The bottom of FBS: There are 128 teams in the Football Bowl Subdivision. Technically, Idaho and Alabama are in the same weight class. However ...

"We do live in different worlds," Slive said.

It's no secret that the bottom end of big-time football isn't going to be able to afford some these changes.

Cost of attendance? It will be optional, increasing the value of the current scholarship by $1,000-$6,000 per year. It would cost Idaho $440,000 per year to implement. That's going to be a tough addition to a $4 million football budget.

It may be that those who can't adopt financially may simply drop out of FBS. Slive said that's not the intent.

"We want Idaho to have a very successful athletic program," the commissioner said. "There are so many different interests, it's time in the evolution of intercollegiate athletics to declare ...

"The best way to think about it is to put the student-athlete first in health, safety and nutrition.

"It isn't about resources, it's about doing what is right. If you look at our list of things, there isn't anything on there that you wouldn't say isn't right."



As to when the P5 need to have full autonomy by---

Considering the rash of lawsuits and pressure from the public and Capitol Hill, is August soon enough?

"It has to be," he said. "August is as late as it can be. We have this done by August. We're prepared to go right to work and implement those items we have included in our vision."


http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...f-college-

Quote:It may be that those who can't adopt financially may simply drop out of FBS. Slive said that's not the intent.

Pffft. Of course that is the intent. They're not going to adopt rules that strictly force anyone out of FBS; they just want to adopt a series of rules that, over time, will cause programs like Idaho to opt out of FBS -- and, just as importantly, will slow down the numbers of FCS teams trying to get into FBS.

I think his raising 95 scholarship limit killing lower schools is correct. That would pull in theory 650 more players into P5 with the vast majority Red Shirting. There is going to be a split between P5/G5, wish they would just get it over with.

It is easy to compare the differences between top FBS programs like Alabama and Idaho. The difficult part in all of this will be finding the dividing line. You can bet that G5 schools with P5 aspirations and comparable metrics to lower level P5 schools are not going to accept a split forced upon them based solely on conference affiliation. I envision a lot of these "optional" financial investments like Slive discussses as the P5's way to make the split occur naturally and not by NCAA legistlature or a break away.

Actually Slive denied that 95 was on the agenda when the writer suggested it.

It would be a hard proposal to pass. Mississippi State doesn't want Alabama, LSU, and Auburn stockpiling another 10 players each.

(04-16-2014 12:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Actually Slive denied that 95 was on the agenda when the writer suggested it.

It would be a hard proposal to pass. Mississippi State doesn't want Alabama, LSU, and Auburn stockpiling another 10 players each.

Agreed, we've discussed this on this board before, that's not going to happen for that reason. At least half of the P5 schools would be against it.

Well it is about time for a reclassification for some FBS schools. Just another part of the evolution of college football.
Its been what over 30 years since a 1-A / 1-AA split?

Not only would I argue the 95 scholarship limit proposal as being horrible, I would advocate for cutting it back to 80 scholarship players in football. Helps with Title IX issues and will lead to a more competitive, more exciting product at least among the P5 and successful G5 schools.

(04-16-2014 12:16 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Well it is about time for a reclassification for some FBS schools. Just another part of the evolution of college football.
Its been what over 30 years since a 1-A / 1-AA split?

The money involved now makes it where the only way a program will drop is kicking and screaming.

No one wants to be the AD who has to stand in front of fans and boosters and explain why they are dropping to FCS without protest. Its the one thing that Slive knows he cant do. He'd love Idaho to drop, and he can set up some rules to encourage Idaho to drop, but if Idaho doesn't drop, he knows he cant force it.

Schools like Idaho and Umass isolated and without a home might drop on their own...but that what...cuts FBS By two schools? You'll never convince a team belonging to a league that its worth dropping. Even if they have to make incredible sacrifices to stay FBS...they'll do it.

Most P5 schools are having no problem funding Title 9 programs. It will be hard on Maryland and Rutgers, I know.

Why even have the division splits? Let all schools play whoever they want to and use SOS to determine who makes it into whatever championship mechanism is put in place.

If Maryland and Hopkins want to resume their football rivalry, why should it matter what divisions the programs are in?

Nice to see the commissioner of the #1 corrupt conference telling us the future.

(04-16-2014 12:55 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 12:16 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Well it is about time for a reclassification for some FBS schools. Just another part of the evolution of college football.
Its been what over 30 years since a 1-A / 1-AA split?

The money involved now makes it where the only way a program will drop is kicking and screaming.

No one wants to be the AD who has to stand in front of fans and boosters and explain why they are dropping to FCS without protest. Its the one thing that Slive knows he cant do. He'd love Idaho to drop, and he can set up some rules to encourage Idaho to drop, but if Idaho doesn't drop, he knows he cant force it.

Schools like Idaho and Umass isolated and without a home might drop on their own...but that what...cuts FBS By two schools? You'll never convince a team belonging to a league that its worth dropping. Even if they have to make incredible sacrifices to stay FBS...they'll do it.

Then there is also ULM and Eastern Michigan. It won't cut alot of G5 schools but it would trim some of them. It could be like soccer deregulation. The stronger FCS schools that can support FBS may make the move while the weaker FBS schools move to more viable FCS divsion. Yes FCS can be viable otherwise there wouldn't quite a few schools starting up FCS football programs.

(04-16-2014 12:16 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 12:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Actually Slive denied that 95 was on the agenda when the writer suggested it.

It would be a hard proposal to pass. Mississippi State doesn't want Alabama, LSU, and Auburn stockpiling another 10 players each.

Agreed, we've discussed this on this board before, that's not going to happen for that reason. At least half of the P5 schools would be against it.

Probably a lot more than half because it would cause Title IX issues.

(04-16-2014 01:05 PM)Hitch Wrote:  Why even have the division splits? Let all schools play whoever they want to and use SOS to determine who makes it into whatever championship mechanism is put in place.

If Maryland and Hopkins want to resume their football rivalry, why should it matter what divisions the programs are in?

A couple of years ago, that threat was made by the BCS schools. That's the last thing the G5 wants.

"Do you say he can have agent?" Slive asked. "I don't have all the answers but I know it's going to be part of a model that puts the student-athlete first."

The thinking on agents is interesting. That seems to be the biggest preoccupation of the NCAA. North Carolina got nailed for agent contacts while their academic fraud was ignored. USC got nailed for the agent contacts as did Georgia Tech for one contact. Meanwhile the recruiting of Cam Newton is quickly ignored. They get excited about things that don't really generate competitive advantage. They ignore things that do.

If it was about caring for the student athlete then they would take NCAA revenue and profit share with every NCAA athlete. All of whom are allegedly equal in the eyes of the NCAA.

But that isn't what it is about. It is about "some" athletes from "some" schools getting paid in order to keep those schools advantaged while the student athletes at Idaho are encouraged to take a flying leap back to FCS along with their school.

Well, this is one way to get to the final 65.

The interesting thing is this: Every remaining G5 school that DOESN'T drop down actually becomes stronger with every school that does. There will be less competition for those schools when it comes to accessing solid 3* and weaker 4* recruits. This will actually make the teams more successful - and hopefully allow them to generate more revenue as well. In addition, it would make a smaller pool of G5 programs from which the P5 will have to pick from come scheduling time.

Slive's model of "Starvation and Scorched Earth" will show us which schools are REALLY FBS and which ones aren't - and fast.

(04-16-2014 02:48 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Well, this is one way to get to the final 65.

The interesting thing is this: Every remaining G5 school that DOESN'T drop down actually becomes stronger with every school that does. There will be less competition for those schools when it comes to accessing solid 3* and weaker 4* recruits. This will actually make the teams more successful - and hopefully allow them to generate more revenue as well. In addition, it would make a smaller pool of G5 programs from which the P5 will have to pick from come scheduling time.

Slive's model of "Starvation and Scorched Earth" will show us which schools are REALLY FBS and which ones aren't - and fast.

Nobody will willingly drop down no matter what...and any attempt to force schools down will get challenged in court.

(04-16-2014 02:53 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 02:48 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Well, this is one way to get to the final 65.

The interesting thing is this: Every remaining G5 school that DOESN'T drop down actually becomes stronger with every school that does. There will be less competition for those schools when it comes to accessing solid 3* and weaker 4* recruits. This will actually make the teams more successful - and hopefully allow them to generate more revenue as well. In addition, it would make a smaller pool of G5 programs from which the P5 will have to pick from come scheduling time.

Slive's model of "Starvation and Scorched Earth" will show us which schools are REALLY FBS and which ones aren't - and fast.

Nobody will willingly drop down no matter what...and any attempt to force schools down will get challenged in court.

It won't, it'll fall along the lines when 1-AA was created and schools/conferences had to make a choice where they want to go.