Just for fun, go through the roster of the MAC when he was there, the WAC when he was there, and the Sun Belt.

There just aren't a lot of G5 schools who haven't had him as commissioner.

(01-22-2014 04:43 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Just for fun, go through the roster of the MAC when he was there, the WAC when he was there, and the Sun Belt.

There just aren't a lot of G5 schools who haven't had him as commissioner.

CUSA should get him next. Its only fair. I know MTSU fans loved him when they were here...

Here's the thing about Benson I never understood.

He was on the record multiple times while with the WAC pushing to go to 12 (after the MWC split, after TCU left, after Tulsa, SMU, Rice left) and they never took his advice. If you aren't going to take the guy's very public advice, why do you keep him?

(01-21-2014 12:28 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 09:59 PM)MJG Wrote:  I think challenging title 9 as in two categories revenue and non revenue sports.
Revenue generating sports should be exempt schools should not be forced to lose money.


Allowing football only conferences making travel less of a concern.

The number of sports sponsored maybe ?

A lot of schools might consider adding hockey if not for title 9 .
Hockey would be a lot easier to do if no title 9 hit.
Meaning as long as the program made money most hockey programs do.

Just some random ideas to help the less resourced .

The WAC has pushed two measures that were adopted (so much for the P5 controlling the agenda).

The recent growth of FBS is an unintended consequence of the NCAA requiring FBS leagues to have 8 members playing all-sports within a league. That was a WAC measure aimed at the Sun Belt and karma being a *****, killed the WAC.

FBS would likely be smaller today if the number were still six with no all-sports requirement. That in turn has resulted FBS leagues taking schools for survival purposes raiding other non-FBS league who have either called up Division II schools or raided other leagues who have turned to move ups for survival.

The second issue has been the grace period, again a WAC initiative. Texas State and UTSA came into FBS as part of the WAC's grace period attempt to comply with 8 team requirement.

The grace period nearly insures no league goes out of business.

An idea that has been tossed out (do not believe it has been turned into a proposal) to address Division I growth is restructure the NCAA revenue sharing eliminating the concept of the first "unit". Instead of receiving the current roughly $245,000 for each game played starting with the first game each year, that payment would be for the second game. In lieu of the first unit each year a conference eligible for an auto bid would receive $122,500 per member that has completed the full five year transition up to the 12th member and the grace period would be repealed along with counting any member that has not completed the five year transition and the transition years would not count toward continuity.

I thought going from 6 to 8 was to stop the growth of new basketball leagues.

(01-20-2014 10:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Title IX changes aren't ever happening. No one is rolling back those laws.

Unless the President's name is Steve King or Louie Gohmert.

j/k

(01-24-2014 01:44 PM)Rube Dali Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 10:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Title IX changes aren't ever happening. No one is rolling back those laws.

Unless the President's name is Steve King or Louie Gohmert.

j/k

Why couldn't the interpretation of the rule be an equal number of non revenue sports. Programs that make money even Connecticut women's basketball would be exempt .