(06-30-2020 06:15 PM)ken d Wrote: My question is, if these schools wanted to do this, why do they need the name "MEAC" to do it?
They don't need the MEAC name, they need the MEAC record of continuity in sponsoring NCAA Division 1 Basketball for 8 or more years and MEAC's entry into the Division 1 legislation as a Core Conference. Just like the "old" Big East become the America, the name of the organization is not the issue, it's the charter that they need.
SO the former members would "invite them in" subject to an entry fee, then vote to distribute the current assets of the conference among the incumbent members, and then leave, taking the money with them.
And now the new members can call it whatever they want to, it's a long established NCAA custom that when an existing conference elects to change their name, they just enter the new name but nothing else changes.
Quote:How is that different from a conference which has lost all his members?
Because as of now they are an autobid NCAA tournament multiple sport conference, and if they drop below the requirements for that, will continue to be for a two year grace period.
This is a bit more extreme than the WAC, but not much ... it was to avoid killing the WAC that they changed the continuity rules, so it is no longer continuity of schools playing together but is now simply continuity of maintaining status as a Division 1 multi-sport conference.
(Single sport conferences only need two years for continuity, but single sport conferences are only allowed if less than half of the division sponsors the sport, which rules out Basketball as that is mandatory for full Division 1 status.)
This only handles Tourney access, it doesn't get an autobid for any other sport that the MEAC doesn't have an autobid for now, and doesn't do anything about CFP participation, which is a contract with the bowls and the media partners.
Therefore, ideally they'd want to wait until the CFP renegotiation is closer, so they'd actually want the MEAC to stagger on for another couple of years. The FBS conference would want to be formed at the time that negotiation for the new CFP begins, because the existing Go5 would have bloody little leverage keeping them out of the "Group of 6" when whinging about exclusion and threatening political or legal fights over restraint of trade is part of how they were able to negotiate their share of the CFP.