CSNbbs

what are you thoughts on this.

Video

I think it's crazy to try to fit more than 1200 schools under the same athletic umbrella. It's just as crazy to expect the top 80-90 schools to subsidize all the rest. But that's what we have.

It's also crazy to have so many disparate sports all under that same umbrella.

If there were no college athletics governing body in existence already, and you wanted to create one from scratch, nobody in their right mind would offer this model as the answer. They would be laughed out of the room.

Is the NCAA really the problem? This is only an issue in CFB and MBB, the two sports whose professional analogs don't have a minor league system and have age restrictions barring direct ascension after leaving HS.

(02-27-2018 11:28 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]I think it's crazy to try to fit more than 1200 schools under the same athletic umbrella. It's just as crazy to expect the top 80-90 schools to subsidize all the rest. But that's what we have.

It's also crazy to have so many disparate sports all under that same umbrella.

If there were no college athletics governing body in existence already, and you wanted to create one from scratch, nobody in their right mind would offer this model as the answer. They would be laughed out of the room.

But it really isn't 1200 schools under one umbrella. The federated system means there are basically no rules that automatically apply to all divisions. Initial eligibility for Division I is different from Division II. The stipend isn't available as permissible aid in Division II and so on.

(02-27-2018 09:18 PM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-27-2018 11:28 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]I think it's crazy to try to fit more than 1200 schools under the same athletic umbrella. It's just as crazy to expect the top 80-90 schools to subsidize all the rest. But that's what we have.

It's also crazy to have so many disparate sports all under that same umbrella.

If there were no college athletics governing body in existence already, and you wanted to create one from scratch, nobody in their right mind would offer this model as the answer. They would be laughed out of the room.

But it really isn't 1200 schools under one umbrella. The federated system means there are basically no rules that automatically apply to all divisions. Initial eligibility for Division I is different from Division II. The stipend isn't available as permissible aid in Division II and so on.

I'm not very knowledgeable about this, but I thought that the rules of the games themselves are the same in all 3 divisions.

For example, if they change the distance of the 3-point line, doesn't that change for NCAA games in all divisions?

(02-28-2018 01:33 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-27-2018 09:18 PM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-27-2018 11:28 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]I think it's crazy to try to fit more than 1200 schools under the same athletic umbrella. It's just as crazy to expect the top 80-90 schools to subsidize all the rest. But that's what we have.

It's also crazy to have so many disparate sports all under that same umbrella.

If there were no college athletics governing body in existence already, and you wanted to create one from scratch, nobody in their right mind would offer this model as the answer. They would be laughed out of the room.

But it really isn't 1200 schools under one umbrella. The federated system means there are basically no rules that automatically apply to all divisions. Initial eligibility for Division I is different from Division II. The stipend isn't available as permissible aid in Division II and so on.

I'm not very knowledgeable about this, but I thought that the rules of the games themselves are the same in all 3 divisions.

For example, if they change the distance of the 3-point line, doesn't that change for NCAA games in all divisions?

Generally are consistent but not always, lower divisions had overtime before FBS, think shot clock started at Division I and later picked up and video replay I don't think has made it downward yet.