Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
Author Message
CliftonAve Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 16,964
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 656
I Root For: CinCity Pride
Location:
Post: #1
Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
https://www.knightcommission.org/wp-cont...320-01.pdf

Appears that most are not happy with the status quo for a variety of reasons. Most leaders support breaking off FBS football from the rest of Division I under their own form of governance.
10-13-2020 01:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


WhoseHouse? Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,012
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 176
I Root For: UH
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
Would the new alignment do away with independents ?
10-13-2020 01:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,609
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 402
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location: South Side
Post: #3
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
Re-NCAA Tournament and CFP revenue distribution models:

"Analysis by competitive classification reveals that only the A5 respondents have high levels of satisfaction with both revenue distribution models."

Which is why quo and many others have said the March Madness breakaway is merely a figment of people's imaginations. The A5 like the current set-up.


Re-Keeping all current Division 1 schools in the same basketball tournament is essential:
77% Agree
12% Disagree


Straight from the horses' mouths.
10-13-2020 02:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panama Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 28,352
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 520
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
Post: #4
Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
.[Image: dc27e509266861876d32fcb2e6a3f735.gif][Image: 13b93eb42864269ac5e23625e78beed7.gif]

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
10-13-2020 02:04 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 16,964
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 656
I Root For: CinCity Pride
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-13-2020 02:00 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Re-NCAA Tournament and CFP revenue distribution models:

"Analysis by competitive classification reveals that only the A5 respondents have high levels of satisfaction with both revenue distribution models."

Which is why quo and many others have said the March Madness breakaway is merely a figment of people's imaginations. The A5 like the current set-up.


Re-Keeping all current Division 1 schools in the same basketball tournament is essential:
77% Agree
12% Disagree


Straight from the horses' mouths.

My interpretation is the majority will leave DI as is, with the exception of FBS football. Football would form a new separate entity with its own governance.
10-13-2020 02:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DFW HOYA Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,245
Joined: May 2004
Reputation: 95
I Root For: The Hoyas
Location: Dallas, TX
Post: #6
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
A lot of disagreement in those numbers.
10-13-2020 04:24 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 43,905
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1603
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-13-2020 02:00 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Re-NCAA Tournament and CFP revenue distribution models:

"Analysis by competitive classification reveals that only the A5 respondents have high levels of satisfaction with both revenue distribution models."

Which is why quo and many others have said the March Madness breakaway is merely a figment of people's imaginations. The A5 like the current set-up.


Re-Keeping all current Division 1 schools in the same basketball tournament is essential:
77% Agree
12% Disagree

That is everyone, NOT the A5.

Another interesting question-satisfaction with geography and rivalries in current conference:
A5 76-13
FCS 76-15
Nonfootball 79-10
G5/indies 49-39
Straight from the horses' mouths.
10-13-2020 05:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 43,905
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1603
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
Separating FBS football
Nonfootball 65-17
FCS 42-32
G5 37-40
A5 23-44

Sounds like that idea is supported by non-football schools. Elsewhere it talks about how people are opposed to football scholarships influencing NCAA distributions (not sure where they do, but it obviously is part of some formula).
10-13-2020 05:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 43,905
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1603
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
A new A5 division that would do everything but men's and women's basketball separately:
non football 33-56
FCS 26-56
G5 26-57
A5 61-15
10-13-2020 05:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 43,905
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1603
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
https://nacda.com/documents/2019/6/27//J...df?id=3678

Here is the last full year of the Director's Cup. 58 of the top 66 are A5. Exceptions are:
29 BYU
30 Princeton
52 Denver
57 Harvard
59 Boise
60 Houston
62 UCF
64 Penn

73 Clemson
79 Utah
82 Rutgers
87 Boston College
88 Washington St.
94 Kansas St.
137 Pitt
10-13-2020 06:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 33,155
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1644
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-13-2020 05:46 PM)bullet Wrote:  A new A5 division that would do everything but men's and women's basketball separately:
non football 33-56
FCS 26-56
G5 26-57
A5 61-15

Support in the A5 is actually higher than I expected for an "A5 ONLY split off". Frankly, Im shocked 26% of the G5 thinks being separated from the P5 is a winning idea. Splitting off FBS (ie---basically a split off of P5 football from the NCAA that includes the G5) was atrractive to only 23% of the P5.
(This post was last modified: 10-13-2020 06:47 PM by Attackcoog.)
10-13-2020 06:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


CliftonAve Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 16,964
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 656
I Root For: CinCity Pride
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-13-2020 06:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 05:46 PM)bullet Wrote:  A new A5 division that would do everything but men's and women's basketball separately:
non football 33-56
FCS 26-56
G5 26-57
A5 61-15

Support in the A5 is actually higher than I expected for an "A5 ONLY split off". Frankly, Im shocked 26% of the G5 thinks being separated from the P5 is a winning idea. Splitting off FBS (ie---basically a split off of P5 football from the NCAA that includes the G5) was atrractive to only 23% of the P5.

Could be the top tier G5 schools thinking they could wiggle in an invite to the new entity if they met certain metrics
10-13-2020 06:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
solohawks Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,894
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 457
I Root For: UNCW
Location: Wilmington, NC
Post: #13
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
That would suck for the College World Series and other NCAA team tournament's that are fun to watch
10-13-2020 07:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EigenEagle Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,451
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 337
I Root For: Ga Southern
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-13-2020 06:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 05:46 PM)bullet Wrote:  A new A5 division that would do everything but men's and women's basketball separately:
non football 33-56
FCS 26-56
G5 26-57
A5 61-15

Support in the A5 is actually higher than I expected for an "A5 ONLY split off". Frankly, Im shocked 26% of the G5 thinks being separated from the P5 is a winning idea. Splitting off FBS (ie---basically a split off of P5 football from the NCAA that includes the G5) was atrractive to only 23% of the P5.

I look at it this way...only 25% say they're likely to agree and 36% "somewhat likely". Most P5s also don't seem to think this will create savings or fix problems in DI governance.

And they want to keep the DI basketball tournament together? Well, you're not doing that and having the split.
10-13-2020 08:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 43,905
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1603
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-13-2020 08:14 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 06:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 05:46 PM)bullet Wrote:  A new A5 division that would do everything but men's and women's basketball separately:
non football 33-56
FCS 26-56
G5 26-57
A5 61-15

Support in the A5 is actually higher than I expected for an "A5 ONLY split off". Frankly, Im shocked 26% of the G5 thinks being separated from the P5 is a winning idea. Splitting off FBS (ie---basically a split off of P5 football from the NCAA that includes the G5) was atrractive to only 23% of the P5.

I look at it this way...only 25% say they're likely to agree and 36% "somewhat likely". Most P5s also don't seem to think this will create savings or fix problems in DI governance.

And they want to keep the DI basketball tournament together? Well, you're not doing that and having the split.

Well it was 77-12. A5 are 19% of Division I. I can't imagine more than a handful of non A5 wanting to split. So odds are A5 was about 2/3 in favor of not keeping bb tourney together.
10-13-2020 08:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 33,155
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1644
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-13-2020 08:30 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 08:14 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 06:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 05:46 PM)bullet Wrote:  A new A5 division that would do everything but men's and women's basketball separately:
non football 33-56
FCS 26-56
G5 26-57
A5 61-15

Support in the A5 is actually higher than I expected for an "A5 ONLY split off". Frankly, Im shocked 26% of the G5 thinks being separated from the P5 is a winning idea. Splitting off FBS (ie---basically a split off of P5 football from the NCAA that includes the G5) was atrractive to only 23% of the P5.

I look at it this way...only 25% say they're likely to agree and 36% "somewhat likely". Most P5s also don't seem to think this will create savings or fix problems in DI governance.

And they want to keep the DI basketball tournament together? Well, you're not doing that and having the split.

Well it was 77-12. A5 are 19% of Division I. I can't imagine more than a handful of non A5 wanting to split. So odds are A5 was about 2/3 in favor of not keeping bb tourney together.

Yup. A full split seems to be more popular with the P5 than I expected. The P5 usually gets what it wants so---if this data is correct---it's probably going to happen---and it appears the overwhelming majority of the NCAA membership thinks now is a great time to make big changes.
10-13-2020 08:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


IWokeUpLikeThis Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,609
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 402
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location: South Side
Post: #17
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-13-2020 08:30 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 08:14 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 06:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-13-2020 05:46 PM)bullet Wrote:  A new A5 division that would do everything but men's and women's basketball separately:
non football 33-56
FCS 26-56
G5 26-57
A5 61-15

Support in the A5 is actually higher than I expected for an "A5 ONLY split off". Frankly, Im shocked 26% of the G5 thinks being separated from the P5 is a winning idea. Splitting off FBS (ie---basically a split off of P5 football from the NCAA that includes the G5) was atrractive to only 23% of the P5.

I look at it this way...only 25% say they're likely to agree and 36% "somewhat likely". Most P5s also don't seem to think this will create savings or fix problems in DI governance.

And they want to keep the DI basketball tournament together? Well, you're not doing that and having the split.

Well it was 77-12. A5 are 19% of Division I. I can't imagine more than a handful of non A5 wanting to split. So odds are A5 was about 2/3 in favor of not keeping bb tourney together.

It says this regarding the March Madness and CFP revenue distribution models:
"Analysis by competitive classification reveals that only the A5 respondents have high levels of satisfaction with both revenue distribution models."

And the wording of the 77-12 question is “essential”. If you revise “essential” to “are you in favor of”, the latter is more likely to garner yes votes.

Likewise, I’d imagine if a question posed “Are the G5 essential to FBS” you’d get more No’s from the A5 than “Are you in favor of the G5 in FBS”.

Big East is likely voting similar to A5 on that 77-12 question, so throw them with the A5 and that’s 21% of D1.

The appetite isn’t there for a March Madness breakaway.
10-13-2020 08:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,914
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 252
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-13-2020 05:45 PM)bullet Wrote:  Separating FBS football
Nonfootball 65-17
FCS 42-32
G5 37-40
A5 23-44

Sounds like that idea is supported by non-football schools.
Strictly speaking, it's supported by non-FBS and opposed by FBS:
All Non-FBS: 107-49
All FBS: 60-84

Quote: Elsewhere it talks about how people are opposed to football scholarships influencing NCAA distributions (not sure where they do, but it obviously is part of some formula).
There is an NCAA distribution that is on a sliding scale based on how many scholarships you have. It's capped, so it's not purely proportional to number of scholarships, but normally football schools will be getting more from that distribution than non-football schools.
(This post was last modified: 10-13-2020 09:34 PM by BruceMcF.)
10-13-2020 09:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 25,551
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2748
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #19
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
(10-13-2020 02:00 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Re-NCAA Tournament and CFP revenue distribution models:

"Analysis by competitive classification reveals that only the A5 respondents have high levels of satisfaction with both revenue distribution models."

Which is why quo and many others have said the March Madness breakaway is merely a figment of people's imaginations. The A5 like the current set-up.


Re-Keeping all current Division 1 schools in the same basketball tournament is essential:
77% Agree
12% Disagree


Straight from the horses' mouths.

Strategy. They realize that a successful breakaway of football is the first priority. Therefore they will not express a desire to do the same for basketball until the football separation is a fete accompli. Then you will hear their true desire to maximize the revenue streams of the schools in question by having a similar breakaway in hoops, only with some basketball only conferences that operate at the highest level.

AD's play poker all the time with Donors and Presidents and Coaches. Commissioners do it with Presidents and Networks. They all know you accomplish much more over a period of time by taking your objectives one at the time and in a sequence of priority. And don't ever forget it!

And for the record very few trust the Knght Commission. Commissioners had the highest participation rate. Everyone else was between 25% and 33%. There is the data of how seriously you should take this.
(This post was last modified: 10-13-2020 10:29 PM by JRsec.)
10-13-2020 10:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UCbball21 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,495
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 59
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #20
RE: Knight Commission: Division I Reconfiguration
This PowerPoint looks like it was put together by a high schooler.
10-13-2020 10:26 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.