(01-28-2015 05:17 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  If the Big 12 said to compete you can only offer 8 baseball schollies, and Texas offered 11, then they would not be allowed to compete in that sport in conference. Conferences can and do dictate scholarship levels below NCAA maximums. Either you agree, or you find another conference, or go Indy.

The Summit and MVFC may well approve COFA, or leave it up to the schools. But if either conference bans members from using them in conference sports, then a member of that conference either complies, or GTFO.

Well, you have me there.

I'm simply saying that if conferences were going to terminate membership just because a school is greatly outspending the rest of the schools in the conference, wouldn't that have happened by now?


In either the case of Big XII vs. Texas or Summit League vs. NDSU, I don't see where the conference has any legitimate authority to prevent a member from offering the NCAA allowed maximum. As you say, they could propose that the school should "GTFO" if they don't like the new rules, but the school could in turn reply "GFY" and sue the conference. Since that's not a very practical way to do business, I think they'll come to some kind of agreement. Most likely leaning more towards having the poorer schools "buck up".

(01-28-2015 07:08 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-28-2015 05:17 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  If the Big 12 said to compete you can only offer 8 baseball schollies, and Texas offered 11, then they would not be allowed to compete in that sport in conference. Conferences can and do dictate scholarship levels below NCAA maximums. Either you agree, or you find another conference, or go Indy.

The Summit and MVFC may well approve COFA, or leave it up to the schools. But if either conference bans members from using them in conference sports, then a member of that conference either complies, or GTFO.

Well, you have me there.

I'm simply saying that if conferences were going to terminate membership just because a school is greatly outspending the rest of the schools in the conference, wouldn't that have happened by now?

You are being obtuse. It is not a matter of outspending. It is about conference membership requirements. The Pioneer Football League prohibits members from offering scholarships for football. But Dayton can, and does have a multi-million dollar weight room.

San Diego was disqualified from the Pioneer League championship because of impermissible aid (by Conference rules). It is really, really simple.

(01-28-2015 07:08 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-28-2015 05:17 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  If the Big 12 said to compete you can only offer 8 baseball schollies, and Texas offered 11, then they would not be allowed to compete in that sport in conference. Conferences can and do dictate scholarship levels below NCAA maximums. Either you agree, or you find another conference, or go Indy.

The Summit and MVFC may well approve COFA, or leave it up to the schools. But if either conference bans members from using them in conference sports, then a member of that conference either complies, or GTFO.

Well, you have me there.

I'm simply saying that if conferences were going to terminate membership just because a school is greatly outspending the rest of the schools in the conference, wouldn't that have happened by now?


In either the case of Big XII vs. Texas or Summit League vs. NDSU, I don't see where the conference has any legitimate authority to prevent a member from offering the NCAA allowed maximum. As you say, they could propose that the school should "GTFO" if they don't like the new rules, but the school could in turn reply "GFY" and sue the conference. Since that's not a very practical way to do business, I think they'll come to some kind of agreement. Most likely leaning more towards having the poorer schools "buck up".

Its somewhat similar to the late 1970's when the rules defining the top division of college football were revised to require a 30K stadium (or a certain level of average attendance over a given period). It was up to the individual school to decide if they wanted to spend the money to comply with the new D-1A rules, or drop back to the new D1-AA. But while this was a individual decision for each school---it was also a decision that had to also be made at the conference level. Each conference, as a whole had to decide the division they would compete within. Some conferences decided to drop down and complete at the AA level. In those cases, the schools that wanted to stay at the D1-A level, had to find a new home. I think that happened to ECU if I remember correctly. This is going to be similar. Being able to offer your recruits $5K cash while your conference opponents cannot is a game changer. Its silly to act as if its no big deal.

(01-28-2015 07:11 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  You are being obtuse. It is not a matter of outspending. It is about conference membership requirements. The Pioneer Football League prohibits members from offering scholarships for football. But Dayton can, and does have a multi-million dollar weight room.

San Diego was disqualified from the Pioneer League championship because of impermissible aid (by Conference rules). It is really, really simple.

The Pioneer League was formed by members who agreed to a certain principle when it came to scholarships. Namely, that they would keep to the DIII model which they all had just come from: no grants from the athletic department allowed, for any expenses - regardless of their tax exempt qualifying status.

Likewise, the Summit league was formed by members who agreed to a certain principle when it came to scholarships. Namely, that they were allowed to offer athletes grants from the athletic department to pay for those costs that the NCAA allowed and the maximum number of grants that the NCAA allowed.


In either case, if the most of the members of the conference suddenly decided they wanted to change the rules to the detriment of one of the other members - it doesn't fly. That's not how business is done.