http://cfn.scout.com/2/1431175.html

The NCAA voted to let the Power 5 conferences – the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC – become autonomous. To put it more correctly, the NCAA voted to allow the Power 5 to become autonomous and run things the way they want to, because the alternative would’ve been the Power 5 would’ve run things the way they wanted to, only without the NCAA being a part of the fun.

So what does it all really mean? Why should you care? You’re going to hear and probably read a lot of procedural mumbo jumbo, but here’s what’s really going on.

The Power 5 just wants to be able to do things the way they want to do things.

The big conferences finally realized that it didn’t make proper business sense to carry the smaller leagues around anymore. The SEC isn’t on the same financial playing field as the Sun Belt, and the Michigans of the world didn’t want the Eastern Michigans to have an equal say in how the collegiate athletic world should be run. With this NCAA ruling, the path has been paved for the Power 5 to figure out their own infrastructure and how to best run their respective businesses without the NCAA being able to say much.

Also, this is the Power 5’s way of trying to jump off the sinking ship. The NCAA is an easy target right now in terms of lawsuits, power, influence, and PR, and while autonomy doesn’t remove the Power 5 from any of the problems, at least it makes it look like they’re creating some distance.

To cut to the chase, who’s the big winner and who’s the big loser?

Obviously the big conferences are the winners, and depending on how all of this shakes out over the next several years, the players might be the huge losers.

Unionization will take the biggest hit, because if the conferences start to legislate the way they want to, they’re going to cut the legs right out of the movement. The player representatives will get around a 3% say, which means they don’t get any say, but the players will be able to start receiving more money, will have more attention paid to concussions and other issues, and will be treated with a bit more respect than before. Unfortunately, they’ll be paid pennies and lip service compared to the billions that will come rolling in for the mega-conferences. If you thought it was hard for players to have a unified voice and proper representation before, that’s nothing compared to what they’ll have to do to deal with the bigger and more powerful conferences.

So the American Athletic Conference, Conference USA, MAC, Mountain West and Sun Belt – at least among the football conferences – are hosed, right?

Not really. The Puny 6 won’t have as much power in how things are done, but they’re not going to go away, and they’re sure not going to start playing college football in the spring, like SMU head coach June Jones suggested. Everyone is still sort of under the NCAA umbrella, but now the Power 5 get twice as much say – around 38% of the voting power goes to the Power 5, and around 19% to the Puny 6, with non-football conferences, student-athlete councils, and a faculty advisory thing taking up the remaining part. No, this doesn’t necessarily mean the other conferences are going to be shoved into a lesser financial situation. They’re being asked to sit on the couch with Sidney. Jugdish, Mohammet and Lonny, but they’re able to help themselves to punch and cookies.

How does this affect John Q. College Football Fan?

It doesn’t. The average sports fan won’t even notice or care. The same rich and powerful programs will remain rich and powerful. It’s not like New Mexico State was in the hunt for national titles under the old system.

But will this end up changing the world of college athletics as we know it?

Yeah, but it might take a little while.

You know all those pesky NCAA investigations surrounding a slew of phony-baloney rules? Those might go the way of the leather helmet depending on the rules and regulations the Power 5 will end up creating. Outside of the bungling of the Penn State situation, when was the last time you heard the NCAA was doing anything real in terms of infraction investigations?

With billions of dollars on the line and the power in the hands of the big conferences, do you really think any cash-cow power program is going to get tagged for stupid stuff like a player getting money from a marketing consultant or a coach hiding a few e-mails about players selling their bowl memorabilia?

It’s not like the big conferences are now free to do whatever they wish. They take the power away from the NCAA in a lot of ways, but it’s going to take a bit before the Power 5 figures out among the respective leagues what the next step is.

The biggest battle might be over the idea of cost-of-attendance, which I keep saying over and over is the one really big area of interest. Basically, cost-of-attendance will be the way schools and colleges start to pay players without actually saying they’re going to pay them. Of all the things about to happen, in terms of recruiting, this could resonate the most with the average fan.

Here’s the problem, and here’s where the infighting is going to come. It costs a lot more to live in Westwood, Coral Gables, Chestnut Hill and Berkeley than it does in State College, Auburn and Starkville. Talk about a recruiting advantage, the schools and conferences have to figure out how they’re going to even the pay playing field, because some of the rich schools in small college towns are going to want to compete when it comes to money that can be offered, even if, technically, it’s supposed to be to offset the cost of living and going to school – NOT working – at a university.

The other big tussle will be between the haves and have-nots within the leagues. Ohio State and Michigan can afford anything, but Illinois and Purdue can’t. Also, this still won’t solve the overall problem of player talent and merit. In theory, cost-of-attendance will apply to the backup punter as well as the Heisman-caliber quarterback. Eventually, the conferences can decide on how to deal with this – like letting Johnny Heisman sign footballs for money, take endorsement deals, or $100 handshakes – but that’s ten steps ahead of what’s going on right now.

What about Notre Dame and BYU?

Notre Dame is lumped in with the ACC thanks to its Friends With Benefits deal. BYU is a different story. The program seems to love the freedom and autonomy of being an independent, but it also wants to be seen as a power program. On the field, the changes don’t matter much to BYU – it’ll always have a minor bowl tie-in and it could still get into the College Football Playoff with a monster year. However, in terms of influence in the way college athletics are run, BYU needs to latch on to a conference. The fans have no interest in going back to the Mountain West – even though it would push the league into another level. The Pac-12 already has Utah and doesn’t appear interested, but the Big 12 makes a ton of sense in terms of exposure, relative geography, and potential power within the league. At the moment, though, in terms of the ruling, BYU is still in its own world.

Is that it for the NCAA?

Nope. It’s still needed for a variety of reasons, including handling all of the other sports, but its days as a true governing body for major college football are effectively over.

Power 5, you got what you wanted. Let the games begin.

How many conferences are in the Puny 6?

I'm assuming he's lumping the independents.

(08-07-2014 02:38 PM)Klak Wrote:  How many conferences are in the Puny 6?

He was counting CUSA Twice by mistake.

As far as playing exclusively P5 schedules, I wonder how the lesser of the 65 will feel about that?

Northwestern, Maryland, Rutgers, Wake Forest, Duke, Miss. St., Vandy, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, and others aren't going to win 6 games consistently in a P5-only schedule.

The new rally cry should be "Feed the Greed!" The NCAA has been transformed by the P5 from an impotent, spineless collection of bureaucrats to remora fish. I think now I'd rather watch Wall Street play each other that P5. "Go fighting Goldman Sachs!" "Stick it to them, AIG!"

(08-07-2014 03:31 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(08-07-2014 02:38 PM)Klak Wrote:  How many conferences are in the Puny 6?

He was counting CUSA Twice by mistake.

No not by mistake they are REALLY puny so they get to count as PUNY twice..

(08-08-2014 06:31 AM)Eagles Cliff Wrote:  As far as playing exclusively P5 schedules, I wonder how the lesser of the 65 will feel about that?

Northwestern, Maryland, Rutgers, Wake Forest, Duke, Miss. St., Vandy, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, and others aren't going to win 6 games consistently in a P5-only schedule.

You can ask you AD's about all the calls they are getting to schedule P5's to figure out the answerer to that. Might even give you a clue as to the chances of that happening.

Ask them what they think about the big-boys ahead of them being able to sign more players while you are at it.

People say the G5's don't get many 4-5 star athletes, but neither do about half the P5's, and they don't like the idea of not getting any, because they have to play at least some of the big-boys in their conference every year, and their jobs do depend on how they do against them.

I can promise you their are more P5 coaches and administrators anxious about what lies ahead than G5.

(08-08-2014 07:16 AM)sarkelcpa Wrote:  The new rally cry should be "Feed the Greed!" The NCAA has been transformed by the P5 from an impotent, spineless collection of bureaucrats to remora fish. I think now I'd rather watch Wall Street play each other that P5. "Go fighting Goldman Sachs!" "Stick it to them, AIG!"

one way it will hurt the rest of us is that they are now able to set their own rules on recruiting and coaching staff size. the reason some g5 schools have a chance to be good is that there are more talented players coming out of high school than spots available at the p5 schools. that will change. they could raise the max. number of scholarships allowed and thereby widen the gap in skill level. they are also now able to increase the size of their coaching staff and some good head coaches from g5 schools will be snapped up with offers of more money to be assistants at a p5 school..before there were limits on recruiting, even little schools like baylor would have over a hundred players on scholarship. now the p5 can pay players, provide more support staff and take more of the talented players. I see the gap widening as some conference commissioners have already suggested that p5's dont play any g5 schools anymore.

(08-08-2014 07:35 AM)runamuck Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 07:16 AM)sarkelcpa Wrote:  The new rally cry should be "Feed the Greed!" The NCAA has been transformed by the P5 from an impotent, spineless collection of bureaucrats to remora fish. I think now I'd rather watch Wall Street play each other that P5. "Go fighting Goldman Sachs!" "Stick it to them, AIG!"

one way it will hurt the rest of us is that they are now able to set their own rules on recruiting and coaching staff size. the reason some g5 schools have a chance to be good is that there are more talented players coming out of high school than spots available at the p5 schools. that will change. they could raise the max. number of scholarships allowed and thereby widen the gap in skill level. they are also now able to increase the size of their coaching staff and some good head coaches from g5 schools will be snapped up with offers of more money to be assistants at a p5 school..before there were limits on recruiting, even little schools like baylor would have over a hundred players on scholarship. now the p5 can pay players, provide more support staff and take more of the talented players. I see the gap widening as some conference commissioners have already suggested that p5's dont play any g5 schools anymore.

For what it's worth I think most of your concerns are based on pure ignorance.

(08-08-2014 07:38 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 07:35 AM)runamuck Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 07:16 AM)sarkelcpa Wrote:  The new rally cry should be "Feed the Greed!" The NCAA has been transformed by the P5 from an impotent, spineless collection of bureaucrats to remora fish. I think now I'd rather watch Wall Street play each other that P5. "Go fighting Goldman Sachs!" "Stick it to them, AIG!"

one way it will hurt the rest of us is that they are now able to set their own rules on recruiting and coaching staff size. the reason some g5 schools have a chance to be good is that there are more talented players coming out of high school than spots available at the p5 schools. that will change. they could raise the max. number of scholarships allowed and thereby widen the gap in skill level. they are also now able to increase the size of their coaching staff and some good head coaches from g5 schools will be snapped up with offers of more money to be assistants at a p5 school..before there were limits on recruiting, even little schools like baylor would have over a hundred players on scholarship. now the p5 can pay players, provide more support staff and take more of the talented players. I see the gap widening as some conference commissioners have already suggested that p5's dont play any g5 schools anymore.

For what it's worth I think most of your concerns are based on pure ignorance.

(08-08-2014 07:38 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 07:35 AM)runamuck Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 07:16 AM)sarkelcpa Wrote:  The new rally cry should be "Feed the Greed!" The NCAA has been transformed by the P5 from an impotent, spineless collection of bureaucrats to remora fish. I think now I'd rather watch Wall Street play each other that P5. "Go fighting Goldman Sachs!" "Stick it to them, AIG!"

one way it will hurt the rest of us is that they are now able to set their own rules on recruiting and coaching staff size. the reason some g5 schools have a chance to be good is that there are more talented players coming out of high school than spots available at the p5 schools. that will change. they could raise the max. number of scholarships allowed and thereby widen the gap in skill level. they are also now able to increase the size of their coaching staff and some good head coaches from g5 schools will be snapped up with offers of more money to be assistants at a p5 school..before there were limits on recruiting, even little schools like baylor would have over a hundred players on scholarship. now the p5 can pay players, provide more support staff and take more of the talented players. I see the gap widening as some conference commissioners have already suggested that p5's dont play any g5 schools anymore.

For what it's worth I think most of your concerns are based on pure ignorance.

I disagree. In society in general, the pursuit of money has contributed to the lowering of morality, ethics and social conscience. It is not an idle saying, 'Money is the root of nearly all evil.' (Actually, I paraphrased!) I griped and complained about Ohio State's post season ban in 2012 for players selling memorabilia to buy tattoos. The thing was, the players broke NCAA rules and the team was penalized for it (and rightly so). Granted, there was more to it that was not as obvious, like car dealerships loaning new cars to players for free. The bottom line was, I compromised my ethics for a few selfish guys who thought only of themselves. Ignorant? I don't think so.

(08-08-2014 08:20 AM)sarkelcpa Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 07:38 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 07:35 AM)runamuck Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 07:16 AM)sarkelcpa Wrote:  The new rally cry should be "Feed the Greed!" The NCAA has been transformed by the P5 from an impotent, spineless collection of bureaucrats to remora fish. I think now I'd rather watch Wall Street play each other that P5. "Go fighting Goldman Sachs!" "Stick it to them, AIG!"

one way it will hurt the rest of us is that they are now able to set their own rules on recruiting and coaching staff size. the reason some g5 schools have a chance to be good is that there are more talented players coming out of high school than spots available at the p5 schools. that will change. they could raise the max. number of scholarships allowed and thereby widen the gap in skill level. they are also now able to increase the size of their coaching staff and some good head coaches from g5 schools will be snapped up with offers of more money to be assistants at a p5 school..before there were limits on recruiting, even little schools like baylor would have over a hundred players on scholarship. now the p5 can pay players, provide more support staff and take more of the talented players. I see the gap widening as some conference commissioners have already suggested that p5's dont play any g5 schools anymore.

For what it's worth I think most of your concerns are based on pure ignorance.

I disagree. In society in general, the pursuit of money has contributed to the lowering of morality, ethics and social conscience. It is not an idle saying, 'Money is the root of nearly all evil.' (Actually, I paraphrased!) I griped and complained about Ohio State's post season ban in 2012 for players selling memorabilia to buy tattoos. The thing was, the players broke NCAA rules and the team was penalized for it (and rightly so). Granted, there was more to it that was not as obvious, like car dealerships loaning new cars to players for free. The bottom line was, I compromised my ethics for a few selfish guys who thought only of themselves. Ignorant? I don't think so.

That was not the type of ignorance I was talking about.

Scholarship limits are not part of the autonomy legislation and neither are transfers. It would take a vote by the entier NCAA to move those rules to autonomy. Unless they plan on changing the rules of football to allow more players on the field at the same time, increasing scholarship limits wold onyl increase the number of disgruntled players sitting on the bench who want to transfer. UNlike the 1960s, there are plenty of opportunities for bench players to transfer now.

(08-08-2014 09:05 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  Scholarship limits are not part of the autonomy legislation and neither are transfers. It would take a vote by the entier NCAA to move those rules to autonomy. Unless they plan on changing the rules of football to allow more players on the field at the same time, increasing scholarship limits wold onyl increase the number of disgruntled players sitting on the bench who want to transfer. UNlike the 1960s, there are plenty of opportunities for bench players to transfer now.

well I suppose there might be some nonstarters at a big time program that would want to leave the perks and pampered setting there for the hardscrabble life at a lower level of college sports..

Just a couple of points:

1. Unionization - This move does nothing to cut the legs of the unionization movement. It does the opposite. The only thing stopping players from unionizing is that they aren't employees. That is, they aren't getting paid. As soon as the schools start paying them, you'll see it will be much harder to maintain that the athletes are not employees. Overall, this is a bad move if you're trying to fix the unionization issue.
2. P5 playing G5 - Coaches may not want to play G5 schools, but you can't make a home schedule the way you want it(7,8 games) with home and homes. And the only ones coming for a 1 off for that sweet sweet paycheck is us, the G5 schools. So this is kind of a non-starter when the big schools want to fill up their scheduled with home games to appease season ticket holders.
   

(08-08-2014 06:31 AM)Eagles Cliff Wrote:  As far as playing exclusively P5 schedules, I wonder how the lesser of the 65 will feel about that?

Northwestern, Maryland, Rutgers, Wake Forest, Duke, Miss. St., Vandy, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, and others aren't going to win 6 games consistently in a P5-only schedule.

LOL. Last year 8 SEC, 9 ACC, 9 B1G, 6 Big XII, and 6 Pac 12 teams didn't have 6 P5 wins. Sure they can change the bowl rules, but it would be a complete mess to do so.

-------------

Last year the following teams had less than 6 P5 wins (doesn't include bowl games). * Denotes bowl team

SEC - Miss State (3)*, Arkansas (0), Ole Miss (4)*, Texas A&M (4)*, Kentucky (0), Tennessee (2), Florida (3), Vandy (5)*

ACC - Virginia (0), Pitt (4)*, Ga Tech (5)*, UNC (4)*, Va Tech (5)*, NC State (0), Wake (2), BC (4)*, Syracuse (4)*

B1G - Maryland (4)*, Penn State (5), Purdue (0), Illinois (1), Indiana (3), Northwestern (3), Michigan (4)*, Minnesota (4)*, Nebraska (5)* - Rutgers not counted as they didn't play an 8 game league P5 schedule

Big XII - Kansas (1), Iowa State (2), West Virgina (2), TCU (2), Texas Tech (4)*, Kansas State (5)*

Pac12 - Colorado (1), Utah (2), Arizona (4)*, Cal (0), Wash St (4)*, Oregon St (4)*

----

Obviously, there would be some more P5 games played and someone would have to win those games, so lets just add 1 more win to each team. I don't see how the AD's or Coaches would want this.

A little off track (I think?) but here's my issue. An FBS team has 85 scholarships. FCS has 63. So, ok, the FCS can divvy those up and probably cover most, if not all, of the 85-90 players; in some form or fashion, leaving them to "fend for themselves" to cover the rest of their costs.

However, FBS teams do not have that "luxury" They have 85 schollys and 85 guys get the whole shooting match. As we all know, most FBS teams have somewhere in the area of 110-120 players, right? What do you tell those guys? How do you, or do you, cover them? You can't blankly hand over an extra 5K to guys who already get everything free and not make some move to help the others who might can afford their education, etc but, then again, they could just be squeaking by.

I don't care if they get us to up the scholarship quota to 90, there will still be players who are getting zilch.

85 total scholarships is enough. 22 starters on offense/defense, a punter, FG kicker and Kickoff guy. That is 25 players. You can have 3 deep at every position and that is 75 (25 times 3) and still have 10 other players.

85 is plenty.