(10-25-2013 09:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 09:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 09:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 08:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 09:19 AM)bullet Wrote:  I don't think that's for sure. You've got a lot of groups with very different agendas. They have to come to an agreement.

There will be change. But there's no guarantee it happens in January. They were pretty certain they would have a college football playoff back in 1993. It all fell apart and its only in 2014 we get any sort of playoff.

The NCAA already announced that the changes decided upon at the Convention will be put into place by August 2014. These folks are under the gun. They have run out of time and know they need to come up with something. I would say we can pretty much guarantee something will happen in January. They may try to implement less than what the Majors want but they have already said they will be implementing something.

You are assuming they will agree on something in January.

I am assuming they basically already have and that the presentations being made on the 29th are either a symbolic gesture or are about smaller more minute details.

I am assuming based upon the very often stated desires of Major Conference Commissioners, Major University Presidents and Athletic Directors and because the money is leading to this.

Anyone assuming the opposite is being hopeful, in my opinion. The threat of these conferences and schools actually leaving the NCAA is still viable. The NCAA has proven itself to be very inept in it's leadership. These Major Universities could easily prove such in Court if it came down to it.

I said as much above.

Ahh, sorry JR. I missed it, been playing catch up.

The dog and pony show is commencing. Everyone gather around and say your peace. We will listen so that you can go back to your groups and schools saying that you did your best and represented well. After that, we will go ahead and do what we all know is going to be done in order to preserve the NCAA.

(10-25-2013 09:34 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 09:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 09:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 09:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 08:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The NCAA already announced that the changes decided upon at the Convention will be put into place by August 2014. These folks are under the gun. They have run out of time and know they need to come up with something. I would say we can pretty much guarantee something will happen in January. They may try to implement less than what the Majors want but they have already said they will be implementing something.

You are assuming they will agree on something in January.

I am assuming they basically already have and that the presentations being made on the 29th are either a symbolic gesture or are about smaller more minute details.

I am assuming based upon the very often stated desires of Major Conference Commissioners, Major University Presidents and Athletic Directors and because the money is leading to this.

Anyone assuming the opposite is being hopeful, in my opinion. The threat of these conferences and schools actually leaving the NCAA is still viable. The NCAA has proven itself to be very inept in it's leadership. These Major Universities could easily prove such in Court if it came down to it.

I said as much above.

Ahh, sorry JR. I missed it, been playing catch up.

The dog and pony show is commencing. Everyone gather around and say your peace. We will listen so that you can go back to your groups and schools saying that you did your best and represented well. After that, we will go ahead and do what we all know is going to be done in order to preserve the NCAA.

Exactly! And I wasn't just shooting the breeze about distancing from the O'Bannon case. It was the NCAA that screwed the pooch on that one by making money for themselves off of the players names and jersey numbers. A new governance structure that addresses the central issues of the O'Bannon case would likely owe nothing in a settlement, leaving the NCAA to make amends in their absence. A new governance structure could also choose to recognize conferences as they were constituted in the NCAA, or facilitate their reorganization. New TV contracts could then be drawn up with the entities that were recognized, reorganized, or formed. All with network approval of course.

At this point, I just hope that Tulane - and whatever schools Tulane considers its "friends/conference mates" - have the common sense to vote in lockstep with the P5. Paying a stipend is a very small price to pay if you consider what the long-term losses of NOT playing the top flight are.

Our alumni are spending a lot of money these days - and I would hate to see it all be for nothing.

(10-25-2013 09:39 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 09:34 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 09:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 09:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 09:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  You are assuming they will agree on something in January.

I am assuming they basically already have and that the presentations being made on the 29th are either a symbolic gesture or are about smaller more minute details.

I am assuming based upon the very often stated desires of Major Conference Commissioners, Major University Presidents and Athletic Directors and because the money is leading to this.

Anyone assuming the opposite is being hopeful, in my opinion. The threat of these conferences and schools actually leaving the NCAA is still viable. The NCAA has proven itself to be very inept in it's leadership. These Major Universities could easily prove such in Court if it came down to it.

I said as much above.

Ahh, sorry JR. I missed it, been playing catch up.

The dog and pony show is commencing. Everyone gather around and say your peace. We will listen so that you can go back to your groups and schools saying that you did your best and represented well. After that, we will go ahead and do what we all know is going to be done in order to preserve the NCAA.

Exactly! And I wasn't just shooting the breeze about distancing from the O'Bannon case. It was the NCAA that screwed the pooch on that one by making money for themselves off of the players names and jersey numbers. A new governance structure that addresses the central issues of the O'Bannon case would likely owe nothing in a settlement, leaving the NCAA to make amends in their absence. A new governance structure could also choose to recognize conferences as they were constituted in the NCAA, or facilitate their reorganization. New TV contracts could then be drawn up with the entities that were recognized, reorganized, or formed. All with network approval of course.

Yes, it is no coincidence that it has already been stated that new changes will be instituted by August 2014. I know you know this already but for the sake of everyone else, I will still ask. For whom was such an announcement made for?

(10-25-2013 09:43 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  At this point, I just hope that Tulane - and whatever schools Tulane considers its "friends/conference mates" - have the common sense to vote in lockstep with the P5. Paying a stipend is a very small price to pay if you consider what the long-term losses of NOT playing the top flight are.

Our alumni are spending a lot of money these days - and I would hate to see it all be for nothing.

I think Tulane is fine. Was a good move to get into the AAC. That conference is the best one to be the foundation for the gatekeeper conference that will protect the major conferences from any legalities.

(10-25-2013 09:54 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 09:43 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  At this point, I just hope that Tulane - and whatever schools Tulane considers its "friends/conference mates" - have the common sense to vote in lockstep with the P5. Paying a stipend is a very small price to pay if you consider what the long-term losses of NOT playing the top flight are.

Our alumni are spending a lot of money these days - and I would hate to see it all be for nothing.

I think Tulane is fine. Was a good move to get into the AAC. That conference is the best one to be the foundation for the gatekeeper conference that will protect the major conferences from any legalities.

I agree.

I don't think that the CUSA schools that bolted to the AAC did so without already knowing that something was going down. These schools new that the only way to stay "in" was to move "up".

We'll have to see what happens to the other conferences; I can't imagine that there will be more than 8 conferences when all of this is said and done. The reason? I think that the costs will be too high.

(10-25-2013 09:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  This is the obligatory let's try to stay in the NCAA meeting. Every effort will be made to try to form an new upper division limited to a predetermined number between 60 and 80 schools. They will push for the cost of living stipends and other issues important to the P5 schools. If they are stonewalled by the smaller schools, or bogged down in the typical committee morass, or impinged in any significant way then things will get interesting.

The threat of a breakaway is real. The spokespeople for the P5 schools, their presidents and commissioners, have all made it clear that they would like to stay within the NCAA structure. The key words here are "would like". That is hardly a mandate to do so. I believe that they realize that this time too much is at stake to stick with status quo. Besides what better way to insulate themselves from the O'Bannon case than to form a new governance structure and let the NCAA take the heat for that case.

I still think much the split talk is just posturing to get more control. "give us control over ourselves or we're leaving" kind of stuff to get the smaller D1 schools to acquiesce. And I think it'll work too.

(10-25-2013 11:46 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(10-25-2013 09:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  This is the obligatory let's try to stay in the NCAA meeting. Every effort will be made to try to form an new upper division limited to a predetermined number between 60 and 80 schools. They will push for the cost of living stipends and other issues important to the P5 schools. If they are stonewalled by the smaller schools, or bogged down in the typical committee morass, or impinged in any significant way then things will get interesting.

The threat of a breakaway is real. The spokespeople for the P5 schools, their presidents and commissioners, have all made it clear that they would like to stay within the NCAA structure. The key words here are "would like". That is hardly a mandate to do so. I believe that they realize that this time too much is at stake to stick with status quo. Besides what better way to insulate themselves from the O'Bannon case than to form a new governance structure and let the NCAA take the heat for that case.

I still think much the split talk is just posturing to get more control. "give us control over ourselves or we're leaving" kind of stuff to get the smaller D1 schools to acquiesce. And I think it'll work too.

Of course it is But, the threat is real enough to actually bear some weight. They may not want to leave the NCAA but they could if it came down to it. It's not as if the threat of leaving couldn't be followed by the action of doing so which would give such a threat very little leverage if any at all.

I think its the first step to kicking 100-150 or so schools out of Division I. But that is a ways down the road.

(10-26-2013 11:59 AM)bullet Wrote:  I think its the first step to kicking 100-150 or so schools out of Division I. But that is a ways down the road.

I think this would be more likely. Splitting the tournament money even 250 ways instead of 350 is a huge improvement for many schools. I just don't know if it can be done without voiding the current CBS/Turner contract. The trickier part is who gets the boot; outside of the SWAC and MEAC, there are no conferences that would likely be booted entirely. The WAC, Southland, Big Sky, Big South, America East, and Atlantic Sun might be close, but all of them have teams that would be desirable to a new Division I.

My guess is that the multi-sport sponsorship requirement gets ratcheted up over time to slow the growth of the division and force a few individual schools down to Division II. Consolidation between conferences will occur as the landscape shifts.