger product is worth more money. Does anyone beside Slive think the NCAA is a mess? Of course. .

I don't think raising the enrollment to 30,000 should make any difference at all. In NIU's case it's about 24K which is bigger than some P5 schools. And I don't think making the stadium bigger would make much difference either - at least some of the Big 14 schools need to play 7 home games to balance their budget (well, Purdue has said so at least). It's going to be hard to get those schools to play on the road, even if we had a big stadium. It's also hard to justify expanding the stadium when you don't fill the stadium now playing G5 schools. Some P5 schools play 8 home games. NIU has played P5 teams in the past at home. Some of it is the previous NIU administration's crappy scheduling philosophy. But college football is probably the only sport where teams don't play about the same number of games at home vs. on the road simply due to money or some other excuse, even though the teams are supposedly on the same level and are compared as if they are.

(07-16-2013 04:11 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:06 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  Since the P5 teams won't play G5 teams on a level playing field, maybe they might as well break away officially. They've mostly done it already.

So who's going to watch their NCAA March Madness tourney when Washington State plays Boston College while UConn, Georgetown, and Memphis are barred from competing?

If the p5 breaks away they don't get into the ncaa tourney. once they leave they are out! That goes for all sports, hoops, hockey, lacrosse, football, baseball, track. No more tourney bids