Luckylucky Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 NCAA to rename college football subdivisions Posted 8/3/2006 9:59 PM ET E-mail | Save | Print | Reprints & Permissions | Subscribe to stories like this By Steve Wieberg, USA TODAY The NCAA is doing a little re-labeling, eliminating the Division I-A and I-AA tags that officially separate college football's major and more modest programs. Acknowledging frustration that the classification often brands an entire university as big-time or non-big-time, the association's Division I Board of Directors moved Thursday to rename the subdivisions. Beginning in December, they'll be known by their respective postseason formats. What now are I-A programs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diggler Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 Good move by the NCAA. Now they can draw even more attention to the utter jackarsedness that is a sport without a true champion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdahl Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 I knew this was in the works, but what a pathetic attempt by I-AA to pretend it's not a lower division than I-A. It would've been nice and easy to explain to people that we were I-AA, but now we're supposed to say we're in the Football Championship Subdivision? Ugh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hansel Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 I knew this was in the works, but what a pathetic attempt by I-AA to pretend it's not a lower division than I-A. It would've been nice and easy to explain to people that we were I-AA, but now we're supposed to say we're in the Football Championship Subdivision? Ugh. its more about non-football sports (especially basketball) jim- there have been many B-Ball coaches from schools which sponsor I-AA football who have complained about being called "I-AA basketball" in recruiting battles with B-ball coaches from schools which sponsor I-A football- and some recruits beleive it- the change in nomenclature may help change that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IowaBison Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 You are completely wrong, DaveK. The intent is as exactly as has been stated repeatedly. It is to end confusion, primarily among ignorant journalists, that institutions that are currently labeled DI-AA are DI institutions as are our DI-AAA and DI-A brethren. No one is going to confuse schools like NDSU and New Hampshire and conferences like the Big Sky and Gateway with Oklahoma, USC, the Big Ten, and the SEC. It is quite annoying when schools are incorrectly labeled as DIAA schools when in the context the football subclassification should not be used. There is no ulterior motive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 The average person can't keep DI-A straight from DI-AA (and most don't care). And this "FBS" vs. "FCS" naming is going to help? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodakvindy Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 I don't think there is that much confusion, I think it's that schools don't like being called I-AA. When it comes to March Madness, I have never heard anyone say, "I hope that I-AA Southern Illinois can advance." It's even more disingenuous to rename the I-AA Championship, the Division I Championship, as it does not include all Division I schools. This is another NCAA solution to a problem that doesn't really exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamStrait Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 NDV, my take on this is slightly different: The NC$$ thinks schools are at a recruiting disadvantage because of the I-AA label, when in fact they are at a disadvantage due to exposure. Even a crappy UMTC bouncyball team gets tons more exposure than a mid-major that has lately been a frequent NCAA tourney qualifier like say Gonzaga. It is a stupid attempt at a solution to a probably impossible to solve situation. And it is merely a situation, not a problem (in that sense I very much agree with you). But with a complete moron like Brand in control, should we really expect any better? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diggler Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 They should have renamed the divisions the Minor NFL and the Glorified Division II. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlApp Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 So you are saying that Gonzaga is not a true division 1 school?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bison_Kent Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Tell Villanova and Georgetown that they are just I-AA schools. The last I checked both are former Division I basketball champions of the past 25 years and yet they play what is currently called I-AA football. I have seen writers call other schools at the I-AA level for all sports when that is not the case. There is just one Division I level for all sports other than football. Face the facts, all schools at the I-A and I-AA level for football are all Division I for all other sports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IowaBison Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Ignorant Journalist "It's not like Samford isn't used to seeing former Division I football players suited up and on the field in Bulldog games." Samford plays DI-AA ball. The quote should read "former Division I-A football players". This happens all the time, for those of us who follow DI-AA, this gets extremely annoying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 I really hope that the word "Subdivision" isn't actually going to be part of the official new names. That would be really lame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biff Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 I really hope that the word "Subdivision" isn't actually going to be part of the official new names. That would be really lame. Yes it would. I thought it I-A would remain BCS and I-AA would be PCS (playoff championship series). That would sound better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodakvindy Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Where does that leave the likes of the Sun Belt, MAC, WAC, C-USA and probably Mountain West, who will rarely (and for the first three leagues likely never) get a sniff of the BCS? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Where does that leave the likes of the Sun Belt, MAC, WAC, C-USA and probably Mountain West, who will rarely (and for the first three leagues likely never) get a sniff of the BCS? I would say that many of the Sun Belt, MAC and WAC belong in I-AA or whatever it is to be called. They are the teams near the bottom of attendance in 2005. Some not averaging the magic 15,000. http://www.ncaa.org/stats/football/attenda..._attendance.pdf What really suprised me is that Duke averages less than 18,000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knowledge Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 You seem to be suffering from the same inferiority complex as the D-1AA schools who whined to get this terminology changed. The D-1AA schools that are D1 in all other sports, 99% of the time, can't compete in any other sport with the D-1A schools. If you suggest otherwise you aren't being honest with yourself. I have no problem separating the D-1A's from the D-1AA's... and I'm a fan of a school that will be D-1AA in two years. Villanova and Georgetown, like Maine and New Hampshire, are D-1AA schools. Just because they happen to be competitive in one D1 sport doesn't make them any less D-1AA. Dave K, Why is football the be all end all of DI classification? It's a money thing. GTown, Nova and Gonzaga are private institutions that don't have the means to spend "big" on football. That makes them no less DI than other schools. For all UND fans that have made the statements that UND is the first DI school in ND than your feelings would go against that because UND wouldn't be real DI if DIA Football is the key. Classify sport individually, don't classify institutions. The subdivisions are a joke, just like making the Sioux change their nickname. It will take decades for people (other than the media) to refer to levels this way. The Sioux will always be the Sioux, DI and DIAA are going to be that way, Comisky Park will always be that, the SkyDome etc....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FargoBison Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 Well in a few years UND will be playing for this...... I-AA is dead, this is the new logo. Oh, and DaveK did you notice it said Division I championship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BostonSiouxFan Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 You are completely wrong, DaveK. The intent is as exactly as has been stated repeatedly. It is to end confusion, primarily among ignorant journalists, that institutions that are currently labeled DI-AA are DI institutions as are our DI-AAA and DI-A brethren. No one is going to confuse schools like NDSU and New Hampshire and conferences like the Big Sky and Gateway with Oklahoma, USC, the Big Ten, and the SEC. It is quite annoying when schools are incorrectly labeled as DIAA schools when in the context the football subclassification should not be used. There is no ulterior motive. DaveK is ALMOST ALWAYS completely wrong IowaBison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMeNow Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 Well in a few years UND will be playing for this...... I-AA is dead, this is the new logo. Oh, and DaveK did you notice it said Division I championship. ...talk about throwing a tootsie roll from a parade float and the overeager kid thinks he's really "WON" something! DI-A should be DIVISION I... DI-AA should be Division II... ANY scholarship teams can play in Division III... Everyone else...with few or NO scholarships (including those in "so called" di-aaa) can play for the Tootsie-Roll Championships!!! My biggest bitch about college FB is they don't call a spade a spade! (Total Schollys) - until they do that...whatever division you think you're BETTER THAN is a joke! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FargoBison Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 When people refer to Division I football, what they really mean is D-1A. I don't even like to use the term D-1A myself. I like to call them Division I and Division I-AA. What gets really annoying are all the D-1AA zealots who like to pretend they're as big-time as D-1A. I liked the idea that was suggested earlier in this thread... let's just refer to these two divisions as the NFL feeder league (D-1A) and the glorified D2 league (D-1AA). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.