Quote:[quote="bitcruncher"]The Pac 10 has discussed leaving the NCAA more than once. I think if a few other conferences began the same discussion it will probably happen. The NCAA has made too many enemies in the big conferences, and mending those fences will probably be beyond their limited abilities.

I don't think federal or state legislatures would stand for a split (not to mention university presidents and the general public). It would be final and conclusive proof that big-time college sports are running amuck.

Agreed and such a move would be catastrophic to the Big East and to schools like Georgetown. Since some school do not play certain olympic sports, that would mean we would only have BCS schools competing agasint each other in football and basketball.

If you only have BCS schools, where does put schools like Georgetown, Seton Hall, St. John's, and Providence?

Would we get a share of your football profits? How about scheduling for both football and basketball?

I don't see this happening; however, I do see college athletics moving towards a larger conference form to include more teams and also to reap more revenues through TV contracts and bowl games. I would not be surprised to see the ACC, SEC, and Big 12 go to 14 full members one day, and the Pac 10 going to 12, and the Big 10 going to 12.

State or Federal legislation has nothing in the way of precidents for requiring membership in an organization that has no legal foundation for its existence. The NCAA exists on the suffrance of its members. If said suffrance is removed, it ceases to exist as a meaningful body and a new governing body would be created to take its place with rules more to the liking of its founders.

Sounds like revolution, don't it?

I am tire of schools like Central Conn. sticking its nose into most issues! They hate the 120 Big Time schools!

it would be one sure-fire way to get schools like Villanova, Marquette, Georgetown to get their butts back into football or be left behind.

Their choice.

Even if the new association included all 120 division 1a football schools it would still be a VAST improvement over the 4,500 ankle biter schools that currently claim to be division 1 and on the same level with schools like Ohio State, Illinois, WVU, Pitt, Louisville, Cincinnati, etc., etc.

Many of those schools are SO pathetic that major schools wouldn't play them because merely playing them is so destructive of RPI.

This was brought up during Kennedy's coaches show last night. It was mentioned because they were discussing the NCAA not wanting the BE to get 9 or 10 teams in the tourney because it would give the BE too much power and the NCAA wants to keep control....As oppossed to what happened in football when the large conference seperated from the NCAA to form the BCS....I don't think anyone in Cincy was suggesting this needs to happen because UC was snubbed.

And for the Memphis fan with the 1st round comment....How many trips to the dance have you had while we were going to the last 14 straight, 1 final four, and 3 great eights?

triad buc Wrote:That would be the worst thing to ever happen to College sports. If the BCS schools acomplished this, you would destroy the whole idea that college sports represents. Amature atheletes. You would also destroy one of the biggest events in college sports. March Madness.

I hate to tell you this but, March Madness gets its name not exactly from the Final 4 but the first and second round games. The NCAA tourney would not be the same without a non-well known school takes out a BIG DOG.

Also, if that were to happen, you may as well start paying the players. The Big conferences have been pushing this for years. Especially in football. Then what are you doing? You are no longer competing with the MVCs and CUSAs of the world, but the NBA. I enjoy college basketball much more then Pro, but the JJ Redick's aren't going to hold a candle to the LeBron James'.

This has been beaten around before. Not on this board but has been bantered. This would be the destruction of college sports as we know it.

I don't disagree. I am not advocating such a move. I just think it is a possibility down the road and was curious about what others thought.

I have mixed feelings. I was displeased with what seemed to be a smaller-league selection bias this year. At the same time, I feel that every conferences' champ should be included. It was the at-large pool that displeased me.

For this, I wouldn't disband the ncaa.

It is possible, however, that, if this trend continues, the bigger conferences might feel the need to stage their own tournament. I feel that this may be one of the reasons the larger conferences are so opposed to a college FB playoff.

Jim

Bearcat T Wrote:Lets face it no one wants to watch George Mason and Air force! Oh I forgot the AD at George Mason and the WAC commissioner who made sure they cheated to get their teams in do.

Actually, I want to watch George Mason.

As for cheating, here is an interesting bite. Although the George Mason Athletic Director left the room when it came to discussing the Patriots, the Virginia Althetic Director who was leading the NCAA committee, remained.

GMU was part of the University of Virginia before becoming a school of its own. Granted it was a long time ago and our paths do not cross very often (except when Mason steals another high profile professor from UVA) but the link is still there.

For what is is worth, I think Mason will win its first round game. I think they will lose in the second round.

For your argument... I think you are underestimating the damage your rule would have on basketball. Under your rule Gonzaga would never have been able to build its program. St Joseph would have never been able to make its run. Valporaso would never had its run.

Do you really think Baylor playing Vanderbilt would be more attractive? Clemson vs Washington State? Mississippi State vs Northwestern? Texas Tech vs Virginia Tech?

I can't necessarily say I think the power conferences should secede from the NCAA but, if they really wanted to, they could all join the NAIA en masse. The NAIA has been bleeding red ink and losing members to the NCAA by the bushel over the last few years.

If the six BCS leagues went to NAIA leadership and said they want to join together and become the new NAIA Division I, bumping the current members down a division, you know the NAIA would agree to it because it means financial solvency and a big windfall.

Gray Avenger Wrote:

Quote:[quote="Shannon Panther"]This is purely hypothetical, however, the BCS is predicated on keeping the vast majority of FB revenues in the hands of the power conferences. Is it possible with this years snub of Cinci, FSU and several other major conference member that the BCS schools might leave the NCAA and form a new governing body with Notre Dame?


One way to alleviate this would be to invite one mid major conference to go with them. If so, which one? Personally, I would take the Mountain West because they represent a portion of the country that is not well covered by another conference. Because of this they would be a "safe" choice that wouldn't come back to hurt a BCS conference later. That would bring the membership to 73 schools. CUSA duplicates the SEC and B12. ............

For what it is worth, C-USA is the only non-BCS conference which holds official NCAA status as an "equity conference" and thus sits at the decision-making table.

Somebody's gotta fetch coffee.

chess Wrote:For your argument... I think you are underestimating the damage your rule would have on basketball. Under your rule Gonzaga would never have been able to build its program. St Joseph would have never been able to make its run. Valporaso would never had its run.

Do you really think Baylor playing Vanderbilt would be more attractive? Clemson vs Washington State? Mississippi State vs Northwestern? Texas Tech vs Virginia Tech?

So the question is: "Exactly how much value do the small-program Cinderella's add to the NCAA's?" Enough to keep the Big Six under the thumbs of the NCAA in perpituity?

I don't think any break away/reformation would be so exclusive as to wipte every such program off the national radar. At the same token I don't think the schools that are supposedly providing the lions share of the product value are interested in subsidising the rise of those other programs. At least, not too much. I think that for every Gonzaga, Valpo and other programs that work within themselves to truly be good teams and programs overall, there are also numerous sides that are only fielding sports for exposure. And much like we see a huge gulf in the levels of investment within both 1-A and 1-AA football, the same could be said of D1 basketball. Somewhere there has to be a measure of investment where it really is too small to be considered level with the likes of UConn and Kentucky. So just as we can rightfully debate the wherewithall of non-schollie football programs to crowd the ranks of AA football, surely there are basketball programs ill-equipped to occupy earnest post-season ranks among the highest calibre programs in the country.

And no, this isn't like high school athletics where essentially the players have few options in where to play based on assigned districts, thus there is less need to presume everybody should be within the same playoff. There are divisions for a reason and it appears the measures difining each division need to be reassessed.

a good point.

At the very very least division 1 basketball could split into division 1a and 1aa divisions. 1a membership could require $10 million or $15 million or $20 million overall athletic budget. Something like that.

That could possibly help to insure that post-season play involved programs that are truly more in the same class.

In my opinion though such a move would be a half-measure, something offered at the last moment to avert a secession. The problem is getting hundreds of currently division 1 schools to vote themselves into oblivion.

I don't think NAIA is the answer. We need a new organization made by us and for us.

Shannon Panther Wrote:Disadvantages: Too few member schools. The B10-11, BE-8, ND, PAC10 - 10, and the 3 superconferences ACC, SEC, B12 would only equal 66 teams total. Their postseason BB tourney would have no more than 32 participants.

I don't know about that. 66 is close enough to 64 that you could throw in 2 "play in" games and have a "BCS National Championship" tournament. Using RPI as a rough guide, here's what it would look like this year:

Atlanta Regional:

#1 Duke vs. #16 play-in (USF vs. Oregon State)
#8 Colorado vs. #9 South Carolina
#5 Boston College vs. #12 Northwestern
#4 Michigan State vs. #13 Mississippi State
#6 Cincinnati vs. #11 Minnesota
#3 LSU vs. #14 Missouri
#7 Texas A&M vs. #10 Virginia
#2 Pitt vs. #15 Virginia Tech

Oakland Regional

#1 Tennessee vs. #16 Washington State
#8 NC State vs. #9 Rutgers
#5 Indiana vs. #12 Iowa State
#4 Oklahoma vs. #13 Penn State
#6 Washington vs. #11 Oklahoma State
#3 Florida vs. #14 USC
#7 Maryland vs. #10 Vanderbilt
#2 UCLA vs. #15 Georgia Tech

Minneapolis Regional

#1 Ohio State vs. #16 Baylor
#8 California vs. #9 Louisville
#5 Arizona vs. #12 Notre Dame
#4 Syracuse vs. #13 Kansas State
#6 West Virginia vs. #11 Stanford
#3 Illinois vs. #14 Auburn
#7 Michigan vs. #10 Clemson
#2 Texas vs. #15 Ole Miss

Washington, DC Regional

#1 UConn vs. #16 play-in (Purdue vs. Arizona State)
#8 Alabama vs. #9 Florida State
#5 Wisconsin vs. #12 Nebraska
#4 Kansas vs. #13 Georgia
#6 Kentucky vs. #11 Wake Forest
#3 North Carolina vs. #14 Texas Tech
#7 Arkansas vs. #10 Miami
#2 Iowa vs. #15 Oregon

Granted some of the games are clunkers in the first round, but there are always some clunkers in the first round every year anyway. By the time you reach the Sweet 16, the match-ups will be compelling.

Before you completely dismiss the concept, remember that it wasn't all THAT long ago that the NIT was actually the premier postseason college basketball tournament. If a tournament such as the one above were pitched to the networks, it would ignite a helluva bidding war.

USFFan

omnicarrier Wrote:

CardinalZen Wrote:If there is ever going to be a split, basketball issues won't be what drives it. The only way a split happens is if the NCAA tries to jack with the BCS system too much.

Sport doesn't matter. What would drive such a split is $$$ - and as I've pointed out over and over again - take all of the $$$ earned in Bowl games in College Football and total them together and it's about 1/3 of the revenue produce by March Madness.

At this point in time, the Big Boys are willing to settle for about 22% of that pie in exchange for the NCAAs not messing with college football. However, as budgets get tighter and tighter that may change.

Cheers,
Neil

Here is the financial info Omni was saying. The BB contract is worth ALOT more but the NCAA keeps ALOT.

I didn't bother to update the money but its going to be similar.

The conferences get 100% of the bowl money directly back to fund their athletics. In 2004-2005, the BCS distributed $122 million dollars.

http://www.ncaa.org/financial/po...venue.html

For BB, each unit is now worth $164,000.

In 2005-06, each basketball unit will be approximately $164,000 for a total $122.8 million distribution. The credits are distributed based over a six-year rolling period.

The BB contract is worth much more ($6 billion over 11 years?) but the NCAA only distributed about 25% of that back to teh conferences as credits (as Omni noted).

http://www.ncaa.org/releases/mon...Notes.html

www1.ncaa.org/finance/rev...ion_plan#5

I found some info that shows how much revenue was distributed to each conference from 2000-2005.

www1.ncaa.org/finance/5-y...basketball

well after watching the first 2 days of games. I must say that I wouldn't agree with this split. The last 2 days have been fun. Maybe Kansas and Iowa would agree with you though! They might still be alive in your idea!

Hoquista Wrote:

omnicarrier Wrote:

CardinalZen Wrote:If there is ever going to be a split, basketball issues won't be what drives it. The only way a split happens is if the NCAA tries to jack with the BCS system too much.

Sport doesn't matter. What would drive such a split is $$$ - and as I've pointed out over and over again - take all of the $$$ earned in Bowl games in College Football and total them together and it's about 1/3 of the revenue produce by March Madness.

At this point in time, the Big Boys are willing to settle for about 22% of that pie in exchange for the NCAAs not messing with college football. However, as budgets get tighter and tighter that may change.

Cheers,
Neil

Here is the financial info Omni was saying. The BB contract is worth ALOT more but the NCAA keeps ALOT.

I didn't bother to update the money but its going to be similar.

The conferences get 100% of the bowl money directly back to fund their athletics. In 2004-2005, the BCS distributed $122 million dollars.

http://www.ncaa.org/financial/po...venue.html

For BB, each unit is now worth $164,000.

In 2005-06, each basketball unit will be approximately $164,000 for a total $122.8 million distribution. The credits are distributed based over a six-year rolling period.

The BB contract is worth much more ($6 billion over 11 years?) but the NCAA only distributed about 25% of that back to teh conferences as credits (as Omni noted).

http://www.ncaa.org/releases/mon...Notes.html

www1.ncaa.org/finance/rev...ion_plan#5

I found some info that shows how much revenue was distributed to each conference from 2000-2005.

www1.ncaa.org/finance/5-y...basketball

Remember, NCAA also distributes other monies to schools and conferences based on programs, etc. Most of the $550 million is distributed.

omnicarrier Wrote:

CardinalZen Wrote:If there is ever going to be a split, basketball issues won't be what drives it. The only way a split happens is if the NCAA tries to jack with the BCS system too much.

Sport doesn't matter. What would drive such a split is $$$ - and as I've pointed out over and over again - take all of the $$$ earned in Bowl games in College Football and total them together and it's about 1/3 of the revenue produce by March Madness.

At this point in time, the Big Boys are willing to settle for about 22% of that pie in exchange for the NCAAs not messing with college football. However, as budgets get tighter and tighter that may change.

Cheers,
Neil

March Madness ONLY worth as much as they are now is due to the people that are in them. With out Tiger Wood the PGA tour doesn't have the rating.

well, I'm sure Pitt, Tennessee, and Indiana would also love your idea!

so would UNC!