For those that have a pulse on the NCAA what do you think could be the downhill effect for the potential of the D1 conferences realignment into "super" conferences. Short term, does that mean more revenue for the NCAA to help the lower divisions. Long term, do these conferences break away and tell the NCAA to get lost and we have to go to the NAIA model (schools pay own way for post-season, etc)?
What do you think?
I think out of the two options you listed the second one is much more likely. There will be no new infusion of money that wil trickle down to Division III. All new television money that would be gained by these super conferences would be in contracts signed by the conferences so the money would stay with the conference schools.
The best case senario for Division III may be a formation of a third level of Division I (or forth if you count I-AAA) The four sixteen team super conferences form I-A, the rest of current FBS forms I-AA and the current FCS is now I-AAA. The NCAA controls playoffs in all 3 and makes a killing at a level mirroring March Madness (football is much more popular but with less teams there is less programming for the network and chance for advertising dollars so the two cancel each other out). The new money trickles down like March Madness money trickles down.
Unfortunately there is as much chance of this happening perfectly as the Super-conferences telling the NCAA to get lost. You have to remember that the top schools have more than football and basketball. The Olympic sports need to be supported as well and I highly doubt the NCAA would allow the Olympic sports to compete in their Association but the revenue sports not.
Why do the Big East, the ACC, the Big Ten, the SEC, and Big XII and the Pac-10 really need the NCAA?
They can take their ball and play elsewhere.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 08, 2010, 01:15:03 PM
Why do the Big East, the ACC, the Big Ten, the SEC, and Big XII and the Pac-10 really need the NCAA?
They can take their ball and play elsewhere.
Obviously they wouldn't
need the NCAA, and that's even assuming that the Big East and Big 12 still exist after all the raiding and realignment are finished. There's a lot of speculation that the other four will ultimately become "superconferences" of 16 teams each, and you know that (except for a TCU or Boise or Utah) they won't be picking up those new members from the MAC or Conference USA or WAC.
DI will end up with too many losers and few winners on the field. Alumni will not be happy and this whole process may eventually reverse itself toward smaller conferences.
Quote from: Gray Fox on June 08, 2010, 04:10:38 PM
DI will end up with too many losers and few winners on the field. Alumni will not be happy and this whole process may eventually reverse itself toward smaller conferences.
+1! That is why we have 36 D-1 Bowl games and the NIT!
Speaking strictly for myself, it's all sort of depressing. I've gone from having an indifferent attitude towards major-college sports to having an active dislike of them and everything that they stand for -- and yet I know that D3 national tournaments are completely at their mercy, because D3 doesn't generate any revenue and is dependent upon the big boys for its tourney budgets.
Its all Notre Dame's fault. If they would just play ball and join the Big 10 already, that would be the end of the expansion mess. ;)
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 08, 2010, 01:15:03 PM
They can take their ball and play elsewhere.
That's where I think this is headed one day. Probably just an overreaction but if/when these super conferences form why do they need the NCAA model anymore?
Quote from: wildcat11 on June 09, 2010, 12:12:55 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 08, 2010, 01:15:03 PM
They can take their ball and play elsewhere.
That's where I think this is headed one day. Probably just an overreaction but if/when these super conferences form why do they need the NCAA model anymore?
I think they will still need the NCAA to govern their other 20+ sports. Even with as much money as they are making, these schools will need some kind of organization to manage tennis, swimming, volleyball, etc. They won't want to take it on themselves because that would cut drastically into their cash, time and resources. They can't simply cut minor sports because the PR backlash would be deadly and it would ba tacit admission that they don't care about anything but football. I think they need the NCAA to maintain at least the illusion of still being "amatuer".
Quote from: Just Bill on June 09, 2010, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: wildcat11 on June 09, 2010, 12:12:55 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 08, 2010, 01:15:03 PM
They can take their ball and play elsewhere.
That's where I think this is headed one day. Probably just an overreaction but if/when these super conferences form why do they need the NCAA model anymore?
I think they will still need the NCAA to govern their other 20+ sports. Even with as much money as they are making, these schools will need some kind of organization to manage tennis, swimming, volleyball, etc. They won't want to take it on themselves because that would cut drastically into their cash, time and resources. They can't simply cut minor sports because the PR backlash would be deadly and it would ba tacit admission that they don't care about anything but football. I think they need the NCAA to maintain at least the illusion of still being "amatuer".
I agree that the NCAA provides some administrative responsibilities, but do the "Big 64" need the other 260 D-1 schools so they can be better than any other 230 schools in those minor sports? The Big 64 are usually the best at the minor sports, too. Gymnastics, Swimming, Volleyball. There are a few quality teams in soccer that are not in the Big 64, but are they worth the hassle?
Let's look at the Directors' Cup. We have a smattering of C-USA, MWC, MAC and WAC's scattered in the top of the Directors Cup, mainly because you get so many points just for earning the conference AQ.
How do the Big 64 hold onto as much money as possible?
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 09, 2010, 01:32:32 PM
Quote from: Just Bill on June 09, 2010, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: wildcat11 on June 09, 2010, 12:12:55 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 08, 2010, 01:15:03 PM
They can take their ball and play elsewhere.
That's where I think this is headed one day. Probably just an overreaction but if/when these super conferences form why do they need the NCAA model anymore?
I think they will still need the NCAA to govern their other 20+ sports. Even with as much money as they are making, these schools will need some kind of organization to manage tennis, swimming, volleyball, etc. They won't want to take it on themselves because that would cut drastically into their cash, time and resources. They can't simply cut minor sports because the PR backlash would be deadly and it would ba tacit admission that they don't care about anything but football. I think they need the NCAA to maintain at least the illusion of still being "amatuer".
I agree that the NCAA provides some administrative responsibilities, but do the "Big 64" need the other 260 D-1 schools so they can be better than any other 230 schools in those minor sports? The Big 64 are usually the best at the minor sports, too. Gymnastics, Swimming, Volleyball. There are a few quality teams in soccer that are not in the Big 64, but are they worth the hassle?
Let's look at the Directors' Cup. We have a smattering of C-USA, MWC, MAC and WAC's scattered in the top of the Directors Cup, mainly because you get so many points just for earning the conference AQ.
How do the Big 64 hold onto as much money as possible?
I think Just Bill's concern with how to handle the Olympic sports will slow the Big 64 from leaving the NCAA for a few years but ultimately I think they will leave like Ralph Turner is suggesting. I hope it doesn't happen but I think it will.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 09, 2010, 01:32:32 PM
Quote from: Just Bill on June 09, 2010, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: wildcat11 on June 09, 2010, 12:12:55 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 08, 2010, 01:15:03 PM
They can take their ball and play elsewhere.
That's where I think this is headed one day. Probably just an overreaction but if/when these super conferences form why do they need the NCAA model anymore?
I think they will still need the NCAA to govern their other 20+ sports. Even with as much money as they are making, these schools will need some kind of organization to manage tennis, swimming, volleyball, etc. They won't want to take it on themselves because that would cut drastically into their cash, time and resources. They can't simply cut minor sports because the PR backlash would be deadly and it would ba tacit admission that they don't care about anything but football. I think they need the NCAA to maintain at least the illusion of still being "amatuer".
I agree that the NCAA provides some administrative responsibilities, but do the "Big 64" need the other 260 D-1 schools so they can be better than any other 230 schools in those minor sports? The Big 64 are usually the best at the minor sports, too. Gymnastics, Swimming, Volleyball. There are a few quality teams in soccer that are not in the Big 64, but are they worth the hassle?
Let's look at the Directors' Cup. We have a smattering of C-USA, MWC, MAC and WAC's scattered in the top of the Directors Cup, mainly because you get so many points just for earning the conference AQ.
How do the Big 64 hold onto as much money as possible?
I think the 100lb. gorilla that is still in the room that hasn't been discussed is that by remaining in the NCAA, the Big 64 can keep the pretense that their institutions are concerned about academics first. The NCAA governs college athletics but also allows the Big 64 and the rest of D1 to argue that their football players, basketball players, etc... are student athletes (The APR etc...allows the Big 64 to claim that academics are the most important part). Being part of the NCAA allows the institutions to claim that they are "academic institutions first" that allow their students to participate in athletics and gain scholarships because of their athletic talents. If the Big 64 left the NCAA they would have a more difficult time making the argument that academics are most important....it would show their true colors that they still try to hide....money is what it is all about. So IMO I think they stay in the NCAA even if they go to 4 super-conferences.
Using the 16-PAC model, teams will play seven games in their own division and two in the other. That will give a school a chance to play old rivals (USC/Notre Dame) or Nebraska patsies like Haskell Indian. ;D
I think the 16 team superconference is not a bad idea entirely. 7 games against your division, 2 against the other division that would rotate each year, and depending on the # of games that you have on your schedule you would have 1-3 at large games....1 at D3, and up to 3 at the D1 level. The superconference would probably cut down on costs at the D3 level since scheduling would be easy and predictable from year to year plus administrative costs would be shared by 16....It might even be enough to get some type of conference TV coverage...and maybe 2 AQ bids to the playoffs.
You know Gull, a 100 lb. gorilla is actually a really small gorilla. ;)
Interesting dialogue here....
Dr. Karen Weaver is the AD at D-III Penn State-Abington, and she wrote her doctoral dissertation on the rise of the Big Ten Network. She penned this column for the Indianapolis Star describing why she thought small D-I conferences like the Horizon League should be scared about the D-I realignment...
http://bit.ly/94AMwW
Now, here is the response from Jon LeCrone, the commissioner of the Horizon League. As you can imagine he disputes Dr. Weaver, but I find it interesting that his argument sure sounds a lot like what a D-III commissioner might say....
http://bit.ly/czKVV6
Quote from: Just Bill on June 11, 2010, 10:18:13 AM
You know Gull, a 100 lb. gorilla is actually a really small gorilla. ;)
I tried to change it to a 500lb. Gorilla after I sent the message, but couldn't figure out how to do it.... ;D
I figured someone would take a shot at it... ;)
Quote from: Gargantuan Gull on June 11, 2010, 09:02:42 PM
Quote from: Just Bill on June 11, 2010, 10:18:13 AM
You know Gull, a 100 lb. gorilla is actually a really small gorilla. ;)
I tried to change it to a 500lb. Gorilla after I sent the message, but couldn't figure out how to do it.... ;D
I figured someone would take a shot at it... ;)
As long as you have a 'modify' button, you're free to change anything you want on your own post.
I don't know if 'modify' is available immediately or if you need a certain number of posts.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on June 11, 2010, 09:07:31 PM
Quote from: Gargantuan Gull on June 11, 2010, 09:02:42 PM
Quote from: Just Bill on June 11, 2010, 10:18:13 AM
You know Gull, a 100 lb. gorilla is actually a really small gorilla. ;)
I tried to change it to a 500lb. Gorilla after I sent the message, but couldn't figure out how to do it.... ;D
I figured someone would take a shot at it... ;)
As long as you have a 'modify' button, you're free to change anything you want on your own post.
I don't know if 'modify' is available immediately or if you need a certain number of posts.
Good to know, I'll look for it after I send this. Thanks.
Can't see a modify button, where would it be at?
Quote from: Gargantuan Gull on June 11, 2010, 10:18:05 PM
Can't see a modify button, where would it be at?
Do you have a "quote" button up on the tool bar at the far right opposite the "Re: Potential effect..." ?
It should be inside that. I think that "Modify" adds after a few more posts.Welcome to the boards.
Quote from: Gargantuan Gull on June 11, 2010, 10:18:05 PM
Can't see a modify button, where would it be at?
Upper right of your box, if you have that 'power'.
Pat (quite wisely) only allots certain capabilities after posters have 'proved themselves' with a certain number of posts. I don't know those numbers, since I am quite obviously beyond them (though I strongly suspect Pat was wondering about the numbers during my earlier days! ;D).
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 11, 2010, 10:30:16 PM
Quote from: Gargantuan Gull on June 11, 2010, 10:18:05 PM
Can't see a modify button, where would it be at?
Do you have a "quote" button up on the tool bar at the far right opposite the "Re: Potential effect..." ?
It should be inside that. I think that "Modify" adds after a few more posts.Welcome to the boards.
I do have a quote button, but not a modify. Thanks for the welcome. I look forward to following the boards and the action on the field in D3 football.
GG: You should get modify privileges soon. I believe the next level of membership comes around 25 posts?
Sounds good. I should reach that soon, maybe today....Thanks for the info.
Quote from: Gray Fox on June 10, 2010, 07:40:35 PM
Using the 16-PAC model, teams will play seven games in their own division and two in the other. That will give a school a chance to play old rivals (USC/Notre Dame) or Nebraska patsies like Haskell Indian. ;D
After more thought I realized that there will be four conference champions. This is only two steps away from a playoff championship. The "also rans" like TCU/Boise State and UCLA/Temple can still get to be in a bowl, altough these wil be even more meaningless.
www.ncaa.org
Front page of the NCAA website shows the spring championships.
Softball -- UCLA
Men's Golf -- Augusta State (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/ncaa+news/ncaa+news+online/2010/division+i/augusta+state+wins+first+mens+golf+title_ncaa_news_06_07_10) won the Match Format after Okie State had the low 54-hole team score.
Women's Lacrosse -- Maryland
Men's Lacrosse -- Duke
Women's Tennis singles -- Georgia
Men's Tennis singles -- Stanford
Rowing -- Virginia
Six out of seven from the Super Conferences.
The Super Conferences can conduct their playoffs very easily, without the logisitical hassles of a venue trying to host 30+ teams.
Quote from: Gray Fox on June 12, 2010, 09:59:14 PM
Quote from: Gray Fox on June 10, 2010, 07:40:35 PM
Using the 16-PAC model, teams will play seven games in their own division and two in the other. That will give a school a chance to play old rivals (USC/Notre Dame) or Nebraska patsies like Haskell Indian. ;D
After more thought I realized that there will be four conference champions. This is only two steps away from a playoff championship. The "also rans" like TCU/Boise State and UCLA/Temple can still get to be in a bowl, altough these wil be even more meaningless.
I have a feeling that certain Senators will try to stop the BCS from excluding TCU or Boise State.
Quote from: smedindy on June 13, 2010, 06:26:31 PM
Quote from: Gray Fox on June 12, 2010, 09:59:14 PM
Quote from: Gray Fox on June 10, 2010, 07:40:35 PM
Using the 16-PAC model, teams will play seven games in their own division and two in the other. That will give a school a chance to play old rivals (USC/Notre Dame) or Nebraska patsies like Haskell Indian. ;D
After more thought I realized that there will be four conference champions. This is only two steps away from a playoff championship. The "also rans" like TCU/Boise State and UCLA/Temple can still get to be in a bowl, altough these wil be even more meaningless.
I have a feeling that certain Senators will try to stop the BCS from excluding TCU or Boise State.
TCU and Boise State -- members of the Mountain West Conference.
My guess is that if the PAC 10 goes to 16, the Big 10 follows suit and the ACC and SEC join the parade. If that happens the ACC will lose a few to the SEC, and the SEC and ACC will then devour the Big East. I would not be suprised to see the other conferences (CUSA, MAC, Sunbelt and Mounain West) try to follow suit picking up the leftovers from the Big East and Big 12 to reach 16 teams each to try to at least stay somewhat competitive from a television money standpoint. As it currently stands 3 of the 4 remaining could go to 16 (64 teams from the Big 10, PAC 10, SEC and ACC and 48 teams from the other three) which would leave 10 or so teams for the last remaining conference...) If the model proves successful it may trickle down to other divisions...
Quote from: Gargantuan Gull on June 13, 2010, 07:17:21 PM
My guess is that if the PAC 10 goes to 16, the Big 10 follows suit and the ACC and SEC join the parade. If that happens the ACC will lose a few to the SEC, and the SEC and ACC will then devour the Big East. I would not be suprised to see the other conferences (CUSA, MAC, Sunbelt and Mounain West) try to follow suit picking up the leftovers from the Big East and Big 12 to reach 16 teams each to try to at least stay somewhat competitive from a television money standpoint. As it currently stands 3 of the 4 remaining could go to 16 (64 teams from the Big 10, PAC 10, SEC and ACC and 48 teams from the other three) which would leave 10 or so teams for the last remaining conference...) If the model proves successful it may trickle down to other divisions...
Switching divisions requires at least 5 years, so the process is not easy.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 13, 2010, 07:49:38 PM
Quote from: Gargantuan Gull on June 13, 2010, 07:17:21 PM
My guess is that if the PAC 10 goes to 16, the Big 10 follows suit and the ACC and SEC join the parade. If that happens the ACC will lose a few to the SEC, and the SEC and ACC will then devour the Big East. I would not be suprised to see the other conferences (CUSA, MAC, Sunbelt and Mounain West) try to follow suit picking up the leftovers from the Big East and Big 12 to reach 16 teams each to try to at least stay somewhat competitive from a television money standpoint. As it currently stands 3 of the 4 remaining could go to 16 (64 teams from the Big 10, PAC 10, SEC and ACC and 48 teams from the other three) which would leave 10 or so teams for the last remaining conference...) If the model proves successful it may trickle down to other divisions...
Switching divisions requires at least 5 years, so the process is not easy.
Didn't know that. Are you referring to D3, or all divisions....it seems as if Nebraska is moving to the Big 10 next year or maybe 2012?
Quote from: Gargantuan Gull on June 13, 2010, 08:03:40 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 13, 2010, 07:49:38 PM
Quote from: Gargantuan Gull on June 13, 2010, 07:17:21 PM
My guess is that if the PAC 10 goes to 16, the Big 10 follows suit and the ACC and SEC join the parade. If that happens the ACC will lose a few to the SEC, and the SEC and ACC will then devour the Big East. I would not be surprised to see the other conferences (CUSA, MAC, Sunbelt and Mountain West) try to follow suit picking up the leftovers from the Big East and Big 12 to reach 16 teams each to try to at least stay somewhat competitive from a television money standpoint. As it currently stands 3 of the 4 remaining could go to 16 (64 teams from the Big 10, PAC 10, SEC and ACC and 48 teams from the other three) which would leave 10 or so teams for the last remaining conference...) If the model proves successful it may trickle down to other divisions...
Switching divisions requires at least 5 years, so the process is not easy.
Didn't know that. Are you referring to D3, or all divisions....it seems as if Nebraska is moving to the Big 10 next year or maybe 2012?
I need some help from some of the other experts who read these boards, but by the time that you consider dissolving existing conference obligations, exploratory years, provisional years and finally getting access to the playoffs, five years is a good round number, even longer to get to D-1. D-2 seems to be the easiest division to join. D-2 is actively recruiting membership.
You guys are having a miscommunication...
Gull is talking about changing conferences
Ralph is talking about changing divisions
Quote from: Just Bill on June 13, 2010, 09:08:55 PM
You guys are having a miscommunication...
Gull is talking about changing conferences
Ralph is talking about changing divisions
Thanks, Just Bill.
I assumed that he was talking about the process as schools would move up into the other divisions. My bad!
It does take 2-3 years for moves to take place among conferences. DPU will take until 2012 to get fully into the NCAC.
Bard and RIT announced their move to the Liberty League
27 months (http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2009/06/16/its-official-bard-and-rit-to-the-liberty-league.html) in advance.
With the Big 12 now having 10 teams, while the Big Ten (which refused to change the name with 11 teams) now has 12 teams, I'm eager to see what renaming (if any) will occur! ;D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on June 14, 2010, 08:43:49 PM
With the Big 12 now having 10 teams, while the Big Ten (which refused to change the name with 11 teams) now has 12 teams, I'm eager to see what renaming (if any) will occur! ;D
When what is left of the Big XII absorbs the Mountain West, they will have close to XII to XIV teams. ;)
Big XII stays X (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/7052775.html).
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 14, 2010, 09:06:22 PM
Big XII stays X (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/7052775.html).
The NCAA dodged a major silver bullet....for now.
If we to form 4 DIII Super Conferences with football being the main factor?
NWC/ASC
OAC/CCIW
WIAC/MIAC
NJAC/E8
Any adjustments to this?
Quote from: wildcat11 on June 15, 2010, 07:06:17 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 14, 2010, 09:06:22 PM
Big XII stays X (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/7052775.html).
The NCAA dodged a major silver bullet....for now.
If we to form 4 DIII Super Conferences with football being the main factor?
NWC/ASC
OAC/CCIW
WIAC/MIAC
NJAC/E8
Any adjustments to this?
+1 Karma, which BTW moves your total to "1492"!
Okay, who else is clamoring for recognition?
IIAC? Pres AC?
What case can they make?
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 15, 2010, 07:31:56 PM
The NCAA dodged a major silver bullet....for now.
If we to form 4 DIII Super Conferences with football being the main factor?
NWC/ASC
OAC/CCIW
WIAC/MIAC
NJAC/E8
Any adjustments to this?
+1 Karma, which BTW moves your total to "1492"!
Okay, who else is clamoring for recognition?
IIAC? Pres AC?
What case can they make?
[/quote]
IIAC has had a team in the elite 8 each of the past 2 years. Last year Coe was our 2nd place team and they made it to the elite 8.
But, really, just because I want them in ;D
Coe was bounced in the second round, the round of 16.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on June 16, 2010, 03:56:51 PM
Coe was bounced in the second round, the round of 16.
Well there you go, bringing facts into the conversation :D
Quote from: wildcat11 on June 15, 2010, 07:06:17 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 14, 2010, 09:06:22 PM
Big XII stays X (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/7052775.html).
The NCAA dodged a major silver bullet....for now.
If we to form 4 DIII Super Conferences with football being the main factor?
NWC/ASC
OAC/CCIW
WIAC/MIAC
NJAC/E8
Any adjustments to this?
I think you'd break some of those leagues up. For example, the OAC / CCIW would probably need Wabash, Witt, Wooster, Allegheny and DPU and jettison five weaker sisters. Others would follow suit.
It would be anarchy, chaos and bloodletting in the streets and towns.
When there was a chance schools would break away and form a Division IV, there was a good likelihood we would have seen a radical amount of realignment.
Utah (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/ncaa+news/ncaa+news+online/2010/division+i/utah_follows_colorado_into_pac_10_conference_ncaa_news_06_17_10) becomes the 12th.
Okay, I'm only posting this because I'm bored.
I heard a rumor the other day, about 6th-hand, that the NCAC was considering a radical expansion, to 16 or more teams, encompassing some members of the PrAC and perhaps some HCAC schools. Now, as I say, I got this from a friend of a friend of a friend at a wedding, and it seems likely that it was intended as a joke; not being within 2000 miles of the source, I have no way to judge. It sounds like a loony idea to me, considering the issues of playoff access that the ASC deals with. (Personally, I was hoping to see an 8-team NCAC going forward, but it was not to be.) Joke or earnest, crazy or sane, at a minimum it's an interesting off-season discussion-starter.
This just in...
USC has left the Pac-10 to join the SCIAC, which will now be known as the USCiac. Unfortunately, effective immediately, the entire conference has been put on probation and banned from postseason play for the next 25 years.
OxyBob
Sorry to come late to the party - moving has kept me out of the loop a bit.
An AD friend of mine laid out this whole "superconference" scenario for me four or five years ago. At the time it seemed like a far-fetched conspiracy theory - now, obviously, not so much.
They'll take 64 teams and bolt the NCAA entirely. It'll happen soon. The Big-12 is working to keep it from happening without them, but Texas will be leaving soon enough.
They'll be able to make the chances they want in the rules and have more than enough money to fund a governance infrastructure (if they even want one).
It makes a lot of sense - four 16 team conference with two 8 team divisions each. For football, its an easy 8 game playoff. For basketball, you just stick all 64 teams onto a bracket. The big schools have been looking for a way to get the March Madness money for a while now - this circumvents the NCAA entirely.
My big questions is what do the small schools do after that? There's basically no money left for D3 championships to exist - at least on a national scale.
Quote from: Hoops Fan on June 20, 2010, 09:52:09 PM
Sorry to come late to the party - moving has kept me out of the loop a bit.
An AD friend of mine laid out this whole "superconference" scenario for me four or five years ago. At the time it seemed like a far-fetched conspiracy theory - now, obviously, not so much.
They'll take 64 teams and bolt the NCAA entirely. It'll happen soon. The Big-12 is working to keep it from happening without them, but Texas will be leaving soon enough.
They'll be able to make the chances they want in the rules and have more than enough money to fund a governance infrastructure (if they even want one).
It makes a lot of sense - four 16 team conference with two 8 team divisions each. For football, its an easy 8 game playoff. For basketball, you just stick all 64 teams onto a bracket. The big schools have been looking for a way to get the March Madness money for a while now - this circumvents the NCAA entirely.
My big questions is what do the small schools do after that? There's basically no money left for D3 championships to exist - at least on a national scale.
Okay
| Conference | Teams |
| PAC-10 | 12 |
| Big Ten | 12 |
| SEC | 12 |
| ACC | 12 |
| Big East Football | 8 |
| Total | 56 |
Who gets invited?
What happens to Notre Dame?
Who are the 8 best teams that are left?
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 20, 2010, 10:30:10 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on June 20, 2010, 09:52:09 PM
Sorry to come late to the party - moving has kept me out of the loop a bit.
An AD friend of mine laid out this whole "superconference" scenario for me four or five years ago. At the time it seemed like a far-fetched conspiracy theory - now, obviously, not so much.
They'll take 64 teams and bolt the NCAA entirely. It'll happen soon. The Big-12 is working to keep it from happening without them, but Texas will be leaving soon enough.
They'll be able to make the chances they want in the rules and have more than enough money to fund a governance infrastructure (if they even want one).
It makes a lot of sense - four 16 team conference with two 8 team divisions each. For football, its an easy 8 game playoff. For basketball, you just stick all 64 teams onto a bracket. The big schools have been looking for a way to get the March Madness money for a while now - this circumvents the NCAA entirely.
My big questions is what do the small schools do after that? There's basically no money left for D3 championships to exist - at least on a national scale.
Okay
| Conference | Teams |
| PAC-10 | 12 |
| Big Ten | 12 |
| SEC | 12 |
| ACC | 12 |
| Big East Football | 8 |
| Total | 56 |
Who gets invited?
Would some teams currently in those conferences get kicked to the curb? Vanderbilt??? Northwestern??? Then it could get really confusing and political.
If everyone stays from those conferences you can forget about any team from the MAC, Sun Belt and C-USA getting in to the Super 64. It would probably be some combination of teams from the Big 12 and Mountain West Conference. Having a bit of basketball history and location near a large market would help...like if you are Kansas or Mizzou.
Something tells me though that this talk is all a bunch of conspiracy stories...it sounds plausible...but will never happen. At least I hope. I like my small D3 school being a port of the same orginization as my big state school.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 20, 2010, 10:30:10 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on June 20, 2010, 09:52:09 PM
Sorry to come late to the party - moving has kept me out of the loop a bit.
An AD friend of mine laid out this whole "superconference" scenario for me four or five years ago. At the time it seemed like a far-fetched conspiracy theory - now, obviously, not so much.
They'll take 64 teams and bolt the NCAA entirely. It'll happen soon. The Big-12 is working to keep it from happening without them, but Texas will be leaving soon enough.
They'll be able to make the chances they want in the rules and have more than enough money to fund a governance infrastructure (if they even want one).
It makes a lot of sense - four 16 team conference with two 8 team divisions each. For football, its an easy 8 game playoff. For basketball, you just stick all 64 teams onto a bracket. The big schools have been looking for a way to get the March Madness money for a while now - this circumvents the NCAA entirely.
My big questions is what do the small schools do after that? There's basically no money left for D3 championships to exist - at least on a national scale.
Okay
| Conference | Teams |
| PAC-10 | 12 |
| Big Ten | 12 |
| SEC | 12 |
| ACC | 12 |
| Big East Football | 8 |
| Total | 56 |
Who gets invited?
What happens to Notre Dame?
Who are the 8 best teams that are left?
Notre Dame would join if it comes to that. They may value their independence but they'll give it up to stay in the top tier of football. Your numbers are also leaving out the ten teams still in the Big 12. Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma would certainly be part of that. That gets you to 60. Kansas would probably be involved and add Kansas State with them. Last two spots be a toss up between Missouri, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State.
I can tell you pretty easily what makes the most sense. However, with the schools and leagues competing with each other, it may not work out so nicely. We've already seen Utah get invited to the PAC-10 - a team I wouldn't have expected to get into the Big-64. So we're likely to see some messy situations in the next few years as it all sorts out.
Here's a list of how it may work - at least, what I see as the easiest scenario:
PAC-10: All current members + Utah, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Kansas State, and Iowa State or Texas Tech.
Big-10: All current members + Nebraska, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Rutgers, and either WVU or Pittsburgh.
SEC: All current members + Texas, A&M, Oklahoma, OKSt
ACC: All current members + Louisville, UConn, WVU or Pitt, and either Cincinatti or South Florida.
This encompasses all of the major BCS teams with few exceptions. The PAC-10 adding Utah may have cost either Iowa State or Texas Tech a place in the 64. Baylor is almost assuredly out. The other loss is either S. Florida or Cincinatti - neither school with a huge football tradition.
The big questions will be whether academics wins our over football in Texas. UT doesn't like the academic profile of the SEC, but obviously it would be a nice football move. If the Texas schools do move west, you might see the SEC poach teams from the ACC, which will create a really crazy cascade and then who knows who gets left out?
If West Virginia is invited to join the Big Ten, it will mean that the Big Ten no longer has any significance beyond being a group of football-playing universities in the same general part of the country. I can't see this ever happening--or maybe I just refuse to.
Quote from: Hoops Fan on June 22, 2010, 11:45:14 AM
Big-10: All current members + Nebraska, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Rutgers, and either WVU or Pittsburgh.
Quote from: David Collinge on June 22, 2010, 11:52:23 PM
If West Virginia is invited to join the Big Ten, it will mean that the Big Ten no longer has any significance beyond being a group of football-playing universities in the same general part of the country. I can't see this ever happening--or maybe I just refuse to.
West Virginia will not join the Big Ten. Yes, that conference is just as mercenary as the other D1 power conferences, but the academic cachet of the eleven member schools still means enough to their respective administrations to influence who gets to join the club.
There are two exclusive academic consortia to which every Big Ten school belongs. One is the Committee on Institutional Cooperation, which consists of the eleven Big Ten schools plus former Big Ten member the University of Chicago. The twelve schools share a research fund that totals somewhere north of five billion dollars. Obviously, that's a club to which the current Big Ten members control admission, so Nebraska and anyone else invited to join the league will also be invited to join the CIC. The more important academic collective, however, is the Association of American Universities, which counts among its sixty members the most prestigious research universities in the United States and Canada. The Big Ten is the only D1 conference that can make the claim that each of its members is also an AAU member (Dartmouth is not an AAU member, so the Ivy League can't make that claim).
West Virginia is not an AAU member. Nebraska, Syracuse, Rutgers, and Pittsburgh are. Admission to the AAU is by invitation only, and three-quarters of the sixty member schools have to vote "yea" for a new school to join. Interestingly, Notre Dame is
not an AAU member, although, as a highly-ranked research institution, it's certainly qualified to be one. This has been a matter of some discussion in the media in recent years, given the ongoing interest in having Notre Dame join the Big Ten; the consensus seems to be that, if the Big Ten members pushed for it, Notre Dame would be accepted into the AAU with little problem. It's a lot less likely that that would happen if the Big Ten put forth West Virginia as a prospective AAU member, since WVU has far less impressive credentials as a research university than does Notre Dame.
Since this is, after all, a website about Division III and not a website about Division I, I'll add that there are
two leagues whose entire membership is in the AAU: The Big Ten and our own University Athletic Association. The eight members of the UAA constitute over three-quarters of the D3 contingent of the AAU; the other three D3 members are Caltech, Johns Hopkins, and MIT. Two other D3 members, Catholic and Clark, have left the AAU of their own accord within the past dozen years.
I'll amend my list and just throw Pitt into the Big-10 and WVU to the ACC.