Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

The NCAA implemented their 15k attendance requirement in 02' and claimed they were going to begin enforcing it in 04':

Football Bowl Subdivision -- Membership Requirements
3. Average at least 15,000 in actual or paid attendance for all home football contests over a
rolling two-year period. [Bylaw 20.9.7.3]
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/b96 ... 1ad6fc8b25

NCAA football attendance from 98'-08'
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome ... index.html

Attendance 09':
http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/2009/Internet/ ... NDANCE.pdf

Utah State
03': 14,921
04': 4,875
05': 10,896
06': 11,360
07': 13,131
08': 14,736
09': 15,971

E. Mich
03': 11,258
04': 16,060
05': 5,219
06': 14,734
07': 7,448
08': 18,951
09: 5,016

Kent State:
03': 8,524
04': 12,877
05': 6, 658
06': 17,004
07': 8,999
08': 10,639
09': 15,512

Idaho:
03':12,064
04' 16,620 (and over half that seasons fans from 4 home games came from a "home" game at Wash St).
05':15,175
06': 14,543
07': 11,479
08': 15,340
09': 12,546

FIU:
06': 15,110
07': 7,982
08': 13,852
09:' 10,204

Rice:
03': 20,512
04': 15,785
05': 10,072
06': 14,760
07': 13,353
08': 20,179
09': 13,552

Ball Sate:
06': 15,061
07': 13,085
08': 19,201

Buffalo:
06': 16,417
07': 13,568
08': 16,924

So since 04, when the NCAA claimed they were going to enforce the new attendance requirement:
-Utah State, E Mich, and Kent State have NEVER been in compliance.
-Idaho has been out of compliance since 05'..
-Rice was out of compliance 04'-07'
-ball State and Buffalo were out of compliance 06' to 07'.

So how come the NCAA isn't enforcing their rule and booted those 8 teams back down to I-AA, or at least the 3 who've NEVER been in compliance?

Because the WAC, CUSA, MAC, or any conf. won't drop a school and try to look for another one to fill the void in their conf. Re-do schedules etc... It's not a rule, NCAA might as well just take it off. We just talked about this on another thread today. Also Utah St. and New mexico St. are the top 2 basketball schools in the WAC.

Actually, it's more of a guideline than a rule.

Fresno St. Alum wrote:Because the WAC, CUSA, MAC, or any conf. won't drop a school and try to look for another one to fill the void in their conf. Re-do schedules etc... It's not a rule, NCAA might as well just take it off. We just talked about this on another thread today.

T-Dog wrote: Actually, it's more of a guideline than a rule.

Football Bowl Subdivision Requirements
3. Average at least 15,000 in actual or paid attendance for all home football contests over a
rolling two-year period. [Bylaw 20.9.7.3]

NCAA lists it under requirements. "Requirements" and "Bylaw" doesn't sound like a "guideline" to me. Otherwise they would have stated Football Bowl Subdivision "Suggestions" or "Guidelines"

Just like the cell phone texting while driving law. They still do it and no one gets busted. You can show me that law in the rule book all you want. Then you can look at the conference standings every night and see all of those teams are still in their conference and aren't leaving unless they drop to D-III like UNO. So far no FBS school has dropped football so it doesn't matter. If there ever were to be my bet would be SJSU.

Fresno St. Alum wrote:Because the WAC, CUSA, MAC, or any conf. won't drop a school and try to look for another one to fill the void in their conf. Re-do schedules etc... It's not a rule, NCAA might as well just take it off. We just talked about this on another thread today. Also Utah St. and New mexico St. are the top 2 basketball schools in the WAC.

If it was talked about on that "Future of FCS" thread, then I didn't see it. I skimmed the 1st 2 pages of that thread then quit. It looks like those old "Future of the CAA" threads- too much mind numbing speculation.

BDKJMU wrote:

Fresno St. Alum wrote:Because the WAC, CUSA, MAC, or any conf. won't drop a school and try to look for another one to fill the void in their conf. Re-do schedules etc... It's not a rule, NCAA might as well just take it off. We just talked about this on another thread today. Also Utah St. and New mexico St. are the top 2 basketball schools in the WAC.

If it was talked about on that "Future of FCS" thread, then I didn't see it. I skimmed the 1st 2 pages of that thread then quit. It looks like those old "Future of the CAA" threads- too much mind numbing speculation.

yeah it was in there.

My guess is that they don't enforce it because there's no mechanism with which to enforce it. Every enforcement mechanism I try to dream up leads almost immediately to congressional delegations and conference affiliates going postal on the NCAA.

How are they going to enforce this rule, with the NCAA Army? Sanction those schools with their Army?

Oh, that's right, the NCAA Ain't got no Army! Guess that means the NCAA needs to STFU?

[quote="49RFootballNow"]How are they going to enforce this rule, with the NCAA Army? Sanction those schools with their Army?

Oh, that's right, the NCAA Ain't got no Army! Guess that means the NCAA needs to STFU?

Simple, use their enforcement power, and declare to those teams dems the rules, and you are no longer in FBS.

all 3 of the WAC schools would sue the NCAA. The WAC would sue too for fucking with it's membership. If it was "simple" it would be done but it aint so it won't

Fresno St. Alum wrote:all 3 of the WAC schools would sue the NCAA. The WAC would sue too for **** with it's membership. If it was "simple" it would be done but it aint so it won't

On what grounds??

Why enforce it? What is the NCAA (or these conferences) losing? If the conferences involved don't like splitting their TV money to these schools, they can take steps to kick them out, otherwise I don't think anyone really cares.

commodore_dude wrote:Why enforce it? What is the NCAA (or these conferences) losing? If the conferences involved don't like splitting their TV money to these schools, they can take steps to kick them out, otherwise I don't think anyone really cares.

Bingo.

Arguing this is like trying to argue for FCS to have bowls. It won't happen and would be a horrible idea. On what grounds? All of those schools were I-A before this rule began as were the conferences they were in. By making a rule after the fact and all of a sudden changing the rule that they did NOT agree to when joining the I-A ranks.

Thus when the NCAA made all these new rules about moving to D-I and not allowing any D-II or D-III school to play up in a sport, they made sure to grandfather in all of those hockey schools like UMD, SCSU, UN-Omaha etc. and Lacrosse schools like Johns Hopkins, Dallas Baptist baseball because if they kicked them out they'd sue. JHU has a lot of D-I LAX national titles too.

Idaho's dome holds only 18,000 for football, so they basically have to sell it out to supposedly stay out of trouble?

Fresno St. Alum wrote:Arguing this is like trying to argue for FCS to have bowls. It won't happen and would be a horrible idea. On what grounds? All of those schools were I-A before this rule began as were the conferences they were in. By making a rule after the fact and all of a sudden changing the rule that they did NOT agree to when joining the I-A ranks.

True, except for FIU.

AZGrizFan wrote:

commodore_dude wrote:Why enforce it? What is the NCAA (or these conferences) losing? If the conferences involved don't like splitting their TV money to these schools, they can take steps to kick them out, otherwise I don't think anyone really cares.

Bingo.

Then why have the membership requirements for I-A if they're not going to enforce them? If that's the case, they should just wipe all the memberships requirements off the books. (the 90% of 85 scholly requirement, the 16 varsity sports, the 200 grants in aid, 60% of games against FBS, etc) .

they follow the sports required (14) since UNO doesn't have FBS fb. UNO fell below and was going to get kicked out of the Sun Belt and decided D-III was their answer. Yup, they should get rid 15K and any other thing they won't enforce. WKU & FAU too then along with FIU but they are in a conf. that has existed before the rule. All kinds of loopholes. Soon USA can be added to the list of FBSers that came after the rule.

The fact of the matter is the NCAA is not a dictatorship and one group in it will find it difficult to impose their will on another without the injured party having legal recourse. This is why the NCAA no longer has control of college TV contracts and why they get so very little control or income from the evil cabal called BCS.

These "rules" are nothing more than guidelines the NCAA would LIKE its FBS members to TRY to maintain. The NCAA may make it tougher to get into FBS or DI overall, but they will never close it off and they will never force a school down. They don't want to waste their lawyers' time and their money fighting another losing battle against their own membership. The NCAA works by the consent of ALL its members and their WILLINGNESS to obey certain rules. This is helped along by the fact that the NCAA doesn't impose rules that the majority of its members would find lawsuit worthy.

The membership requirements that the NCAA will enforce are the minimum number of sports, scholarships, and total scholarship dollars - those are what the MEMBERS want enforced.

Butts in the seat is irrelevant.

No other NCAA sport besides FBS football has a minimum attendance requirement.
No other NCAA sport besides FBS football has a minimum scholarship requirement.
No other NCAA sport besides FBS football facilitates 4th string players receiving full scholarships.
No other NCAA sport besides FBS football has had a minimum stadium capacity requirement.*
No other NCAA team sport besides FBS football ends without a playoff.

FBS was intentionally set up to make money for a certain small group of universities and to discourage competition. There is no other reason for it to exist, and that is why the equivalent will never exist in any other sport except maybe men's basketball.

(* no longer a requirement)

E. Mich

03': 11,258
04': 16,060
05': 5,219
06': 14,734
07': 7,448
08': 18,951
09: 5,016

How the hell do you shift that much in attendance on a yearly basis? They must have really blown in 09 and 05

E. Mich

03': 11,258 (3-9)
04': 16,060 (4-7)
05': 5,219 (4-7)
06': 14,734 (1-11)
07': 7,448 (4-8)
08': 18,951 (3-9)
09: 5,016 (0-12)

What a schizophrenic fanbase