Interesting theory (one part) that if Div IV is formed, voting block fights will occur between certain P5 conferences and one way to win future voting block fights to get there way would be to ADD teams to their coalition (usually 2 conf agree to vote a certain way).

And yes, AAC is mentioned as the most likely target that the P5 schools might fight over in regards to helping build up their voting block.

IF A “DIVISION IV” IS CREATED, GET READY FOR MORE CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT

The five wealthiest conferences in the land are asking for more control over their own affairs. Every college sports fan should know that much by now. The 65 schools — including Notre Dame — of the ACC, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC no longer want to be held back by those schools with smaller athletic budgets. This summer, an NCAA vote will determine whether or not schools like Florida, Texas and Southern California can make up their own rules, such as full-cost-of-tuition scholarships and medical insurance for athletes. If not, those wealthy schools will be asked to continue to abide by rules put in place to keep the playing field equal for schools like North Texas, Eastern Michigan and Louisiana-Monroe.

See link for complete article

http://mrsec.com/2014/06/division-iv-cre...alignment/

Good read - I look forward to the next installment.

Rather than individual schools jumping to D4 conferences, imagine the power the American would weild if, in exchange for D4 membership, we agreed to vote along with one of the blocks (SEC/Big12 or Big12/Pac12)? This could get very interesting.

While SEC's Commish Slive has been the leader in regards to most of the P5 and maybe Div IV changes...he might be outsmarted by those from the Big Ten, Pac-12, & ACC who could dominated almost every rule change in Div IV..as their voting block would be larger than SEC/Big 12.

If that were the case, the more "academic" line-up from Big Ten, Pac-12, & ACC make almost any change in the Div IV:

Increase academic minimums for incoming students from HS

Increase academic minimums for college students

Increase grad requirements

Restrict scholarship signings (no more over signing)

Add early signing period (help weaker schools who do a lot of work discovery certain players...only to see power teams swoop in at last minute before signing day) and/or eliminate signing day/period all together (i.e. allow players to sign following the completion of their Junior Year of HS).

Eliminate team specific cable networks (sorry Longhorns)

All of the above is like kyrptonite to many SEC/Big 12 teams.

Slive should be careful what he wishes for...might comeback to bite him in the end.

(06-12-2014 09:42 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  Interesting theory (one part) that if Div IV is formed, voting block fights will occur between certain P5 conferences and one way to win future voting block fights to get there way would be to ADD teams to their coalition (usually 2 conf agree to vote a certain way).

And yes, AAC is mentioned as the most likely target that the P5 schools might fight over in regards to helping build up their voting block.

IF A “DIVISION IV” IS CREATED, GET READY FOR MORE CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT

The five wealthiest conferences in the land are asking for more control over their own affairs. Every college sports fan should know that much by now. The 65 schools — including Notre Dame — of the ACC, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC no longer want to be held back by those schools with smaller athletic budgets. This summer, an NCAA vote will determine whether or not schools like Florida, Texas and Southern California can make up their own rules, such as full-cost-of-tuition scholarships and medical insurance for athletes. If not, those wealthy schools will be asked to continue to abide by rules put in place to keep the playing field equal for schools like North Texas, Eastern Michigan and Louisiana-Monroe.

See link for complete article

http://mrsec.com/2014/06/division-iv-cre...alignment/

This is what I've been saying all along.

Harris Pastides has said that the NCAA council has basically agreed to the cost-of-attendance stipends and that most of what the P5 want has been granted.

The big hangup now is voting thresholds, and this blogger has his finger on it, inasmuch as this is intra-P5 warfare.

(06-12-2014 10:20 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  While SEC's Commish Slive has been the leader in regards to most of the P5 and maybe Div IV changes...he might be outsmarted by those from the Big Ten, Pac-12, & ACC who could dominated almost every rule change in Div IV..as their voting block would be larger than SEC/Big 12.

If that were the case, the more "academic" line-up from Big Ten, Pac-12, & ACC make almost any change in the Div IV:

Increase academic minimums for incoming students from HS

Increase academic minimums for college students

Increase grad requirements

Restrict scholarship signings (no more over signing)

Add early signing period (help weaker schools who do a lot of work discovery certain players...only to see power teams swoop in at last minute before signing day) and/or eliminate signing day/period all together (i.e. allow players to sign following the completion of their Junior Year of HS).

Eliminate team specific cable networks (sorry Longhorns)

All of the above is like kyrptonite to many SEC/Big 12 teams.

Slive should be careful what he wishes for...might comeback to bite him in the end.

Don't forget, however, that the voting threshold the SEC wants is 39 teams rather than 43.

They have likely already done an internal count.

B1G: 14
Pac12: 12
ACC: 15

Magically, that equals 41. So, 39 schools from those 3 conferences could pass their own laws.

Whereas 24 SEC/B12 schools could not. They'd need the entire ACC to do it.

Something tells me the ACC swings back and forth here, and perhaps it is not so united.

(06-12-2014 10:38 AM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(06-12-2014 10:20 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  While SEC's Commish Slive has been the leader in regards to most of the P5 and maybe Div IV changes...he might be outsmarted by those from the Big Ten, Pac-12, & ACC who could dominated almost every rule change in Div IV..as their voting block would be larger than SEC/Big 12.

If that were the case, the more "academic" line-up from Big Ten, Pac-12, & ACC make almost any change in the Div IV:

Increase academic minimums for incoming students from HS

Increase academic minimums for college students

Increase grad requirements

Restrict scholarship signings (no more over signing)

Add early signing period (help weaker schools who do a lot of work discovery certain players...only to see power teams swoop in at last minute before signing day) and/or eliminate signing day/period all together (i.e. allow players to sign following the completion of their Junior Year of HS).

Eliminate team specific cable networks (sorry Longhorns)

All of the above is like kyrptonite to many SEC/Big 12 teams.

Slive should be careful what he wishes for...might comeback to bite him in the end.

Don't forget, however, that the voting threshold the SEC wants is 39 teams rather than 43.

They have likely already done an internal count.

B1G: 14
Pac12: 12
ACC: 15

Magically, that equals 41. So, 39 schools from those 3 conferences could pass their own laws.

Whereas 24 SEC/B12 schools could not. They'd need the entire ACC to do it.

Something tells me the ACC swings back and forth here, and perhaps it is not so united.

SEC/Big 12, with some new teams (not all) from AAC, could probably pick off a few football first type schools like FSU, Clemson, Va Tech, Oregon, etc...that would not be interested in tougher academic standards or new scholarship restrictions...so a few teams might split from their own conf.

If all of the AAC were invited...great...but almost all recent expansion over past 20 years has been individual schools (maybe a few at a time) that had been invited...not entire conferences (i.e. Old Big East...SWC, etc...).

The ACC will certainly be the battlefield conference. As mentioned teams like VT, FSU, Clemson, Louisville and NC State would likely fall in line with SEC schools wear as UNC, UVA, GT, Duke, and Wake would be more aligned with B1G and PAC12 teams.

I do think, our efforts to be included in this new division may payoff. We're at least on the radar. Keep that PR machine rolling Mr. Commish.

If the AAC is admitted into the process to obtain its votes, then the denominator goes up from 65 to I think 77. You can't count the AAC votes in the numerator without also adding them into the denominator also. So, you still wouldn't get to 60%.

Maybe this is what Aresco knew and meant, by saying, "the AAC will be a power conference someday".

(06-12-2014 10:20 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  While SEC's Commish Slive has been the leader in regards to most of the P5 and maybe Div IV changes...he might be outsmarted by those from the Big Ten, Pac-12, & ACC who could dominated almost every rule change in Div IV..as their voting block would be larger than SEC/Big 12.

If that were the case, the more "academic" line-up from Big Ten, Pac-12, & ACC make almost any change in the Div IV:

Increase academic minimums for incoming students from HS

Increase academic minimums for college students

Increase grad requirements

Restrict scholarship signings (no more over signing)

Add early signing period (help weaker schools who do a lot of work discovery certain players...only to see power teams swoop in at last minute before signing day) and/or eliminate signing day/period all together (i.e. allow players to sign following the completion of their Junior Year of HS).

Eliminate team specific cable networks (sorry Longhorns)

All of the above is like kyrptonite to many SEC/Big 12 teams.

Slive should be careful what he wishes for...might comeback to bite him in the end.

That's when Div V happens.

I'm not so sure the entire Big 12 is on-board with running college football the SEC way. I think Texas as they always have will be a vote for reasonable academic standards-probably Baylor too. Ask Nebraska why they hate UT so much. In that manner, Texas is much more a BIG or PAC program

I found this tid bit the most interesting part of the story.

Quote:The inclusion of other non-Power 5 teams in D4 could also cause a reduction in current membership in Power 5 conference teams. If the decision to allow athletes at private schools to unionize stands, you will see a movement to remove private school programs from the Power 5 conferences.

In such a situation, Northwestern, Wake Forest, Duke, Syracuse, Boston College, et al., could all be on the outside looking in. Programs that have struggled to provide a significant portion of conference revenue over a prolonged period of time, like Baylor, could be facing elimination from their respective conferences.

(06-12-2014 03:37 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  I found this tid bit the most interesting part of the story.

Quote:The inclusion of other non-Power 5 teams in D4 could also cause a reduction in current membership in Power 5 conference teams. If the decision to allow athletes at private schools to unionize stands, you will see a movement to remove private school programs from the Power 5 conferences.

In such a situation, Northwestern, Wake Forest, Duke, Syracuse, Boston College, et al., could all be on the outside looking in. Programs that have struggled to provide a significant portion of conference revenue over a prolonged period of time, like Baylor, could be facing elimination from their respective conferences.

That would be a pretty interesting outcome.

I think the big guys (the Texas's, Alabama's, Ohio State's) are going to get swallowed by their own greed. They had control of the NCAA regional game of the week TV package which eliminated support for the lessor football schools. They sue so they can control their own TV rights but that opens the door for TV market driven realignment with new schools like Louisville and Utah taking players and forcing their way into the club.

The super conferences will lead to a greater saturation in televised games giving the consumer more options. The consumer will stream games instead of having to tune into whatever the networks are pitching so no longer will programs have a TV advantage. The price and commitment to an every longer college football season is going to be more than what the next generation can tolerate.

Schools in big media markets building amenity packed 30,000 seat stadiums at reasonable prices like Tulane, Old Dominion and Georgia State are going to be the future. People will pay 40-60 dollars just to sit in a nice stadium for the evening. Nobody wants to pay 100 dollars for a bleacher seat for a program that is stuck at the 5-6 win level (Tennessee).

If Aresco isn't just blowing smoke, you gotta believe if a DIV is formed, the AAC will be in it. The markets we have, the fact that several of our schools were former BCS, etc all makes me think the AAC will be in the DivIV.

(06-12-2014 07:13 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(06-12-2014 03:37 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  I found this tid bit the most interesting part of the story.

Quote:The inclusion of other non-Power 5 teams in D4 could also cause a reduction in current membership in Power 5 conference teams. If the decision to allow athletes at private schools to unionize stands, you will see a movement to remove private school programs from the Power 5 conferences.

In such a situation, Northwestern, Wake Forest, Duke, Syracuse, Boston College, et al., could all be on the outside looking in. Programs that have struggled to provide a significant portion of conference revenue over a prolonged period of time, like Baylor, could be facing elimination from their respective conferences.

That would be a pretty interesting outcome.

I think the big guys (the Texas's, Alabama's, Ohio State's) are going to get swallowed by their own greed. They had control of the NCAA regional game of the week TV package which eliminated support for the lessor football schools. They sue so they can control their own TV rights but that opens the door for TV market driven realignment with new schools like Louisville and Utah taking players and forcing their way into the club.

The super conferences will lead to a greater saturation in televised games giving the consumer more options. The consumer will stream games instead of having to tune into whatever the networks are pitching so no longer will programs have a TV advantage. The price and commitment to an every longer college football season is going to be more than what the next generation can tolerate.

Schools in big media markets building amenity packed 30,000 seat stadiums at reasonable prices like Tulane, Old Dominion and Georgia State are going to be the future. People will pay 40-60 dollars just to sit in a nice stadium for the evening. Nobody wants to pay 100 dollars for a bleacher seat for a program that is stuck at the 5-6 win level (Tennessee).

The way conferences are separating themselves is by monitoring their market reach via networks. They are cashing in on brand equity. What they are also diluting is visibility. This will eventually lead to less fans as the opportunity cost rises by limiting who you get to watch. Eventually there will be a cfb network or we will cycle back to collective bargaining. If there is too big of advantage for some they will run out of content and viewers. Think about the number of fans the g5 represents. If you separate yourselves and don't play us you lose access to a vast majority of eyeballs. Their hubris will kill them. I get bombarded with mail about the sec network and I am a fervent fan. However the target demographic is busy raising kids and going to bday parties. I am going to watch my team as that's all I have time for. Half of the time I am in the stands. If I have to pay for your network I will not be watching and you lose exposure and your ratings. This will help the g5 in the long run. Contrary to the sec s belief the gators are not the primary team here and won't be in the future.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(06-12-2014 07:13 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Nobody wants to pay 100 dollars for a bleacher seat for a program that is stuck at the 5-6 win level (Tennessee).

Tennessee drew 95,584 fans per game last year in their "bleacher" stadium.

While thats below their stadium capacity of almost 103,000....it was still good enough to be #2 in SEC Attendance.

95,000 plus per game is a lot of "nobodies".

NOTE: Some teams mentioned in this thread didn't even come close to 95,000 fans in actual attendance for the entire SEASON last year.

the vast majority of college football i watch at home is the weeknight games and the one or two open weeks my team has (but more likely not because my wife has things for me to do). i go to home and road games and that leave about zero tv game watching time on saturdays unless i catch a glance at a screen during a tailgate.

(06-12-2014 10:38 AM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(06-12-2014 10:20 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  While SEC's Commish Slive has been the leader in regards to most of the P5 and maybe Div IV changes...he might be outsmarted by those from the Big Ten, Pac-12, & ACC who could dominated almost every rule change in Div IV..as their voting block would be larger than SEC/Big 12.

If that were the case, the more "academic" line-up from Big Ten, Pac-12, & ACC make almost any change in the Div IV:

Increase academic minimums for incoming students from HS

Increase academic minimums for college students

Increase grad requirements

Restrict scholarship signings (no more over signing)

Add early signing period (help weaker schools who do a lot of work discovery certain players...only to see power teams swoop in at last minute before signing day) and/or eliminate signing day/period all together (i.e. allow players to sign following the completion of their Junior Year of HS).

Eliminate team specific cable networks (sorry Longhorns)

All of the above is like kyrptonite to many SEC/Big 12 teams.

Slive should be careful what he wishes for...might comeback to bite him in the end.

Don't forget, however, that the voting threshold the SEC wants is 39 teams rather than 43.

They have likely already done an internal count.

B1G: 14
Pac12: 12
ACC: 15

Magically, that equals 41. So, 39 schools from those 3 conferences could pass their own laws.

Whereas 24 SEC/B12 schools could not. They'd need the entire ACC to do it.

Something tells me the ACC swings back and forth here, and perhaps it is not so united.

this post should be bookmarked. its the only legitimate argument against the p5 schools breaking away.