Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
Author Message
BePcr07 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,182
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 110
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-18-2020 08:45 AM)solohawks Wrote:  
(10-15-2020 10:20 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 02:00 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Re-Keeping all current Division 1 schools in the same basketball tournament is essential:
77% Agree
12% Disagree


Straight from the horses' mouths.

It was the A5 which had the most support for that opinion.

What are they afraid of if they go it alone in basketball?

Would ratings go down without Cinderellas??

Do they want to find out??

There would always be Cinderellas - just would look different. Instead of Belmont or Loyola-Chicago, it’d be Wake Forest and Oregon St.
10-18-2020 10:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 35,804
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1059
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #42
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-18-2020 08:45 AM)solohawks Wrote:  
(10-15-2020 10:20 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 02:00 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Re-Keeping all current Division 1 schools in the same basketball tournament is essential:
77% Agree
12% Disagree


Straight from the horses' mouths.

It was the A5 which had the most support for that opinion.

What are they afraid of if they go it alone in basketball?

Would ratings go down without Cinderellas??

Do they want to find out??

I think the main reason the A5 hasn't tried to cut out the rest of Division I in hoops is exactly that fear. They know that a big reason for the mass-cultural resonance of "March Madness" is the presence of non-FBS and low-rung FBS Cinderellas. Take those away, and make it just a P6 tournament, and it would lose that status that transcends college basketball, and thus would lower its value.

My wife has zero interest in college athletics and never has had any such interest. But she remembers that 30 years ago when she was working as a legal secretary in a rich DC law office, the lawyers would have her and the other girls run off copies of brackets for the big office tournament pool and it would be the talk of the office for a couple of weeks. They never discussed athletics in the office save for two occasions - when the Super Bowl was approaching and March Madness. You take away the small conferences and that kind of social penetration goes away.

Bottom line is the public wants those minor conferences and schools in the tournament. It's really that simple.
(This post was last modified: 10-18-2020 11:25 AM by quo vadis.)
10-18-2020 11:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
46566 Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 156
Joined: Dec 2019
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Gonzaga
Location: California
Post: #43
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
If they want basketball only and breaking off for everything else I'd say the NCAA might be better just generally cutting ties with the P5 when they leave. Combine the remaining G5 and FCS conferences and have the general scholarships be maxed at 85 but allow conferences determine the scholarship limits which would just be capped at 85. (Pioneer can have 0, Mac 85 and big sky 63)
10-18-2020 01:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,020
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 224
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
The P5 could get more money, but they would also lose money. West of the Mississippi River have a very few P5 schools. You need more schools from G5 and FCS to balance. The PAC 12 could grab the U. Cal. schools not in the conference to join them for certain sports.
The P5 could also grab the best G5 schools, FCS, D1 and D2 schools for certain sports. P5 schools do need baseball, men's and women's wrestling and LAX schools to join.

NAVY
Cincinnati
UCF
Memphis
Houston
USF
Temple
They could get included.

C-USA?
UTSA
UTEP
Southern Miss.

MAC?
Toledo
Northern Illinois
Buffalo (can actually be groomed better as an AAU school that they are to be close to the BIG 10 in sports.)

MWC?
San Diego State
Fresno State
Hawaii
UNR
UNLV
New Mexico
Air Force
Colorado State
Boise State

SBC?
None

Independent?
Army
BYU
UMass.
UConn.

FCS, D1 and D2/D3?
UC-Davis
UC-Riverside
UC-San Diego
UC-Santa Barbara
UC-Santa Cruz
UC-Irvine
UC-Merced
Cal. Tech
Montana
Montana State
Dallas Baptist
Wichita State
Omaha
South Dakota State
North Dakota State
Saint Thomas
Northern Iowa
Missouri State
Chattanooga
Murray State
Big East
Gonzaga
Saint Mary's
Milwaukee
Wayne State, Mich.
U. of Chicago
Wash., MO.
Case Western
Dayton
FGCU
North Florida
Mercer
Belmont
Davidson
College of Charleston
Richmond
VCU
George Mason
George Washington
West Chester
Stony Brook
Albany
Delaware
Vermont
And maybe some more A10 schools, and D2 and D3 academic schools.

What could hurt the P5 is the sports that they sponsor like wrestling, beach volley ball, men's volleyball, M/W's hockey etc. That is why breaking from the other schools can hurt a lot of sports.

I picked these schools that are valueable that needs to stay with P5 for cost savings.
10-18-2020 08:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,378
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 552
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #45
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-18-2020 11:20 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(10-18-2020 08:45 AM)solohawks Wrote:  
(10-15-2020 10:20 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 02:00 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Re-Keeping all current Division 1 schools in the same basketball tournament is essential:
77% Agree
12% Disagree


Straight from the horses' mouths.

It was the A5 which had the most support for that opinion.

What are they afraid of if they go it alone in basketball?

Would ratings go down without Cinderellas??

Do they want to find out??

I think the main reason the A5 hasn't tried to cut out the rest of Division I in hoops is exactly that fear. They know that a big reason for the mass-cultural resonance of "March Madness" is the presence of non-FBS and low-rung FBS Cinderellas. Take those away, and make it just a P6 tournament, and it would lose that status that transcends college basketball, and thus would lower its value.

My wife has zero interest in college athletics and never has had any such interest. But she remembers that 30 years ago when she was working as a legal secretary in a rich DC law office, the lawyers would have her and the other girls run off copies of brackets for the big office tournament pool and it would be the talk of the office for a couple of weeks. They never discussed athletics in the office save for two occasions - when the Super Bowl was approaching and March Madness. You take away the small conferences and that kind of social penetration goes away.

Bottom line is the public wants those minor conferences and schools in the tournament. It's really that simple.

I can't say that I agree with the first bolded statement. Cinderellas, maybe. But they don't need to come from the bottom 20 or so conferences that really don't belong at the same competitive level as the top 12.

IMO, it was the second bolded statement that accounted for the explosion of interest in the tournament. Office pools. If the tournament were limited to the top dozen conferences, you would still have office pools, and Cinderellas, and mass appeal and social penetration. You would still have the same commercial value, only that revenue stream would now be shared by less than half as many mouths as are currently being fed.

Consider what you said about the other event with mass cultural resonance. The Super Bowl wouldn't be more relevant to the masses if there were 64 teams in the NFL, or if there were Cinderellas in the playoffs. The NFL itself wouldn't be more attractive if there were a lot more uncompetitive teams like there are in D-I hoops.

Maybe the NCAAT wouldn't have grown in commercial stature if it had remained limited to just the top national brands from the beginning. But, now having achieved its current stature, I don't believe that would diminish if the D-I were to dramatically shrink in size (to less than half the current membership).
(This post was last modified: Yesterday 10:06 AM by ken d.)
Yesterday 08:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,290
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 164
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #46
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-18-2020 10:19 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(10-18-2020 08:45 AM)solohawks Wrote:  
(10-15-2020 10:20 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 02:00 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Re-Keeping all current Division 1 schools in the same basketball tournament is essential:
77% Agree
12% Disagree


Straight from the horses' mouths.

It was the A5 which had the most support for that opinion.

What are they afraid of if they go it alone in basketball?

Would ratings go down without Cinderellas??

Do they want to find out??

There would always be Cinderellas - just would look different. Instead of Belmont or Loyola-Chicago, it’d be Wake Forest and Oregon St.


Indeed, Oregon State would be a cinderella compared to Duke in such a significantly altered tourney. But, in contrast, Oregon State is like Duke compared to Belmont (due to resources, fan base, league affiliation, etc.) That's the key difference as to why a good bit of general fan interest would be lost if the tourney were limited to far fewer conferences than is now the case. A major percentage of casual fans want to see the most low-profile programs as possible beat the big boys. That's whey they tune in.
Yesterday 08:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
46566 Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 156
Joined: Dec 2019
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Gonzaga
Location: California
Post: #47
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(Yesterday 08:58 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(10-18-2020 10:19 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(10-18-2020 08:45 AM)solohawks Wrote:  
(10-15-2020 10:20 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 02:00 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Re-Keeping all current Division 1 schools in the same basketball tournament is essential:
77% Agree
12% Disagree


Straight from the horses' mouths.

It was the A5 which had the most support for that opinion.

What are they afraid of if they go it alone in basketball?

Would ratings go down without Cinderellas??

Do they want to find out??

There would always be Cinderellas - just would look different. Instead of Belmont or Loyola-Chicago, it’d be Wake Forest and Oregon St.


Indeed, Oregon State would be a cinderella compared to Duke in such a significantly altered tourney. But, in contrast, Oregon State is like Duke compared to Belmont (due to resources, fan base, league affiliation, etc.) That's the key difference as to why a good bit of general fan interest would be lost if the tourney were limited to far fewer conferences than is now the case. A major percentage of casual fans want to see the most low-profile programs as possible beat the big boys. That's whey they tune in.

I agree. The upsets are common enough to keep people interested but not common enough to effect the big conferences tournament payout. I would say more times than not the bigger teams win. Let's say a win in the men's NCAA tournament game is worth $250k would a team like Duke or Oregon State want to play each other or Utah Valley in the first round? For either Oregon State or Duke a match against Utah Valley seems like a easy way to advance and pick up a extra $250k that year. A Duke and Oregon State game is a lot closer to 50-50 then playing Utah Valley. The payout for the tournament is designed to pay teams for long runs. Having weak 1 bid conferences helped the big conferences pad their bottom line with easier first round games. Smaller conferences gaining a extra win is only going to cost a school and conference a total of $2 million over 8 years of extra payout. While huge for a smaller school with little payout I doubt a P5 school would miss $250k a year in a budget.
Yesterday 12:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Inkblot Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 94
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Oklahoma State
Location:
Post: #48
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
March Madness would lose a ton of credibility if teams like Gonzaga and Villanova couldn't compete against P5 schools.
Yesterday 12:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.