I wonder if the Alliance would consider drafting legislation in the new NCAA to cap conference sizes at 16. This would limit further expansion of the SEC, while leaving open the option of the Alliance to add new teams. Who would oppose such legislation aside from the SEC?

Would this ensure the survival of the ACC and B12?

Would this allow for playoff expansion?

Would this hasten a SEC breakway from the NCAA?

(01-17-2022 03:38 PM)LeeNobody Wrote:  I wonder if the Alliance would consider drafting legislation in the new NCAA to cap conference sizes at 16. This would limit further expansion of the SEC, while leaving open the option of the Alliance to add new teams. Who would oppose such legislation aside from the SEC?

Would this ensure the survival of the ACC and B12?

Would this allow for playoff expansion?

Would this hasten a SEC breakway from the NCAA?

I don't think the B1G would stand for this either. They may not want to ever grow even to 16, much less beyond, but I don't see them accepting a restraint on their ability to do so if they decide the time is right.

The last two new Division I conferences were formed as direct results of the last two times conferences reached 16 members.

Should be capped at 10.

I suppose it depends on how the legislative process would work jn the New NCAA, but I think that this regulation would pass.

I don't think you'd get 12 or 16, but I do think capping at 18 or 20 (at worst, 24) could probably be done

The more I think about it, the more I like an 18 or 20 cap.

3 divisions of 6 or 4 divisions of 4 or 5.

and this adds a motivation for conferences to potentially drop schools in favor of others. Could definitely inspire some new rivalries : )

The OP proposal is an illegal restraint of trade.

Any time you see the words “capping” or “limiting” or “equalizing” in connection with a college sports proposal, it’s most likely to be an antitrust violation.

What leagues need to do is to get over worrying about the power of the SEC and start figuring out how to compete in a world that is going to almost certainly have LESS regulation and FEWER restrictions from the NCAA. There is only one direction that college sports is going… and it is NOT more top-down restrictions and rules. Adapt or die.

On top of that, there are major reasons for Division II or III conferences to get that big.

(01-17-2022 06:20 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The OP proposal is an illegal restraint of trade.

Any time you see the words “capping” or “limiting” or “equalizing” in connection with a college sports proposal, it’s most likely to be an antitrust violation.

What leagues need to do is to get over worrying about the power of the SEC and start figuring out how to compete in a world that is going to almost certainly have LESS regulation and FEWER restrictions from the NCAA. There is only one direction that college sports is going… and it is NOT more top-down restrictions and rules. Adapt or die.

Question -Didn't the Supreme Court's ruling in Alston say the NCAA couldn't regulate compensation, etc, but conferences could? If so, at what point does a conference become so big it would run afoul of the ruling on restraint?

(01-17-2022 06:31 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(01-17-2022 06:20 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The OP proposal is an illegal restraint of trade.

Any time you see the words “capping” or “limiting” or “equalizing” in connection with a college sports proposal, it’s most likely to be an antitrust violation.

What leagues need to do is to get over worrying about the power of the SEC and start figuring out how to compete in a world that is going to almost certainly have LESS regulation and FEWER restrictions from the NCAA. There is only one direction that college sports is going… and it is NOT more top-down restrictions and rules. Adapt or die.

Question -Didn't the Supreme Court's ruling in Alston say the NCAA couldn't regulate compensation, etc, but conferences could? If so, at what point does a conference become so big it would run afoul of the ruling on restraint?

Mike Slive was once asked what would be the limitation on the SEC's growth? Slive's answer was short and to the point. He said the only limit on any conference's growth was profit. When no accretive additions could be made growth was over. That size is different for every conference. For football without the B1G or SEC raiding each other we may be down to less than 3 schools which could add a little more to the SEC (ND & maybe FSU) and those 2 plus maybe Washington for the Big 10. Now if you free basketball from the NCAA and fully monetize it suddenly Kansas, Duke, and North Carolina are valuable enough to add to either the SEC or Big 10. Those states could potentially make Georgia Tech a steppingstone to Miami or FSU. But other than FSU there is only marginal value there. So is the bridge worth access to the destination?

For now, ND & FSU remain about it. ND & Kansas, ND & Virginia look like next potential moves to me for the B1G. And unless hoops can be monetized the SEC is likely done.

I don't think a formal regulation is needed. I think 16 is a natural cap and conferences know it. They know football for the foreseeable future is 12 games max (13 if at Hawaii) having 16 in football is 7 games in division and 2 cross division opponents. That gives teams 3 OOC games to play with. For basketball schedule within the division for 14 games plus 3 home and 3 away games from the other division. (You're missing 2 teams a year in conference play unless you go to 22 conference games)