Quote:As Division I moves closer to changing its governance structure, the Division I Steering Committee on Governance today released an updated governance model to the membership. The updated model and legislative proposal reflect the feedback from campuses and conferences that guided the committee’s decisions.

The restructuring effort aims to preserve and improve the model of collegiate athletics that has helped millions of student-athletes gain access to higher education and pursue a degree. Most importantly, committee members said, the changes will allow the governance structure to more efficiently and effectively meet the needs of student-athletes.

(07-18-2014 11:29 AM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Quote:As Division I moves closer to changing its governance structure, the Division I Steering Committee on Governance today released an updated governance model to the membership. The updated model and legislative proposal reflect the feedback from campuses and conferences that guided the committee’s decisions.

The restructuring effort aims to preserve and improve the model of collegiate athletics that has helped millions of student-athletes gain access to higher education and pursue a degree. Most importantly, committee members said, the changes will allow the governance structure to more efficiently and effectively meet the needs of student-athletes.

Press Release

After looking this over, I get the feeling everyone but the Big 5 Conferences will get screwed.

(07-18-2014 01:23 PM)eaglewraith Wrote:  I thought part of the revisions to the governance structure were being requested to allow G5 to maintain input into what was happening, since they wanted to maintain the seperation of FBS from everything else. That way, all of FBS could make rules for the things they wanted and couldn't be overwritten.

The way this looks, it doesn't matter what anyone else wants. This also gives FCS and basketball conferences more voting power than the G5. WTF

(07-18-2014 01:30 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-18-2014 01:23 PM)eaglewraith Wrote:  I thought part of the revisions to the governance structure were being requested to allow G5 to maintain input into what was happening, since they wanted to maintain the seperation of FBS from everything else. That way, all of FBS could make rules for the things they wanted and couldn't be overwritten.

The way this looks, it doesn't matter what anyone else wants. This also gives FCS and basketball conferences more voting power than the G5. WTF

On a per conference basis, the G5 has a slight edge over the 22 other FCS/Basketball conferences.
However, who is the G5 going to vote with? The P5 or the conferences? The G5 & P5 votes total over 56%.

(07-18-2014 01:23 PM)eaglewraith Wrote:  I thought part of the revisions to the governance structure were being requested to allow G5 to maintain input into what was happening, since they wanted to maintain the seperation of FBS from everything else. That way, all of FBS could make rules for the things they wanted and couldn't be overwritten.

The way this looks, it doesn't matter what anyone else wants. This also gives FCS and basketball conferences more voting power than the G5. WTF

(07-18-2014 01:32 PM)eaglewraith Wrote:  

(07-18-2014 01:30 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-18-2014 01:23 PM)eaglewraith Wrote:  I thought part of the revisions to the governance structure were being requested to allow G5 to maintain input into what was happening, since they wanted to maintain the seperation of FBS from everything else. That way, all of FBS could make rules for the things they wanted and couldn't be overwritten.

The way this looks, it doesn't matter what anyone else wants. This also gives FCS and basketball conferences more voting power than the G5. WTF

On a per conference basis, the G5 has a slight edge over the 22 other FCS/Basketball conferences.
However, who is the G5 going to vote with? The P5 or the conferences? The G5 & P5 votes total over 56%.

I could be reading this wrong, but it looks like the P5 still won't need the G5 to vote with them though.

Correct me if I'm looking at that wrong.

Quote:Math belongs in the classroom and not the football field.

(07-18-2014 01:33 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-18-2014 01:23 PM)eaglewraith Wrote:  I thought part of the revisions to the governance structure were being requested to allow G5 to maintain input into what was happening, since they wanted to maintain the seperation of FBS from everything else. That way, all of FBS could make rules for the things they wanted and couldn't be overwritten.

The way this looks, it doesn't matter what anyone else wants. This also gives FCS and basketball conferences more voting power than the G5. WTF

Not exactly: Here is a summary

FBS Schools now contain 55 percent of the voting power at the D1 level

P5 conferences are given autonomy, and allowed to create rules using their own voting power. G5 conferences are allowed to match whatever rules P5 passes on a school by school basis, provided the conference is okay with it

P5 and G5 are given full voting power over FBS football. P5 votes count twice. G5 votes count once. With one exception. P5 and G5 get equal voting rights on scholarship limits and rules.

Transfer rule changes may not be made for two years to allow the rest of D1 time to decide whether to implement changes. If they do not. FBS schools may use autonomy to implement their own changes.


Those are pretty big concessions to the G5.

(07-18-2014 01:35 PM)slycat Wrote:  FCS will vote together. G5 will ahve no voice and P5 will expect them to stay in line and vote with them to give them the simple majority.

(07-18-2014 01:40 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-18-2014 01:35 PM)slycat Wrote:  FCS will vote together. G5 will ahve no voice and P5 will expect them to stay in line and vote with them to give them the simple majority.

Sort of. G5 essentially becomes the Swing vote.

Lets say P5 schools want to create a rule that says that P5 conferences may offer 100 scholarships, and may freely recruit from other non P5 institutions with no transfer restrictions.

Well...at that point, the G5 and FCS have enough voting power to veto that rule, meaning it doesn't pass.

However, If P5 created a rule that allowed all FBS schools to poach from FCS schools with no transfer restrictions, whenever they want, the G5 schools could combine with the P5 schools and be able to pass that rule and FCS wont be able to do a darn thing about it.

FCS is the one who loses the power here. Essentially FBS conferences could create a whole bunch of rules to screw FCS conferences over, and because FBS controls 56 percent of the voting power, then FCS schools would have no way to stop it.

(07-18-2014 02:25 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Once again, G-5 becomes less significant.

The increase in size would make the weighted voting totals on the Council:
•37.5 percent for the five major conferences
•18.8 percent for the five remaining FBS conferences
•37.5 percent for the FCS and Division I (no football) conferences
•3.1 percent for the student-athletes
•3.1 percent for the designated faculty athletics representatives

This gives P5 2 votes for every 1 vote of G5 schools.
That is an interesting example of take away from FCS, but would probably
turn into take away from G5 schools.
75% of the votes are in the hands of the P5 and FCS+Division 1 non football.
Only 18.8% in hands of G5.

So how can we be happy with not even having 1 out of 5 of the votes.

(07-18-2014 02:25 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Once again, G-5 becomes less significant.

The increase in size would make the weighted voting totals on the Council:
•37.5 percent for the five major conferences
•18.8 percent for the five remaining FBS conferences
•37.5 percent for the FCS and Division I (no football) conferences
•3.1 percent for the student-athletes
•3.1 percent for the designated faculty athletics representatives

This gives P5 2 votes for every 1 vote of G5 schools.
That is an interesting example of take away from FCS, but would probably
turn into take away from G5 schools.
75% of the votes are in the hands of the P5 and FCS+Division 1 non football.
Only 18.8% in hands of G5.

So how can we be happy with not even having 1 out of 5 of the votes.

(07-18-2014 02:32 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote:  

(07-18-2014 02:25 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Once again, G-5 becomes less significant.

The increase in size would make the weighted voting totals on the Council:
•37.5 percent for the five major conferences
•18.8 percent for the five remaining FBS conferences
•37.5 percent for the FCS and Division I (no football) conferences
•3.1 percent for the student-athletes
•3.1 percent for the designated faculty athletics representatives

This gives P5 2 votes for every 1 vote of G5 schools.
That is an interesting example of take away from FCS, but would probably
turn into take away from G5 schools.
75% of the votes are in the hands of the P5 and FCS+Division 1 non football.
Only 18.8% in hands of G5.

So how can we be happy with not even having 1 out of 5 of the votes.

It's important to remember that most issues aren't going to be us vs. everybody else, though. We're in the unique position of being able to side with either extreme.

(07-18-2014 02:34 PM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(07-18-2014 02:32 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote:  

(07-18-2014 02:25 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Once again, G-5 becomes less significant.

The increase in size would make the weighted voting totals on the Council:
•37.5 percent for the five major conferences
•18.8 percent for the five remaining FBS conferences
•37.5 percent for the FCS and Division I (no football) conferences
•3.1 percent for the student-athletes
•3.1 percent for the designated faculty athletics representatives

This gives P5 2 votes for every 1 vote of G5 schools.
That is an interesting example of take away from FCS, but would probably
turn into take away from G5 schools.
75% of the votes are in the hands of the P5 and FCS+Division 1 non football.
Only 18.8% in hands of G5.

So how can we be happy with not even having 1 out of 5 of the votes.

It's important to remember that most issues aren't going to be us vs. everybody else, though. We're in the unique position of being able to side with either extreme.

I agree the G5 will become the swing vote which means we will be courted by both sides.

(07-18-2014 02:35 PM)Panthersville Wrote:  A little off-topic, but a question:

Let's say the P% vote themselves their own set of rules - do they still get to vote on the rules for the rest of us?

I ask because it occurred to me that one way G5 schools could "level the playing field" is to adopt all the P5 rules that they want to, but also add some - like no one-year sit-out period for transfers from P5 schools. Obviously the P5 would not like it, but if they get their own rules, why cant the G5 (with the support of the FCS/non-football schools)?