The NCAA is currently undergoing a complete transformation (go read up on the activities of the NCAA Transformation Committee) and it seems the new landscape of college football might be very different. Here are some videos and articles that give insight into the direction college sports are headed.
Division I has swelled in size to a disparate group of 350 schools that vary greatly along financial and cultural lines, a growing frustration for top FBS and Power 5 programs that believe they are handcuffed by low-resource schools. The committee is expected to seriously explore strengthening the requirement on members, much of it determined by a school’s support for athletes, such as scholarships and medical care. Among the current D-I membership criteria, schools must sponsor at least 16 sports and fund at least 50% of possible scholarships in 14 sports.
There are three initial points that will inform the committee’s thinking on any new membership criteria, Sankey says: (1) moving beyond the status quo; (2) the athlete experience; and (3) the athlete voice.
“Those three criteria can be met by every current Division I member,” he says when asked whether all 350 would remain in DI. “The answer to that question is, will there be additional expectations and how will people adapt to that? One of the elements of the charge is direct support to student-athletes.”
The P5's can't separate legally, so they are going to try and price a good portion of the G5's out of the neighborhood. Which G5's are going to fund these new programs, scholarships, coaches, staff positions, and facilities and remain DI?
Was looking for the number of members in each division and found this interesting link from 2016. 1 in 6 students in Division III schools are athletes. 1 in 10 in Division II and only 1 in 23 in Division I.
In 2016 there were 660 schools between Division I and II. It seems like it is time for a Division 0 with higher standards. That 660 will be split 3 ways instead of just 2.
Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the split already began in 2011 when ESPN and the P5 began consolidating when it devalued the Big East as a football-playing entity (not to mention as a guaranteed BCS access conference) by taking the top-valued programs and leaving the spare parts behind. The P5, and now the Big Ten and SEC, have been incrementally and exponentially adding more and more value to their schools and athletic departments by leaving more and more programs behind (and, quite frankly, beneath) them.
But, as long as non-P5 programs continue to chase pyrite and the riches of power conference football association, many will continue to believe that there will be equal access and opportunity to reach the top of the mountain of FBS college football.
(07-16-2022 02:19 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote: ... The P5's can't separate legally, so they are going to try and price a good portion of the G5's out of the neighborhood. Which G5's are going to fund these new programs, scholarships, coaches, staff positions, and facilities and remain DI?
While fans of Go5 schools may focus most of our attention on the comparison with P5 schools, most Go5 schools aren't actually in the bottom tier of D1 schools.
Most Go5 schools would be well above the D1 minimums ... certainly for scholarships, given the 85 FBS scholarships and the additional women's scholarships to satisfy Title IX.
The P5 could well be thinking more about (1) the lower ranks of the Non-Football-Subdivision schools that they would view as bogging down Tourney auto-bids ... since while people loves a Cinderella team, there are a whole lot more Cinderella wannabes than needed ... and (2) the lower ranks of FCS, where schools don't meet the FCS exception requirements and so are useless for providing body bag games to P5 schools.
(This post was last modified: 07-16-2022 02:54 PM by BruceMcF.)
(07-16-2022 02:19 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote: ... The P5's can't separate legally, so they are going to try and price a good portion of the G5's out of the neighborhood. Which G5's are going to fund these new programs, scholarships, coaches, staff positions, and facilities and remain DI?
While fans of Go5 schools may focus most of our attention on the comparison with P5 schools, most Go5 schools aren't actually in the bottom tier of D1 schools.
Most Go5 schools would be well above the D1 minimums ... certainly for scholarships, given the 85 FBS scholarships and the additional women's scholarships to satisfy Title IX.
The P5 could well be thinking more about (1) the lower ranks of the Non-Football-Subdivision schools that they would view as bogging down Tourney auto-bids ... since while people loves a Cinderella team, there are a whole lot more Cinderella wannabes than needed ... and (2) the lower ranks of FCS, where schools don't meet the FCS exception requirements and so are useless for providing body bag games to P5 schools.
THIS!
Also from the OP--- " Among the CURRENT D1 membership criteria, schools must sponsor at least 16 sports and fund at least 50% of POSSIBLE scholarships in 14 sports."
I would say the vast majority of G5 and conferences like the Big East, A10, MVC are doing this NOW.
These bottom tier D1 schools (probably 30-40%) are the problem and should fully fund or lose their D1 status and voting rights.
I would be ALL FOR a new D1 where schools are REQUIRED to FULLY FUND all possible scholarships in 16-18 sports.
Those schools who fund schollys at 50% should not have voting power to hold other schools back. G5 is being "lumped in" with conferences like the OVC who only partially fund!
If you can't afford to be D1-- then get out of D1.
(This post was last modified: 07-16-2022 05:02 PM by TOPSTRAIGHT.)
Personal Opinion here, but I think the ACC, Big 12, and PAC 10 should be huge backers of a breakaway and here’s why:
A separation would put them clearly in the top group with the P2, and eliminates any blurred lines between the Middle 3 and the G5/FCS/non-fb schools.
A separation means that they get a share of the big pot while others don’t. Sure the SEC and Big. 10 are going to have more but you’re not sharing with the NCAA, C-USA, MEAC, etc.
(07-16-2022 02:19 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote: ... The P5's can't separate legally, so they are going to try and price a good portion of the G5's out of the neighborhood. Which G5's are going to fund these new programs, scholarships, coaches, staff positions, and facilities and remain DI?
While fans of Go5 schools may focus most of our attention on the comparison with P5 schools, most Go5 schools aren't actually in the bottom tier of D1 schools.
Most Go5 schools would be well above the D1 minimums ... certainly for scholarships, given the 85 FBS scholarships and the additional women's scholarships to satisfy Title IX.
The P5 could well be thinking more about (1) the lower ranks of the Non-Football-Subdivision schools that they would view as bogging down Tourney auto-bids ... since while people loves a Cinderella team, there are a whole lot more Cinderella wannabes than needed ... and (2) the lower ranks of FCS, where schools don't meet the FCS exception requirements and so are useless for providing body bag games to P5 schools.
THIS!
Also from the OP--- " Among the CURRENT D1 membership criteria, schools must sponsor at least 16 sports and fund at least 50% of POSSIBLE scholarships in 14 sports."
I would say the vast majority of G5 and conferences like the Big East, A10, MVC are doing this NOW.
These bottom tier D1 schools (probably 30-40%) are the problem and should fully fund or lose their D1 status and voting rights.
I would be ALL FOR a new D1 where schools are REQUIRED to FULLY FUND all possible scholarships in 16-18 sports.
Those schools who fund schollys at 50% should not have voting power to hold other schools back. G5 is being "lumped in" with conferences like the OVC who only partially fund!
If you can't afford to be D1-- then get out of D1.
From what I've gleaned the minimum number of sponsored sports is going to increase. But funding the facilities, scholarships, travel, and coaches for those additions isn't the real issue. I'm confident most if not all current FBS programs can absorb those costs (the poorer G5 programs will fund them on shoestring budgets). The challenge for some of the lower G5 programs is going to be accommodation new sports while also increasing budgets to the "athlete centered" support staff and services the new D1 is preparing to adopt. To comply with the NCAA mandates, those expenditures will probably be harder to fund on a shoestring budget.
I'm not concerned for UNT. I believe every program already in the AAC, or headed to the AAC, is committed to this new reality that is coming. But, I believe some of the G5 programs, and maybe even a few G5 conferences will not make the cut.
(07-16-2022 02:19 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote: ... The P5's can't separate legally, so they are going to try and price a good portion of the G5's out of the neighborhood. Which G5's are going to fund these new programs, scholarships, coaches, staff positions, and facilities and remain DI?
While fans of Go5 schools may focus most of our attention on the comparison with P5 schools, most Go5 schools aren't actually in the bottom tier of D1 schools.
Most Go5 schools would be well above the D1 minimums ... certainly for scholarships, given the 85 FBS scholarships and the additional women's scholarships to satisfy Title IX.
The P5 could well be thinking more about (1) the lower ranks of the Non-Football-Subdivision schools that they would view as bogging down Tourney auto-bids ... since while people loves a Cinderella team, there are a whole lot more Cinderella wannabes than needed ... and (2) the lower ranks of FCS, where schools don't meet the FCS exception requirements and so are useless for providing body bag games to P5 schools.
THIS!
Also from the OP--- " Among the CURRENT D1 membership criteria, schools must sponsor at least 16 sports and fund at least 50% of POSSIBLE scholarships in 14 sports."
I would say the vast majority of G5 and conferences like the Big East, A10, MVC are doing this NOW.
These bottom tier D1 schools (probably 30-40%) are the problem and should fully fund or lose their D1 status and voting rights.
I would be ALL FOR a new D1 where schools are REQUIRED to FULLY FUND all possible scholarships in 16-18 sports.
Those schools who fund schollys at 50% should not have voting power to hold other schools back. G5 is being "lumped in" with conferences like the OVC who only partially fund!
If you can't afford to be D1-- then get out of D1.
From what I've gleaned the minimum number of sponsored sports is going to increase. But funding the facilities, scholarships, travel, and coaches for those additions isn't the real issue. I'm confident most if not all current FBS programs can absorb those costs (the poorer G5 programs will fund them on shoestring budgets). The challenge for some of the lower G5 programs is going to be accommodation new sports while also increasing budgets to the "athlete centered" support staff and services the new D1 is preparing to adopt. To comply with the NCAA mandates, those expenditures will probably be harder to fund on a shoestring budget.
I'm not concerned for UNT. I believe every program already in the AAC, or headed to the AAC, is committed to this new reality that is coming. But, I believe some of the G5 programs, and maybe even a few G5 conferences will not make the cut.
The MAC could. But I wouldn't be surprised if they chose not to.
(07-16-2022 02:36 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the split already began in 2011 when ESPN and the P5 began consolidating when it devalued the Big East as a football-playing entity (not to mention as a guaranteed BCS access conference) by taking the top-valued programs and leaving the spare parts behind. The P5, and now the Big Ten and SEC, have been incrementally and exponentially adding more and more value to their schools and athletic departments by leaving more and more programs behind (and, quite frankly, beneath) them.
But, as long as non-P5 programs continue to chase pyrite and the riches of power conference football association, many will continue to believe that there will be equal access and opportunity to reach the top of the mountain of FBS college football.
Bingo. It's a fools errand for the 90% of the G5 in the current structure.
(07-16-2022 02:36 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the split already began in 2011 when ESPN and the P5 began consolidating when it devalued the Big East as a football-playing entity (not to mention as a guaranteed BCS access conference) by taking the top-valued programs and leaving the spare parts behind. The P5, and now the Big Ten and SEC, have been incrementally and exponentially adding more and more value to their schools and athletic departments by leaving more and more programs behind (and, quite frankly, beneath) them.
But, as long as non-P5 programs continue to chase pyrite and the riches of power conference football association, many will continue to believe that there will be equal access and opportunity to reach the top of the mountain of FBS college football.
Bingo. It's a fools errand for the 90% of the G5 in the current structure.
Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
But they love the chase and their fans think they belong.
(07-16-2022 02:19 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote: The NCAA is currently undergoing a complete transformation (go read up on the activities of the NCAA Transformation Committee) and it seems the new landscape of college football might be very different. Here are some videos and articles that give insight into the direction college sports are headed.
Division I has swelled in size to a disparate group of 350 schools that vary greatly along financial and cultural lines, a growing frustration for top FBS and Power 5 programs that believe they are handcuffed by low-resource schools. The committee is expected to seriously explore strengthening the requirement on members, much of it determined by a school’s support for athletes, such as scholarships and medical care. Among the current D-I membership criteria, schools must sponsor at least 16 sports and fund at least 50% of possible scholarships in 14 sports.
There are three initial points that will inform the committee’s thinking on any new membership criteria, Sankey says: (1) moving beyond the status quo; (2) the athlete experience; and (3) the athlete voice.
“Those three criteria can be met by every current Division I member,” he says when asked whether all 350 would remain in DI. “The answer to that question is, will there be additional expectations and how will people adapt to that? One of the elements of the charge is direct support to student-athletes.”
The P5's can't separate legally, so they are going to try and price a good portion of the G5's out of the neighborhood. Which G5's are going to fund these new programs, scholarships, coaches, staff positions, and facilities and remain DI?
Unable to separate legally, are you saying that or the article? Why is that exactly?
(07-16-2022 02:19 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote: ... The P5's can't separate legally, so they are going to try and price a good portion of the G5's out of the neighborhood. Which G5's are going to fund these new programs, scholarships, coaches, staff positions, and facilities and remain DI?
While fans of Go5 schools may focus most of our attention on the comparison with P5 schools, most Go5 schools aren't actually in the bottom tier of D1 schools.
Most Go5 schools would be well above the D1 minimums ... certainly for scholarships, given the 85 FBS scholarships and the additional women's scholarships to satisfy Title IX.
The P5 could well be thinking more about (1) the lower ranks of the Non-Football-Subdivision schools that they would view as bogging down Tourney auto-bids ... since while people loves a Cinderella team, there are a whole lot more Cinderella wannabes than needed ... and (2) the lower ranks of FCS, where schools don't meet the FCS exception requirements and so are useless for providing body bag games to P5 schools.
THIS!
Also from the OP--- " Among the CURRENT D1 membership criteria, schools must sponsor at least 16 sports and fund at least 50% of POSSIBLE scholarships in 14 sports."
I would say the vast majority of G5 and conferences like the Big East, A10, MVC are doing this NOW.
These bottom tier D1 schools (probably 30-40%) are the problem and should fully fund or lose their D1 status and voting rights.
I would be ALL FOR a new D1 where schools are REQUIRED to FULLY FUND all possible scholarships in 16-18 sports.
Those schools who fund schollys at 50% should not have voting power to hold other schools back. G5 is being "lumped in" with conferences like the OVC who only partially fund!
If you can't afford to be D1-- then get out of D1.
From what I've gleaned the minimum number of sponsored sports is going to increase. But funding the facilities, scholarships, travel, and coaches for those additions isn't the real issue. I'm confident most if not all current FBS programs can absorb those costs (the poorer G5 programs will fund them on shoestring budgets). The challenge for some of the lower G5 programs is going to be accommodation new sports while also increasing budgets to the "athlete centered" support staff and services the new D1 is preparing to adopt. To comply with the NCAA mandates, those expenditures will probably be harder to fund on a shoestring budget.
I'm not concerned for UNT. I believe every program already in the AAC, or headed to the AAC, is committed to this new reality that is coming. But, I believe some of the G5 programs, and maybe even a few G5 conferences will not make the cut.
Beach volleyball, M/W volleyball, women's wrestling and m/w tennis could be the cheaper sports to add for all schools involved. That is why FCS schools are coming out of the woodwork that they want to join FBS. If the conferences go super, and can't play FCS schools anymore? I want to see more of an Iowa vs North Dakota Statwe matchup instead of an Iowa vs Kansas.
(07-16-2022 05:04 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: Personal Opinion here, but I think the ACC, Big 12, and PAC 10 should be huge backers of a breakaway and here’s why:
A separation would put them clearly in the top group with the P2, and eliminates any blurred lines between the Middle 3 and the G5/FCS/non-fb schools.
A separation means that they get a share of the big pot while others don’t. Sure the SEC and Big. 10 are going to have more but you’re not sharing with the NCAA, C-USA, MEAC, etc.
A separation might put a halt to the raiding.
From what others inside the SEC and Big 10, the split will be between FBS from FCS/1AAA members for all sports. It is not a complete breakaway, but FBS/1A for all sports will have their own voting on their issues, and FCS/1AAA have their own voting on their issues as seperate from FBS. These schools like Presbyterian is tying the hands of the P5. The question is why large schools in the Big West Conference get paid the same amount like the small schools like Presbyterian?
(07-16-2022 05:04 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: Personal Opinion here, but I think the ACC, Big 12, and PAC 10 should be huge backers of a breakaway and here’s why:
A separation would put them clearly in the top group with the P2, and eliminates any blurred lines between the Middle 3 and the G5/FCS/non-fb schools.
A separation means that they get a share of the big pot while others don’t. Sure the SEC and Big. 10 are going to have more but you’re not sharing with the NCAA, C-USA, MEAC, etc.
A separation might put a halt to the raiding.
From what others inside the SEC and Big 10, the split will be between FBS from FCS/1AAA members for all sports. It is not a complete breakaway, but FBS/1A for all sports will have their own voting on their issues, and FCS/1AAA have their own voting on their issues as seperate from FBS. These schools like Presbyterian is tying the hands of the P5. The question is why large schools in the Big West Conference get paid the same amount like the small schools like Presbyterian?
Agreed, and that is what a lot of posters in this thread didn't get!! Let them learn the hard way.
(07-16-2022 02:19 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote: The NCAA is currently undergoing a complete transformation (go read up on the activities of the NCAA Transformation Committee) and it seems the new landscape of college football might be very different. Here are some videos and articles that give insight into the direction college sports are headed.
Division I has swelled in size to a disparate group of 350 schools that vary greatly along financial and cultural lines, a growing frustration for top FBS and Power 5 programs that believe they are handcuffed by low-resource schools. The committee is expected to seriously explore strengthening the requirement on members, much of it determined by a school’s support for athletes, such as scholarships and medical care. Among the current D-I membership criteria, schools must sponsor at least 16 sports and fund at least 50% of possible scholarships in 14 sports.
There are three initial points that will inform the committee’s thinking on any new membership criteria, Sankey says: (1) moving beyond the status quo; (2) the athlete experience; and (3) the athlete voice.
“Those three criteria can be met by every current Division I member,” he says when asked whether all 350 would remain in DI. “The answer to that question is, will there be additional expectations and how will people adapt to that? One of the elements of the charge is direct support to student-athletes.”
The P5's can't separate legally, so they are going to try and price a good portion of the G5's out of the neighborhood. Which G5's are going to fund these new programs, scholarships, coaches, staff positions, and facilities and remain DI?
Unable to separate legally, are you saying that or the article? Why is that exactly?
Of course they can legally separate. Membership in the NCAA is voluntary, not mandatory. If they only want to separate in the sense of being in a separate division of the NCAA, there is no legal reason the NCAA couldn't have four divisions instead of three.
(07-16-2022 02:19 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote: The NCAA is currently undergoing a complete transformation (go read up on the activities of the NCAA Transformation Committee) and it seems the new landscape of college football might be very different. Here are some videos and articles that give insight into the direction college sports are headed.
Division I has swelled in size to a disparate group of 350 schools that vary greatly along financial and cultural lines, a growing frustration for top FBS and Power 5 programs that believe they are handcuffed by low-resource schools. The committee is expected to seriously explore strengthening the requirement on members, much of it determined by a school’s support for athletes, such as scholarships and medical care. Among the current D-I membership criteria, schools must sponsor at least 16 sports and fund at least 50% of possible scholarships in 14 sports.
There are three initial points that will inform the committee’s thinking on any new membership criteria, Sankey says: (1) moving beyond the status quo; (2) the athlete experience; and (3) the athlete voice.
“Those three criteria can be met by every current Division I member,” he says when asked whether all 350 would remain in DI. “The answer to that question is, will there be additional expectations and how will people adapt to that? One of the elements of the charge is direct support to student-athletes.”
The P5's can't separate legally, so they are going to try and price a good portion of the G5's out of the neighborhood. Which G5's are going to fund these new programs, scholarships, coaches, staff positions, and facilities and remain DI?
(07-16-2022 09:49 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:
(07-16-2022 06:55 PM)b2b Wrote:
(07-16-2022 02:36 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the split already began in 2011 when ESPN and the P5 began consolidating when it devalued the Big East as a football-playing entity (not to mention as a guaranteed BCS access conference) by taking the top-valued programs and leaving the spare parts behind. The P5, and now the Big Ten and SEC, have been incrementally and exponentially adding more and more value to their schools and athletic departments by leaving more and more programs behind (and, quite frankly, beneath) them.
But, as long as non-P5 programs continue to chase pyrite and the riches of power conference football association, many will continue to believe that there will be equal access and opportunity to reach the top of the mountain of FBS college football.
Bingo. It's a fools errand for the 90% of the G5 in the current structure.
Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
But they love the chase and their fans think they belong.
Perhaps. But also a fools errand for the bottom p5. At some point that money the P5 is chasing will dry up.
Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk
(This post was last modified: 07-17-2022 09:47 AM by hburg.)
(07-16-2022 05:04 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: Personal Opinion here, but I think the ACC, Big 12, and PAC 10 should be huge backers of a breakaway and here’s why:
A separation would put them clearly in the top group with the P2, and eliminates any blurred lines between the Middle 3 and the G5/FCS/non-fb schools.
A separation means that they get a share of the big pot while others don’t. Sure the SEC and Big. 10 are going to have more but you’re not sharing with the NCAA, C-USA, MEAC, etc.
The largest total pot of money is not shared between different conferences, since it is the value of the conference media contracts.
What is possibly the second largest total pot of money includes the revenue sharing: that is the NCAA Tourney money, which would include, from the P5 perspective, all of the shares unnecessarily going to the lowest seed autobids. However, the majority of that pot of money is not shared among the schools at all, but instead is allocated to funding the NCAA system as a whole, and a smaller share of which is divided among participants.
/
Is the Big Split Occurring Right Now?
