What does Div IV guarantee?
1) school's athletic departments operating in the red will have more red
2) if you pay stipends to 85 CFB players then you need to balance that with 85 women scholarship athletes getting an equal stipend
3) teams like WF, Vandy, Duke, BC, Indiana, Iowa state, Kansas, etc, etc, etc will NEVER sniff a playoff or a bowl game unless they let teams play in the Participation Bowl
4) Students will get tired of paying the increased cost of stipends, tutors, and benefits provided to the athletes...especially if their team NEVER wins
5) LSU, Bama, UT, aTm, OU, UM, Ohio St, penn st, USC, and the rest of the big names will get tired of sharing with the perennial losers who don't carry their weight and just sock away their TV money (ala Baylor for 15 years) and will not want equal revenue sharing. Then they will look to boot them
6) I watch UH v. Opponent, so none of this really matters that much to me. I like my college football players to be closer to college students than what the SEC provides. Regardless of a split I will have my season tix. Just tired of the insane greed.

x 1,000,000

If there is a division 4 (and I don't think one is coming anytime soon), you will want to be in it. I want no part of the new G5 version of FCS that the will be left behind in a split. If the Coogs are left behind, Im sure I'll attend an occasional Houston game. But I wont be watching much college football after a split. I'll follow the Texans and pro football . I doubt I'll have much trouble finding other things to occupy my Saturdays.

#6 for the win.

Oh, and f*ck wake forest! Most undeserving school out there.

(06-25-2014 10:53 AM)The T-Shirt Wrote:  #6 for the win.

Oh, and f*ck wake forest! Most undeserving school out there.

More than Duke, BC or TCU?

If Div 4 comes, look for the removal of tax exempt status from these multimillion dollar institutions. How can you have a minor league for the nfl but receive taxpayer subsidies?

(06-25-2014 10:57 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 10:53 AM)The T-Shirt Wrote:  #6 for the win.

Oh, and f*ck wake forest! Most undeserving school out there.

More than Duke, BC or TCU?

I'd say the absolute worst is Washington State.

(06-25-2014 10:57 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 10:53 AM)The T-Shirt Wrote:  #6 for the win.

Oh, and f*ck wake forest! Most undeserving school out there.

More than Duke, BC or TCU?

BC is a close second. Dukes football is coming around and they have major value from a basketball standpoint. TCU has seemingly fallen off since joining a bigger tv contract conference, but they had loads of success before joining, they just need to catch up to the blue bloods, that takes time.

Wake Forest is, has been, and always will be utterly worthless and brings nothing to the table.

(06-25-2014 11:03 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  If Div 4 comes, look for the removal of tax exempt status from these multimillion dollar institutions. How can you have a minor league for the nfl but receive taxpayer subsidies?

Someone posted an analysis and its almost impossible to remove tax exempt status no matter how much profit they make without rewriting the tax code for all such entities.

But, if they can't get autonomy then they can't get Division IV either. They would have to completely break away.

So they will never lose tax-exempt but would face antitrust/monopoly problems.

(06-25-2014 11:08 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 11:03 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  If Div 4 comes, look for the removal of tax exempt status from these multimillion dollar institutions. How can you have a minor league for the nfl but receive taxpayer subsidies?

Someone posted an analysis and its almost impossible to remove tax exempt status no matter how much profit they make without rewriting the tax code for all such entities.

But, if they can't get autonomy then they can't get Division IV either. They would have to completely break away.

So they will never lose tax-exempt but would face antitrust/monopoly problems.

This.

(06-25-2014 10:23 AM)UHRedcat96 Wrote:  2) if you pay stipends to 85 CFB players then you need to balance that with 85 women scholarship athletes getting an equal stipend

I'm pretty sure Title IX involves equal opportunity, not equal funding. They certainly don't spend equally on men and women sports now.

(06-25-2014 11:37 AM)BatonRougeEscapee Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 10:23 AM)UHRedcat96 Wrote:  2) if you pay stipends to 85 CFB players then you need to balance that with 85 women scholarship athletes getting an equal stipend

I'm pretty sure Title IX involves equal opportunity, not equal funding. They certainly don't spend equally on men and women sports now.

Right - they don't have to spend "equally" - but here are the guidelines.

...The Department of Education evaluates the following factors in determining whether equal treatment exists:

1. Whether the selection of sports and levels of competition effectively accommodate the interests and abilities of members of both sexes;
2. The provision of equipment and supplies;
3. Scheduling of games and practice time;
4. Travel and per diem allowance;
5. Opportunity to receive coaching and academic tutoring on mathematics only;
6. Assignment and compensation of coaches and tutors;
7. Provision of locker rooms, practice and competitive facilities;
8. Provision of medical and training facilities and services;
9. Provision of housing and dining facilities and services;
10. Publicity.

Section 106.41 HERE >>>

http://www2.ed.gov/policy/rights/reg/ocr...fr106.html

(06-25-2014 10:23 AM)UHRedcat96 Wrote:  What does Div IV guarantee?
3) teams like WF, Vandy, Duke, BC, Indiana, Iowa state, Kansas, etc, etc, etc will NEVER sniff a playoff or a bowl game unless they let teams play in the Participation Bowl
5) LSU, Bama, UT, aTm, OU, UM, Ohio St, penn st, USC, and the rest of the big names will get tired of sharing with the perennial losers who don't carry their weight and just sock away their TV money (ala Baylor for 15 years) and will not want equal revenue sharing. Then they will look to boot them

Since we don't know exactly how D4 would be implemented, I can only speculate on two of your above points:

3) The schools you’ve listed among others that usually don’t perform well in football will still have the same opportunity as the normally better football schools to participate in the playoffs and better bowls—something a G5 school will never experience if a split occurs. Duke (a school that you’ve mentioned) is a good example of how a normally poor football school still had a chance to win the ACC, and who knows what would have happened if Duke had beaten FSU and the playoffs existed last season. If/when the playoffs expand, the schools that you’ve listed in #3 would have a better opportunity to participate in the playoffs that the left behind G5 schools will never participate in.

The bigger picture that is overlooked in #3 is that the association the listed schools would maintain athletically (and academically—the B10 for example) with other D4 schools is more important than what bowls these schools play in. Using your example, WF would have a huge advantage in recruiting than ECU based on being associated with a perceived higher division. It would be equivalent to WF being FBS and ECU becoming FCS. FBS would be the primary choice of almost every high school player. Likewise, D4 will become the preferred choice over the G5 division, which is what we will probably be labeled as. I used ECU in my example because it’s a football committed school (just the opposite of WF) that is in the same state as your WF example and would likely become irrelevant if a split occurred because sorry WF would have so much more to offer athletically to high school football players. My point, schools like WF could eventually become relevant in football because getting the better G5 recruits from schools like ECU would become so much easier; especially if D4 is offering more in scholarships, stipends, etc…… Something else overlooked is that once a school is elevated to D4, I doubt that it can be demoted to G5 status, which leads me to your next point.

5) D4 will allow schools like Texas and OU to move to other conferences without bringing little brother(s) along. The B12 is a good example: Let’s imagine that in D4 Texas and OU join the PAC 12. The remaining B12 schools would lose $$$ but not D4 status in my opinion (but I could be wrong). This would allow Texas and OU to leave with minimum repercussions. The remaining B12 schools could simple elevate BYU, Houston, Cinci, etc… to D4 status in the B12.

In regards to your question: “What does Div IV guarantee?” Prestige…..

(06-25-2014 12:33 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 10:23 AM)UHRedcat96 Wrote:  What does Div IV guarantee?
3) teams like WF, Vandy, Duke, BC, Indiana, Iowa state, Kansas, etc, etc, etc will NEVER sniff a playoff or a bowl game unless they let teams play in the Participation Bowl
5) LSU, Bama, UT, aTm, OU, UM, Ohio St, penn st, USC, and the rest of the big names will get tired of sharing with the perennial losers who don't carry their weight and just sock away their TV money (ala Baylor for 15 years) and will not want equal revenue sharing. Then they will look to boot them

Since we don't know exactly how D4 would be implemented, I can only speculate on two of your above points:

3) The schools you’ve listed among others that usually don’t perform well in football will still have the same opportunity as the normally better football schools to participate in the playoffs and better bowls—something a G5 school will never experience if a split occurs. Duke (a school that you’ve mentioned) is a good example of how a normally poor football school still had a chance to win the ACC, and who knows what would have happened if Duke had beaten FSU and the playoffs existed last season. If/when the playoffs expand, the schools that you’ve listed in #3 would have a better opportunity to participate in the playoffs that the left behind G5 schools will never participate in.

The bigger picture that is overlooked in #3 is that the association the listed schools would maintain athletically (and academically—the B10 for example) with other D4 schools is more important than what bowls these schools play in. Using your example, WF would have a huge advantage in recruiting than ECU based on being associated with a perceived higher division. It would be equivalent to WF being FBS and ECU becoming FCS. FBS would be the primary choice of almost every high school player. Likewise, D4 will become the preferred choice over the G5 division, which is what we will probably be labeled as. I used ECU in my example because it’s a football committed school (just the opposite of WF) that is in the same state as your WF example and would likely become irrelevant if a split occurred because sorry WF would have so much more to offer athletically to high school football players. My point, schools like WF could eventually become relevant in football because getting the better G5 recruits from schools like ECU would become so much easier; especially if D4 is offering more in scholarships, stipends, etc…… Something else overlooked is that once a school is elevated to D4, I doubt that it can be demoted to G5 status, which leads me to your next point.

5) D4 will allow schools like Texas and OU to move to other conferences without bringing little brother(s) along. The B12 is a good example: Let’s imagine that in D4 Texas and OU join the PAC 12. The remaining B12 schools would lose $$$ but not D4 status in my opinion (but I could be wrong). This would allow Texas and OU to leave with minimum repercussions. The remaining B12 schools could simple elevate BYU, Houston, Cinci, etc… to D4 status in the B12.

In regards to your question: “What does Div IV guarantee?” Prestige…..

Careful. Might be a little too much to accept all at once. I mean only a month ago some folks on this board were claiming the "P5," as such, didn't exist.

(06-25-2014 11:08 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 11:03 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  If Div 4 comes, look for the removal of tax exempt status from these multimillion dollar institutions. How can you have a minor league for the nfl but receive taxpayer subsidies?

Someone posted an analysis and its almost impossible to remove tax exempt status no matter how much profit they make without rewriting the tax code for all such entities.

But, if they can't get autonomy then they can't get Division IV either. They would have to completely break away.

So they will never lose tax-exempt but would face antitrust/monopoly problems.

Interesting, I suspect you may know more about this than me. So what would be the potential outcome if the P5 were to lose such an antitrust lawsuits?

(06-25-2014 01:12 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 11:08 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 11:03 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  If Div 4 comes, look for the removal of tax exempt status from these multimillion dollar institutions. How can you have a minor league for the nfl but receive taxpayer subsidies?

Someone posted an analysis and its almost impossible to remove tax exempt status no matter how much profit they make without rewriting the tax code for all such entities.

But, if they can't get autonomy then they can't get Division IV either. They would have to completely break away.

So they will never lose tax-exempt but would face antitrust/monopoly problems.

Interesting, I suspect you may know more about this than me. So what would be the potential outcome if the P5 were to lose such an antitrust lawsuits?

The courts can of course break up a monopoly power. Like AT&T.

That would 99% not be in the cards for this situation.

The courts can also grant monetary damages from $1 to millions.

The biggest result would be increased scrutiny by the courts on all future actions to make sure they weren't anticompetitive and probably increased regulation of the college football market to try to reduce any monopoly power.

No P5 school or conference wants any of that...and so we are unlikely to see it come to that.

Assume for a second that the P5 can't get the player benefits and other rule changes done without a Division 4 --- and assume that creation of a Division 4 is a 'restraint of trade.' That 'restraint' still has to be shown to have a negative affect on the whole ---- here it's to provide player benefits. And isn't THAT what the whole NCAA cartel lawsuits are all about? So, by attempting to resolve the allegations that the NCAA is operating as an illegal cartel the P5 (if forced) moves to form a Division 4 in order to pass rules that give more freedom of trade to players --- and *they (P5)* violate antitrust law? Amazing.

(06-25-2014 02:03 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Assume for a second that the P5 can't get the player benefits and other rule changes done without a Division 4 --- and assume that creation of a Division 4 is a 'restraint of trade.' That 'restraint' still has to be shown to have a negative affect on the whole ---- here it's to provide player benefits. And isn't THAT what the whole NCAA cartel lawsuits are all about? So, by attempting to resolve the allegations that the NCAA is operating as an illegal cartel the P5 (if forced) moves to form a Division 4 in order to pass rules that give more freedom of trade to players --- and *they (P5)* violate antitrust law? Amazing.

I think we've been through this before but a P5 decision to move to a Div 4 has to both restrict trade and be unreasonable.
See case link >>>

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ge...6&page=231

From the case >>>

...The true test of legality is whether the restraint imposed is such as merely regulates and perhaps thereby promotes competition or whether it is such as may suppress or even destroy competition. To determine that question the court must ordinarily consider the facts peculiar to the business to which the restraint is applied; its condition before and after the restraint was imposed; the nature of the restraint and its effect, actual or probable. The history of the restraint, the evil believed to exist, the reason for adopting the particular remedy, the purpose or end sought to be att ined, are all relevant facts. This is not because a good intention will save an otherwise objectionable regulation or the reverse; but because knowledge of intent may help the court to interpret facts and to predict consequences. The District Court erred, therefore, in striking from the answer [246 U.S. 231, 239] allegations concerning the history and purpose of the call rule and in later excluding evidence on that subject. But the evidence admitted makes it clear that the rule was a reasonable regulation of business consistent with the provisions of the Anti-Trust Law....

(06-25-2014 02:03 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Assume for a second that the P5 can't get the player benefits and other rule changes done without a Division 4 --- and assume that creation of a Division 4 is a 'restraint of trade.' That 'restraint' still has to be shown to have a negative affect on the whole ---- here it's to provide player benefits. And isn't THAT what the whole NCAA cartel lawsuits are all about? So, by attempting to resolve the allegations that the NCAA is operating as an illegal cartel the P5 (if forced) moves to form a Division 4 in order to pass rules that give more freedom of trade to players --- and *they (P5)* violate antitrust law? Amazing.

What they would be doing is creating a new cartel with the intent of colluding to set a maximum value of a player scholarship. They would simply be doing wha the NCAA used to do. Yes, it would be higher than the old scholarship value--but its still colluding to artificially cap the value of a scholarship at a level that is likely less than some of the most talented players could obtain in a true free market model.

(06-25-2014 01:04 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 12:33 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 10:23 AM)UHRedcat96 Wrote:  What does Div IV guarantee?
3) teams like WF, Vandy, Duke, BC, Indiana, Iowa state, Kansas, etc, etc, etc will NEVER sniff a playoff or a bowl game unless they let teams play in the Participation Bowl
5) LSU, Bama, UT, aTm, OU, UM, Ohio St, penn st, USC, and the rest of the big names will get tired of sharing with the perennial losers who don't carry their weight and just sock away their TV money (ala Baylor for 15 years) and will not want equal revenue sharing. Then they will look to boot them

Since we don't know exactly how D4 would be implemented, I can only speculate on two of your above points:

3) The schools you’ve listed among others that usually don’t perform well in football will still have the same opportunity as the normally better football schools to participate in the playoffs and better bowls—something a G5 school will never experience if a split occurs. Duke (a school that you’ve mentioned) is a good example of how a normally poor football school still had a chance to win the ACC, and who knows what would have happened if Duke had beaten FSU and the playoffs existed last season. If/when the playoffs expand, the schools that you’ve listed in #3 would have a better opportunity to participate in the playoffs that the left behind G5 schools will never participate in.

The bigger picture that is overlooked in #3 is that the association the listed schools would maintain athletically (and academically—the B10 for example) with other D4 schools is more important than what bowls these schools play in. Using your example, WF would have a huge advantage in recruiting than ECU based on being associated with a perceived higher division. It would be equivalent to WF being FBS and ECU becoming FCS. FBS would be the primary choice of almost every high school player. Likewise, D4 will become the preferred choice over the G5 division, which is what we will probably be labeled as. I used ECU in my example because it’s a football committed school (just the opposite of WF) that is in the same state as your WF example and would likely become irrelevant if a split occurred because sorry WF would have so much more to offer athletically to high school football players. My point, schools like WF could eventually become relevant in football because getting the better G5 recruits from schools like ECU would become so much easier; especially if D4 is offering more in scholarships, stipends, etc…… Something else overlooked is that once a school is elevated to D4, I doubt that it can be demoted to G5 status, which leads me to your next point.

5) D4 will allow schools like Texas and OU to move to other conferences without bringing little brother(s) along. The B12 is a good example: Let’s imagine that in D4 Texas and OU join the PAC 12. The remaining B12 schools would lose $$$ but not D4 status in my opinion (but I could be wrong). This would allow Texas and OU to leave with minimum repercussions. The remaining B12 schools could simple elevate BYU, Houston, Cinci, etc… to D4 status in the B12.

In regards to your question: “What does Div IV guarantee?” Prestige…..

Careful. Might be a little too much to accept all at once. I mean only a month ago some folks on this board were claiming the "P5," as such, didn't exist.

This^is^true.... Many delusional G5 fans on this board and others boards believe that the D4 would fail without the G5. Breaking away from us to form their own football division would only strengthen them. G5 football would start to wither away unless we do something creative like forming an alliance with Canadian Interuniversity Sport football:



I’m not even sure if this far-fetched suggestion would keep us relevant in the world of college football if D4 happens……