This sounds more in line with the stuff that Delany was talking about yesterday and wouldn't end up being a bad thing at all for us. Hopefully this is how it ends up going.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college...re-change/

So it looks like about 10-12 conferences will be going or 7 or 8 if you read Bowlsby earlier statement from the other day. IMO the AAC is a lock to go in any situation.


"Who is in and who is out?

This will be the big question, much like in realignment. But think of this potential change as similar to realignment in that for all the drastic scenarios floated, in the end it wasn't nearly as earth shaking as many had predicted.

Along with the Big 5, a majority of the other major football-playing leagues would likely go with them -- Mountain West, American Athletic, Conference USA, Sun Belt and MAC. The top basketball leagues like the Big East, Atlantic-10 and perhaps the WCC would go as well. The Ivy League and Patriot League will be talked about, too.

This doesn't mean that the America Easts, Big Souths and Big Wests of the world will be all that different. They'll still have access to the NCAA tournament. Most would agree the NCAA tournament is a better event with Valparaiso, Long Beach State and Florida Gulf Coast.

So if a league is "out," they're really just subjected to a different rules structure. They'll be the same championship structure and play the same teams. This means that the average fan watching Big Monday or filling out a bracket won't see much difference.



Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college...z2a5VRbSmW

So they may form a new division but still include up to 150 schools? That makes no sense. Thamel sounds drunk with that article. If they are to form a new division you can bet that it will not include small mid-major schools. That's the whole point for them to create a new division to begin with. What will most likely end up happening, since it's all about money, is that they will open the door to programs or conferences who are in favor of a "pay for play" setup to join the party. Others who vote down will be left into D-1A.

Thamel is an idiot.

(07-25-2013 02:49 PM)Jay256 Wrote:  So they may form a new division but still include up to 150 schools? That makes no sense. Thamel sounds drunk with that article. If they are to form a new division you can bet that it will not include small mid-major schools. That's the whole point for them to create a new division to begin with. What will most likely end up happening, since it's all about money, is that they will open the door to programs or conferences who are in favor of a "pay for play" setup to join the party. Others who vote down will be left into D-1A.

It sounds as of it will be a new division in terms of its rules, which will allow the P5 schools to much more effectively use thier huge financial advantage. In other words, some of the smaller leagues will be allowed to come along---but don't expect the rules to create a level playing field anymore. They will be designed to do just the opposite. So--the smaller conferences can either stay with the big boys as huge underdogs or they can drop down and compete on a equal plane. Basically, those who elect to stay better find some more revenue if they want to truely compete.

(07-25-2013 02:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:49 PM)Jay256 Wrote:  So they may form a new division but still include up to 150 schools? That makes no sense. Thamel sounds drunk with that article. If they are to form a new division you can bet that it will not include small mid-major schools. That's the whole point for them to create a new division to begin with. What will most likely end up happening, since it's all about money, is that they will open the door to programs or conferences who are in favor of a "pay for play" setup to join the party. Others who vote down will be left into D-1A.

It sounds as of it will be a new division in terms of its rules, which will allow the P5 schools to much more effectively use thier huge financial advantage. In other words, some of the smaller leagues will be allowed to come along---but don't expect the rules to create a level playing field anymore. They will be designed to do just the opposite. So--the smaller conferences can either stay with the big boys as huge underdogs or they can drop down and compete on a equal plane. Basically, those who elect to stay better find some more revenue if they want to truely compete.

So in closing not that much different really?

(07-25-2013 03:00 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:49 PM)Jay256 Wrote:  So they may form a new division but still include up to 150 schools? That makes no sense. Thamel sounds drunk with that article. If they are to form a new division you can bet that it will not include small mid-major schools. That's the whole point for them to create a new division to begin with. What will most likely end up happening, since it's all about money, is that they will open the door to programs or conferences who are in favor of a "pay for play" setup to join the party. Others who vote down will be left into D-1A.

It sounds as of it will be a new division in terms of its rules, which will allow the P5 schools to much more effectively use thier huge financial advantage. In other words, some of the smaller leagues will be allowed to come along---but don't expect the rules to create a level playing field anymore. They will be designed to do just the opposite. So--the smaller conferences can either stay with the big boys as huge underdogs or they can drop down and compete on a equal plane. Basically, those who elect to stay better find some more revenue if they want to truely compete.

So in closing not that much different really?

yea - isn't that where we stand now?? without the stipends anyway.

(07-25-2013 03:00 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:49 PM)Jay256 Wrote:  So they may form a new division but still include up to 150 schools? That makes no sense. Thamel sounds drunk with that article. If they are to form a new division you can bet that it will not include small mid-major schools. That's the whole point for them to create a new division to begin with. What will most likely end up happening, since it's all about money, is that they will open the door to programs or conferences who are in favor of a "pay for play" setup to join the party. Others who vote down will be left into D-1A.

It sounds as of it will be a new division in terms of its rules, which will allow the P5 schools to much more effectively use thier huge financial advantage. In other words, some of the smaller leagues will be allowed to come along---but don't expect the rules to create a level playing field anymore. They will be designed to do just the opposite. So--the smaller conferences can either stay with the big boys as huge underdogs or they can drop down and compete on a equal plane. Basically, those who elect to stay better find some more revenue if they want to truely compete.

So in closing not that much different really?

Yeah. That said, the revenue disparity may make a bigger difference in the future than it has in the past.

(07-25-2013 03:13 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 03:00 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:49 PM)Jay256 Wrote:  So they may form a new division but still include up to 150 schools? That makes no sense. Thamel sounds drunk with that article. If they are to form a new division you can bet that it will not include small mid-major schools. That's the whole point for them to create a new division to begin with. What will most likely end up happening, since it's all about money, is that they will open the door to programs or conferences who are in favor of a "pay for play" setup to join the party. Others who vote down will be left into D-1A.

It sounds as of it will be a new division in terms of its rules, which will allow the P5 schools to much more effectively use thier huge financial advantage. In other words, some of the smaller leagues will be allowed to come along---but don't expect the rules to create a level playing field anymore. They will be designed to do just the opposite. So--the smaller conferences can either stay with the big boys as huge underdogs or they can drop down and compete on a equal plane. Basically, those who elect to stay better find some more revenue if they want to truely compete.

So in closing not that much different really?

Yeah. That said, the revenue disparity may make a bigger difference in the future than it has in the past.

Obviously, but the key is just remain at the top level, win, establish some sort of brand equity, and hope the next TV deal gets this league enough money to remain competitive.

(07-25-2013 03:13 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 03:00 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:49 PM)Jay256 Wrote:  So they may form a new division but still include up to 150 schools? That makes no sense. Thamel sounds drunk with that article. If they are to form a new division you can bet that it will not include small mid-major schools. That's the whole point for them to create a new division to begin with. What will most likely end up happening, since it's all about money, is that they will open the door to programs or conferences who are in favor of a "pay for play" setup to join the party. Others who vote down will be left into D-1A.

It sounds as of it will be a new division in terms of its rules, which will allow the P5 schools to much more effectively use thier huge financial advantage. In other words, some of the smaller leagues will be allowed to come along---but don't expect the rules to create a level playing field anymore. They will be designed to do just the opposite. So--the smaller conferences can either stay with the big boys as huge underdogs or they can drop down and compete on a equal plane. Basically, those who elect to stay better find some more revenue if they want to truely compete.

So in closing not that much different really?

Yeah. That said, the revenue disparity may make a bigger difference in the future than it has in the past.

Actually the biggest difference might be what Delaney suggested today for at-risk students. If I read his comments correctly it sounds like the P5 intend to start keeping those kids that were previously called props, partial qualifiers or non qualifiers. It doesn't matter to most programs in the AAC, but it will definitley harm schools like Marshall which depends heavily on those kids.

(07-25-2013 03:00 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:49 PM)Jay256 Wrote:  So they may form a new division but still include up to 150 schools? That makes no sense. Thamel sounds drunk with that article. If they are to form a new division you can bet that it will not include small mid-major schools. That's the whole point for them to create a new division to begin with. What will most likely end up happening, since it's all about money, is that they will open the door to programs or conferences who are in favor of a "pay for play" setup to join the party. Others who vote down will be left into D-1A.

It sounds as of it will be a new division in terms of its rules, which will allow the P5 schools to much more effectively use thier huge financial advantage. In other words, some of the smaller leagues will be allowed to come along---but don't expect the rules to create a level playing field anymore. They will be designed to do just the opposite. So--the smaller conferences can either stay with the big boys as huge underdogs or they can drop down and compete on a equal plane. Basically, those who elect to stay better find some more revenue if they want to truely compete.

So in closing not that much different really?

Not much. Just that the power-conferences will have the ability to set their own rules, with everyone else able to keep up, or not.

And 150 as a number isn't crazy, if you take the criteria of "who is a serious athletic program." Accepting the idea that being in FBS means you're a serious program, that means about 20 non-FBS schools with heavyweight basketball gets you to 150.

One logistical problem is that those only 10 of those 20 non-FBS schools are in a conference that would be able to keep up. Gonzaga and BYU could, but not the rest of the WCC. I'd be surprised if half of the A-10 schools could spend SuperDivision-level money on their basketball programs.

Which all means more realignment.

(07-25-2013 03:16 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 03:13 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 03:00 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:49 PM)Jay256 Wrote:  So they may form a new division but still include up to 150 schools? That makes no sense. Thamel sounds drunk with that article. If they are to form a new division you can bet that it will not include small mid-major schools. That's the whole point for them to create a new division to begin with. What will most likely end up happening, since it's all about money, is that they will open the door to programs or conferences who are in favor of a "pay for play" setup to join the party. Others who vote down will be left into D-1A.

It sounds as of it will be a new division in terms of its rules, which will allow the P5 schools to much more effectively use thier huge financial advantage. In other words, some of the smaller leagues will be allowed to come along---but don't expect the rules to create a level playing field anymore. They will be designed to do just the opposite. So--the smaller conferences can either stay with the big boys as huge underdogs or they can drop down and compete on a equal plane. Basically, those who elect to stay better find some more revenue if they want to truely compete.

So in closing not that much different really?

Yeah. That said, the revenue disparity may make a bigger difference in the future than it has in the past.

Obviously, but the key is just remain at the top level, win, establish some sort of brand equity, and hope the next TV deal gets this league enough money to remain competitive.

Agree. We have always managed to do more with less. The key is just to stay alive and build your brand.

(07-25-2013 03:19 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Not much. Just that the power-conferences will have the ability to set their own rules, with everyone else able to keep up, or not.

And 150 as a number isn't crazy, if you take the criteria of "who is a serious athletic program." Accepting the idea that being in FBS means you're a serious program, that means about 20 non-FBS schools with heavyweight basketball gets you to 150.

One logistical problem is that those only 10 of those 20 non-FBS schools are in a conference that would be able to keep up. Gonzaga and BYU could, but not the rest of the WCC. I'd be surprised if half of the A-10 schools could spend SuperDivision-level money on their basketball programs.

Which all means more realignment.

Yeah that could mean some conglomeration of the non-FB leagues, or maybe some of the G5 leagues see this as an opportunity to become a dreaded hybrid league and invite some of the better basketball programs in leagues that wouldn't make the cut. I think the AAC is missing an opportunity to better itself by being a limited hybrid. Schools like VCU, Wichita State, and a few others would make this league better and solidify it as a true power basketball conference, but obviously having just ended a pretty poorly functioning hybrid relationship it's probably not a popular idea right now. Hopefully with time that becomes a more accepted idea.

(07-25-2013 02:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:49 PM)Jay256 Wrote:  So they may form a new division but still include up to 150 schools? That makes no sense. Thamel sounds drunk with that article. If they are to form a new division you can bet that it will not include small mid-major schools. That's the whole point for them to create a new division to begin with. What will most likely end up happening, since it's all about money, is that they will open the door to programs or conferences who are in favor of a "pay for play" setup to join the party. Others who vote down will be left into D-1A.

It sounds as of it will be a new division in terms of its rules, which will allow the P5 schools to much more effectively use thier huge financial advantage. In other words, some of the smaller leagues will be allowed to come along---but don't expect the rules to create a level playing field anymore. They will be designed to do just the opposite. So--the smaller conferences can either stay with the big boys as huge underdogs or they can drop down and compete on a equal plane. Basically, those who elect to stay better find some more revenue if they want to truely compete.

A level playing field is not the same as equality of outcomes. Nobody expects that everyone will be Alabama, but everyone should have the ability to improve and move their program forward.

wouldn't it be easier to strip voting rights away from non-football & FCS schools?

(07-25-2013 04:43 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  wouldn't it be easier to strip voting rights away from non-football & FCS schools?

I think that's the basic outline of what's going to happen. The power conferences already control the Division I Board of Directors--the 11 FBS conferences all have permanent seats, the other 7 seats rotate among the other Division I conferences.

What happened with the stipends was enough schools objected to trigger some kind of a review provision, and I'm not sure how that works.

So I figure that, in January, some kind of a deal gets passed where the low-revenue schools have less power to block changes.

(07-25-2013 02:54 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Thamel is an idiot.

This

(07-25-2013 02:49 PM)Jay256 Wrote:  So they may form a new division but still include up to 150 schools? That makes no sense. Thamel sounds drunk with that article. If they are to form a new division you can bet that it will not include small mid-major schools. That's the whole point for them to create a new division to begin with. What will most likely end up happening, since it's all about money, is that they will open the door to programs or conferences who are in favor of a "pay for play" setup to join the party. Others who vote down will be left into D-1A.

I miss you Jay

(07-25-2013 06:22 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:54 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Thamel is an idiot.

This

Maybe true, but I think he's right about this. Remember, he mentioned that the P5 would get veto rights over everything. They can continue to screw us by passing rules to allow them to spend money on athletes, and eventually, we won't be able to keep up.

(07-25-2013 03:19 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 03:00 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 02:49 PM)Jay256 Wrote:  So they may form a new division but still include up to 150 schools? That makes no sense. Thamel sounds drunk with that article. If they are to form a new division you can bet that it will not include small mid-major schools. That's the whole point for them to create a new division to begin with. What will most likely end up happening, since it's all about money, is that they will open the door to programs or conferences who are in favor of a "pay for play" setup to join the party. Others who vote down will be left into D-1A.

It sounds as of it will be a new division in terms of its rules, which will allow the P5 schools to much more effectively use thier huge financial advantage. In other words, some of the smaller leagues will be allowed to come along---but don't expect the rules to create a level playing field anymore. They will be designed to do just the opposite. So--the smaller conferences can either stay with the big boys as huge underdogs or they can drop down and compete on a equal plane. Basically, those who elect to stay better find some more revenue if they want to truely compete.

So in closing not that much different really?

Not much. Just that the power-conferences will have the ability to set their own rules, with everyone else able to keep up, or not.

And 150 as a number isn't crazy, if you take the criteria of "who is a serious athletic program." Accepting the idea that being in FBS means you're a serious program, that means about 20 non-FBS schools with heavyweight basketball gets you to 150.

One logistical problem is that those only 10 of those 20 non-FBS schools are in a conference that would be able to keep up. Gonzaga and BYU could, but not the rest of the WCC. I'd be surprised if half of the A-10 schools could spend SuperDivision-level money on their basketball programs.

Which all means more realignment.

On the topic of the WCC, I'd throw in a school like St. Mary's, which has been very competitive in recent years. They've actually been more successful against national competition than most of the Pac-12 with the exceptions of UCLA, Arizona, Washington, and maybe Oregon.

In comparing the A-10, you can't just compare them to the P5 if you're going to include all of the FBS, many of whom spend most of their money on football and not a lot on basketball. A-10 schools are by and large more competitive in basketball than lots of football schools.