Conference Realignments - Take 2

[UND1983]

The levels of college football are dictated by scholarship levels, not by petigree or by fans in the stands. FBS football is 85 scholarships and FCS is 63. So if there are 3 level of Division I college football, what are the scholarship level differences going to be? If you say that BCS and FBS will both still be at 85 scholarship, then you have answered the question . . . there will not be a split. And FCS schools are not going to want to increase scholarshps to goto the 2nd Level, that makes no sense. So, wise people, tell me what the scholarship levels will be for the 3 tiers of DI college fooltball if this 3 tier system is ever going to happen. . . and please be specific.

DI - 3 Levels (tell me what the scholarship differences are going to be?)

BCS Todays top 6 conferences currently at 85 scholarships ??

FBS Todays next 5 FBS conference at 85 Scholarships ??

FCS Todays 119 schools currently at 63 scholarshps ??

Your right, its all made up and hypothetical. Apparently the Texas AD and Idaho AD didnt address it directly in the past week.

[Herd]

How do you expect people to be specific about a hypothetical situation thrown out in an interview by a BCS school?

If this would happen down the road, and it's not as farfetched as it was 5 years ago, tweaking the scholarship numbers will be the easiest problem they will have to deal with.

How about 85-75-63, or 93-85-70, or xx-xx-xx? It's an arbitrary number that the NCAA would have a committee examine and make recommendations on, and then they would set the numbers.

So the NCAA is going to tell the Sunbelt, MAC, MWC, CUSA, WAC (who are spending to be at the top level of college football) that now you can't? You are going to tell many teams in the Big East and ACC that they have to move up from 85 to 93 scholarships to stay at the top level of college football (a level they can't afford) and loose millions every year? Are you going to allow games between the 3 levels to be counters? Why would any team want to be at the middle level? Don't the top 6 conferences need the rest of DI for non-conference games, so there are not teams that have 0-12 records? Why would anyone want to make a move like this to destroy college football and make the 2nd tier totally irrelevant? People talk like this is going to happen, but in reality I don't see any clean way to make it happen that feasible financially or tolerable for all the tiers.

This is akin to the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cardinals, Tigers, and Braves forming their own division of the MLB, because they have more money to spend than the rest of the league. In reality, these six need the rest of the league to be successfull. FBS football would be wise to involve all 10-11 conferences in a championship, raising up all of college football, rather than destroying it.

[Herd]

Your right, its all made up and hypothetical. Apparently the Texas AD and Idaho AD didnt address it directly in the past week.

So tell me specifically how you would structure 3 tiers while keep the lower 2 tiers at all relevant and forcing current FBS confernces out of the top level? That is the question. There is a huge disparity of resources even within conferences at all 3 levels. Look at the Big 12, you have Texas and OU, then you have K.State and Iowa St. This kind of change would start tearing confereces apart from within ad really hurt college football. If the Big Sky or Valley was foced to move up to 75 scholaships, the casualties would be significant and their woud be realignment everywhere. In current economy, I don't see this 3 teir talk as real . . . there are way to many problems that would hurt all of college football.

[southpaw]

So the NCAA is going to tell the Sunbelt, MAC, MWC, CUSA, WAC (who are spending to be at the top level of college football) that now you can't? You are going to tell many teams in the Big East and ACC that they have to move up from 85 to 93 scholarships to stay at the top level of college football (a level they can't afford) and loose millions every year? Are you going to allow games between the 3 levels to be counters? Why would any team want to be at the middle level? Don't the top 6 conferences need the rest of DI for non-conference games, so there are not teams that have 0-12 records? Why would anyone want to make a move like this to destroy college football and make the 2nd tier totally irrelevant? People talk like this is going to happen, but in reality I don't see any clean way to make it happen that feasible financially or tolerable for all the tiers.

This is akin to the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cardinals, Tigers, and Braves forming their own division of the MLB, because they have more money to spend than the rest of the league. In reality, these six need the rest of the league to be successfull. FBS football would be wise to involve all 10-11 conferences in a championship, raising up all of college football, rather than destroying it.

He already stated its pointless to discuss the scholarship levels for this hypothetical situation, so it's by no means anywhere close to guaranteed the NCAA would do any changes to scholarship levels. But thanks for posting to make yourself seem like more of an idiot.

Why can't the 60 or so schools schedule non conference games against each other with the one game against a lower level team? Most teams would have 1-2 games per year to schedule with fellow BCS schools so a two year home and home deal would be pretty easy. Or what about scheduling alliances? I'd say tier 3 is much more pointless than tier 2. That second tier would represent the lower FBS schools and the top FCS schools.

[82SiouxGuy]

So the NCAA is going to tell the Sunbelt, MAC, MWC, CUSA, WAC (who are spending to be at the top level of college football) that now you can't? You are going to tell many teams in the Big East and ACC that they have to move up from 85 to 93 scholarships to stay at the top level of college football (a level they can't afford) and loose millions every year? Are you going to allow games between the 3 levels to be counters? Why would any team want to be at the middle level? Don't the top 6 conferences need the rest of DI for non-conference games, so there are not teams that have 0-12 records? Why would anyone want to make a move like this to destroy college football and make the 2nd tier totally irrelevant? People talk like this is going to happen, but in reality I don't see any clean way to make it happen that feasible financially or tolerable for all the tiers.

This is akin to the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Cardinals, Tigers, and Braves forming their own division of the MLB, because they have more money to spend than the rest of the league. In reality, these six need the rest of the league to be successfull. FBS football would be wise to involve all 10-11 conferences in a championship, raising up all of college football, rather than destroying it.

Why don't you tell the President of the University of Texas, the Athletic Director from the University of Idaho and the former Athletic Director from the University of Montana that this can't possibly happen. They have all discussed it publicly, the first 2 in stories this week. The disparity in resources is exactly the reason that it could possibly happen. All you have to do is look at high school sports in EVERY STATE in the country. Schools move up and down because of student population, and some are able to move up to compete at a higher level. But they are able to have games against different levels. This isn't rocket science. BCS schools already play non-BCS and FCS schools. Lower level play games against upper level. Maybe you missed where NDSU played the University of Minnesota in football?

This isn't something that someone on SiouxSports.com made up. People at the top of college athletics believe that it is possible. Just because you can't wrap your mind around it doesn't mean it doesn't have some validity. There are major issues in college athletics, and major differences in resources between schools. Something is going to happen. Lower level FBS schools can't compete with BCS schools and BCS schools are giving away more money than they want to lower level schools. There is no guarantee that this set up is going to happen, but it isn't out of the realm of possibility.

[jodcon]

Why don't you tell the President of the University of Texas, the Athletic Director from the University of Idaho and the former Athletic Director from the University of Montana that this can't possibly happen. They have all discussed it publicly, the first 2 in stories this week. The disparity in resources is exactly the reason that it could possibly happen. All you have to do is look at high school sports in EVERY STATE in the country. Schools move up and down because of student population, and some are able to move up to compete at a higher level. But they are able to have games against different levels. This isn't rocket science. BCS schools already play non-BCS and FCS schools. Lower level play games against upper level. Maybe you missed where NDSU played the University of Minnesota in football?

This isn't something that someone on SiouxSports.com made up. People at the top of college athletics believe that it is possible. Just because you can't wrap your mind around it doesn't mean it doesn't have some validity. There are major issues in college athletics, and major differences in resources between schools. Something is going to happen. Lower level FBS schools can't compete with BCS schools and BCS schools are giving away more money than they want to lower level schools. There is no guarantee that this set up is going to happen, but it isn't out of the realm of possibility.

Thanks for saving me the trouble of posting pretty much exactly what you said, the only thing I would add is when you look at Texas high school football with around 14 different divisions it's not too hard to imagine that the NCAA could split D1 into 3 divisions nationally and they could all thrive.

[82SiouxGuy]

Thanks for saving me the trouble of posting pretty much exactly what you said, the only thing I would add is when you look at Texas high school football with around 14 different divisions it's not too hard to imagine that the NCAA could split D1 into 3 divisions nationally and they could all thrive.

Why do people get caught in this idea that things can't be changed? The only constant in sports and in all of history is change. If FCS can thrive as a division now, why can't another division be carved out and still thrive?

[Herd]

Why do people get caught in this idea that things can't be changed? The only constant in sports and in all of history is change. If FCS can thrive as a division now, why can't another division be carved out and still thrive?

The bottom 5 conferences in FBS are funding football at the highest level, why does everyone want to take that away from them. Why can't Boise, Nevada, TCU or the conference champion of these conferences get a shot at winning a national title? Should Butler baskeball be forced into a lower tier of college basketball because it has less money, a smaller statdium or fewer fans? No, they have the same scholarsips (13) and are allowed to complete for the same national championship. What distinguishes the level is the number of scholarships, and that won't change. You will not have a BCS champion and a FBS champion both at 85 scholarships, it simply doesn't work that way. Telling schools and conferences that they have to move up or move down the totem pole of scholarships will get very interesting and will shake up college football much more than we have already seen.

i'm not saying that I'm opposed to it, I just saying that if you are assuming their will be a 3 tier system, scholarship changes need to happen, and that will be very painful for CFB as a whole.

[southpaw]

The bottom 5 conferences in FBS are funding football at the highest level, why does everyone want to take that away from them. Why can't Boise, Nevada, TCU or the conference champion of these conferences get a shot at winning a national title? Should Butler baskeball be forced into a lower tier of college basketball because it has less money, a smaller statdium or fewer fans? No, they have the same scholarsips (13) and are allowed to complete for the same national championship. What distinguishes the level is the number of scholarships, and that won't change. You will not have a BCS champion and a FBS champion both at 85 scholarships, it simply doesn't work that way. Telling schools and conferences that they have to move up or move down the totem pole of scholarships will get very interesting and will shake up college football much more than we have already seen.

i'm not saying that I'm opposed to it, I just saying that if you are assuming their will be a 3 tier system, scholarship changes need to happen, and that will be very painful for CFB as a whole.

I don't know if anyone necessarily disagrees with you that it's going to be painful for schools. But we have already seen that tcu, Boise and etc don't get a shot at the national title. And who is to say they can't join a BCS conference? There is the potential for BCS conference schools to not stay in their conference.

[82SiouxGuy]

The bottom 5 conferences in FBS are funding football at the highest level, why does everyone want to take that away from them. Why can't Boise, Nevada, TCU or the conference champion of these conferences get a shot at winning a national title? Should Butler baskeball be forced into a lower tier of college basketball because it has less money, a smaller statdium or fewer fans? No, they have the same scholarsips (13) and are allowed to complete for the same national championship. What distinguishes the level is the number of scholarships, and that won't change. You will not have a BCS champion and a FBS champion both at 85 scholarships, it simply doesn't work that way. Telling schools and conferences that they have to move up or move down the totem pole of scholarships will get very interesting and will shake up college football much more than we have already seen.

i'm not saying that I'm opposed to it, I just saying that if you are assuming their will be a 3 tier system, scholarship changes need to happen, and that will be very painful for CFB as a whole.

I guess that the President of UT doesn't have a clue. These are his words from today's USA Today, which was linked earlier in this thread, http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/story/2012-05-13/texas-william-powers-split-division-i-football/54959996/1. But of course a Bison fan knows more about football and college athletics than the President of UT.

Texas President William Powers is careful to say he's not advocating or predicting it, but he suggests it's time to address the question. "We may get to a point — I want to underline the word may — where many schools are really not in a position to compete at the level of the Floridas and the Notre Dames and the Texases and the USCs," he says. "Like any competitive business, being in it and not really being in the game, you can get hurt. Will there be some restructuring? I am not a fan of some national league, but we may end up with 50 schools in (the upper football division of the NCAA's) Division I."

Also from the article.

The issue of disparity has caught the attention of NCAA President Mark Emmert, though he insists he's not pushing for a competitive split. He'll appoint a working group, he says, to examine whether the association should reorganize for rules-making purposes.

Glad you could come and educate all of us on what will happen in the future since you, as a wise Bison fan, obviously know so much more about the top end of college athletics than people who aren't involved like President Powers and President Emmert. Thank you for sharing your wisdom.

[The Sicatoka]

The NCAA has the ability to create different rules if it wants to create new rules. What is so hard to understand about that?

UND fans understand that. Others may learn the hard way later.

[UNDColorado]

Here is a good article that talks about relegation from BCS down to NAIA. Now Bison fans don't read to much into this as I understand the last conference realignment type of article caused a bit of a stir (herd); so just look at this as an interesting read. http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/5/16/3022653/conference-realignment-college-football-relegation

[MplsBison]

If new divisions were created I'd guess all rules like that would come under review for a new alignment.

Not to mention that the rule isn't enforced now, anyway.

They're never going to kick Eastern Michigan out of FBS.

[darell1976]

Not to mention that the rule isn't enforced now, anyway.

They're never going to kick Eastern Michigan out of FBS.

I don't think they would enforce any attendance rule if they created a second FBS division. They can call it the EMU rule. Because EMU can't average 10,000. Now Idaho is starting to get that way since they lost their big attendance maker Boise State.

[bincitysioux]

Old Dominion is leaving the CAA for Conference USA starting in 2013.........................

[JohnboyND7]

Old Dominion is leaving the CAA for Conference USA starting in 2013.........................

Real sad deal. They seemed like a program was going to be a force to be reckoned with.

[UNDColorado]

Brian Murphy ‏@murphsturph

Sounds like top four football conferences are trying to set up own semifinals. Exclude everyone else.

Expand

• Reply
  
• Retweet
  
• Favorite
  

Brian Murphy ‏@murphsturph

Rose Bowl is one semi, Sugar Bowl is other one. Winners meet in title game. Only 4 conferences matter. Everyone else: suckers.

The idea of Division 1 football being re-organized into three divisions seems to be more realistic by the day. If the big 4 conferences are basically making a play to ensure they will always be in the proposed 4 team playoff.

[JohnboyND7]

Brian Murphy ‏@murphsturph

Sounds like top four football conferences are trying to set up own semifinals. Exclude everyone else.

Expand

• Reply
  
• Retweet
  
• Favorite
  

Brian Murphy ‏@murphsturph

Rose Bowl is one semi, Sugar Bowl is other one. Winners meet in title game. Only 4 conferences matter. Everyone else: suckers.

The idea of Division 1 football being re-organized into three divisions seems to be more realistic by the day. If the big 4 conferences are basically making a play to ensure they will always be in the proposed 4 team playoff.

This is frickin pathetic. I wonder if it will be easier for the government to break this up now?

[PhillySioux]

Brian Murphy ‏@murphsturph

Sounds like top four football conferences are trying to set up own semifinals. Exclude everyone else.

Expand

• Reply
  
• Retweet
  
• Favorite
  

Brian Murphy ‏@murphsturph

Rose Bowl is one semi, Sugar Bowl is other one. Winners meet in title game. Only 4 conferences matter. Everyone else: suckers.

The idea of Division 1 football being re-organized into three divisions seems to be more realistic by the day. If the big 4 conferences are basically making a play to ensure they will always be in the proposed 4 team playoff.

So, Notre Dame would be forced to join a conference. One would think that Florida State and Virginia Tech would head to the Big 12.

[82SiouxGuy]

This is frickin pathetic. I wonder if it will be easier for the government to break this up now?

If schools are entering this voluntarily the government would have no reason to break it up. It is a group of schools deciding to hold a tournament and declare a winner. There is no guarantee that your school gets to be part of another groups tournament.

[zonadub]

Brian Murphy ‏@murphsturph

Sounds like top four football conferences are trying to set up own semifinals. Exclude everyone else.

Expand

• Reply
  
• Retweet
  
• Favorite
  

Brian Murphy ‏@murphsturph

Rose Bowl is one semi, Sugar Bowl is other one. Winners meet in title game. Only 4 conferences matter. Everyone else: suckers.

The idea of Division 1 football being re-organized into three divisions seems to be more realistic by the day. If the big 4 conferences are basically making a play to ensure they will always be in the proposed 4 team playoff.

Actually, not very surprising when you really think about it. The conferences would love to exclude everyone else. It will also give the B1G or the ACC (or the Big 12 if they are one of the survivors) leverage to force Notre Dame to join a conference.

If this happened, the Big Sky, MVFC and CAA could end up on the same level as the Mountain West and the Big East.

[jodcon]

Would the NCAA go along with this idea? If so the 3-tier system would be closer than anyone expected, the Big Sky might get pushed hard to join the second tier.

Notre Dame being forced to join a conference would make me smirk however.

[homer]

Four 16 team conferences was so close to happening last year. Basically Notre Dame not choosing a conference is what kept it from happening. This thing is close. I think Florida St. being so open about them and Clemson joining a conference in the middle of the country speaks volumes about how close it is to becoming a reality.

[UNDColorado]

Actually, not very surprising when you really think about it. The conferences would love to exclude everyone else. It will also give the B1G or the ACC (or the Big 12 if they are one of the survivors) leverage to force Notre Dame to join a conference.

If this happened, the Big Sky, MVFC and CAA could end up on the same level as the Mountain West and the Big East.

That would be absolutely ideal! Play the Big Sky conference games, and maybe a playoff of some sort or bowl games; at this point they type of playoff doesn't matter. If you look at the finances in the USA Today article posted below you will see that most Big Sky teams are right in the middle of the pack. It is not far fetched to think we can compete with teams like Colorado State and Wyoming down the road. Just some food for thought:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/story/2012-05-14/ncaa-college-athletics-finances-database/54955804/1

[82SiouxGuy]

Would the NCAA go along with this idea? If so the 3-tier system would be closer than anyone expected, the Big Sky might get pushed hard to join the second tier.

Notre Dame being forced to join a conference would make me smirk however.

In the article from USAToday earlier this week, Dr. Powers from U Texas was discussing the possibilities. The last paragraph included a quote from Dr. Mark Emmert said that it might be time to explore some restructuring. I think the NCAA would much prefer going to a 3-tier system than allow the BCS schools to break off on their own.