IA and IAA Basketball???

[clenz]

If this were to happen, it would kill all the excitement surrounding the NCAA basketball tournament.

I don't agree/understand either of these statements. People seem to get too technical with the conference alignments/money situations. If you have the money/facilities play in the division that you are suited for.

Having 150+ teams in the top division does not kill any excitement for the tournament. You still have all the teams that were going to be competitive even before a divisional split.

Let's say the NCAA does split basketball up like the FCS and FBS. There are a lot of programs that will dump football to head to the FBS equivalent of basketball. Dumping the football teams means no money having to go into their football program, and more money to work with their basketball program. If they didn't dump football they would move up to FBS, as I could see 1AA becoming another division, instead of a subdivision.

In the MVFC I would see this happening


Southern Illinois - jumping FBS and 1A basketball
South Dakota State - staying FCS 1AA for now, but jumping sooner than they planned
Northern Iowa - I would think FCS and 1AA basketball, but would probably see FBS and 1AA
Illinois St. - FBS/1A
Missouri State - possibly drop football, new stadium makes FBS and 1A most likely
Youngstown St. - FBS and 1A
North Dakota State - FBS football would carry the basketball to 1A
Indiana State - drop football go 1A basketball
Western Illinois - no idea what they would do...probably stay FCS and 1AA



This would be the same scenario played out in conference after conference.

[JayJ79]

So, I wonder, could you continue to have a IA basketball team and a IAA football team if basketball did make such a split...because if you had to have both on the same level, I could see a number of IAA/FCS football teams disappearing...

I don't think they'd necessarily REQUIRE teams to have both fb and bb at the same level. It is all still considered "division I". So I don't think there would be an NCAA requirement for a school to have both programs in the same SUBdivision.

Conference affiliations might be the complication though.

[OSBF]

So if you want to say successful, yes it would be for the power conferences. Everyone else, not so much.

and that's all that matters right there

[dbackjon]

Congress will never let this happen

[Col Hogan]

Congress will never let this happen

Why does Congress have a say in how college sports are organized???

[danefan]

Congress will never let this happen

Why does Congress have a say in how college sports are organized???

It does have a say in Antitrust issues. That's the angle lawmakers are taking on the BCS. Its also what the Big East sued the ACC for

[clenz]

Why does Congress have a say in how college sports are organized???

It does have a say in Antitrust issues. That's the angle lawmakers are taking on the BCS. Its also what the Big East sued the ACC for

This. It may seem silly, and most likely is in most cases. However, Antitrust laws aren't to be broken, I guess

[SuperHornet]

It does have a say in Antitrust issues. That's the angle lawmakers are taking on the BCS. Its also what the Big East sued the ACC for

This. It may seem silly, and most likely is in most cases. However, Antitrust laws aren't to be broken, I guess

The problem is that antitrust laws in sports pretty much have no teeth. Anyone remember the USFL?

[dbackjon]

Congress will never let this happen

Why does Congress have a say in how college sports are organized???

Without Federal Education Money, the Higher Education system in this country would implode (and that is a whole nother thread). Federal money means Federal oversight.

Why do you think the BCS put firm criteria in it for non-BCS access? Because of congressional threats, led by Senator Hatch from UTAH.

[danefan]

This. It may seem silly, and most likely is in most cases. However, Antitrust laws aren't to be broken, I guess

The problem is that antitrust laws in sports pretty much have no teeth. Anyone remember the USFL?

Not true at all. And it could become even more of an issue.

Still waiting on the SCOTUS decision in American Needle vs. NFL.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/w ... index.html

[collegesportsinfo]

Conferences like the MVC and A10 would be unaffected. It's the extreme lower level conferences that would be the issue. It's basketball programs from conferences like the NEC, Asun, BSouth, Great West, MEAC, summit, Southland, SWAC, etc that are why people like Huggins feel this way. Programs in "tweener" conferences would certainly be at the highest level if they were dedicated to their programs. There are lots of schools that fit this category like Gonzaga, Butler, etc.

It's just that the gap from D2 to say A-Sun might be closer than the gap from A-sun to SEC. The new NCAa criteria are in place to stop future upgrades. But there are so many current schools that just aren't even close to the level of the SEC or even A10, yet they get money come tourney time.

[clenz]

Conferences like the MVC and A10 would be unaffected. It's the extreme lower level conferences that would be the issue. It's basketball programs from conferences like the NEC, Asun, BSouth, Great West, MEAC, summit, Southland, SWAC, etc that are why people like Huggins feel this way. Programs in "tweener" conferences would certainly be at the highest level if they were dedicated to their programs. There are lots of schools that fit this category like Gonzaga, Butler, etc.

It's just that the gap from D2 to say A-Sun might be closer than the gap from A-sun to SEC. The new NCAa criteria are in place to stop future upgrades. But there are so many current schools that just aren't even close to the level of the SEC or even A10, yet they get money come tourney time.

So you are saying the MVC would still get the NCAA 1A big and not the 1AA tourney?

[dbackjon]

Conferences like the MVC and A10 would be unaffected. It's the extreme lower level conferences that would be the issue. It's basketball programs from conferences like the NEC, Asun, BSouth, Great West, MEAC, summit, Southland, SWAC, etc that are why people like Huggins feel this way. Programs in "tweener" conferences would certainly be at the highest level if they were dedicated to their programs. There are lots of schools that fit this category like Gonzaga, Butler, etc.

It's just that the gap from D2 to say A-Sun might be closer than the gap from A-sun to SEC. The new NCAa criteria are in place to stop future upgrades. But there are so many current schools that just aren't even close to the level of the SEC or even A10, yet they get money come tourney time.

So you are saying the MVC would still get the NCAA 1A big and not the 1AA tourney?

First off, this is one guy (huggins) flapping his gums.
Second, who knows what criteria they would set.

I still think there is going to be a reorganization down the road, like there was in the seventies. Number of sports, and scholarship levels will be tied to the level, which will be raised to stay in DI. I would bet that 14 sports won't cut it in the new DI.

[clenz]

So you are saying the MVC would still get the NCAA 1A big and not the 1AA tourney?

First off, this is one guy (huggins) flapping his gums.
Second, who knows what criteria they would set.

I still think there is going to be a reorganization down the road, like there was in the seventies. Number of sports, and scholarship levels will be tied to the level, which will be raised to stay in DI. I would bet that 14 sports won't cut it in the new DI.

This isn't just Huggins. Read OBSF's thread called Interesting Convo. There is real talk about this kind of thing. The talk is causing the MVC to look at adding teams like Butler and SLU and dropping teams like Evansville and Indiana State.

[dbackjon]

First off, this is one guy (huggins) flapping his gums.
Second, who knows what criteria they would set.

I still think there is going to be a reorganization down the road, like there was in the seventies. Number of sports, and scholarship levels will be tied to the level, which will be raised to stay in DI. I would bet that 14 sports won't cut it in the new DI.

This isn't just Huggins. Read OBSF's thread called Interesting Convo. There is real talk about this kind of thing. The talk is causing the MVC to look at adding teams like Butler and SLU and dropping teams like Evansville and Indiana State.

I read it. But again, I will believe it when I see it - I know that the big guys have advocated this for years, but it hasn't happened. The Big guys get the lion's share of the money, and I firmly believe splitting the division would lower the total, and that is the bottom line.

I DO think, as stated, that the DI requirements will be tightened.

And if this were to somehow pass, any current DI team could be in the upper division, provided they met the criteria.


Also - the thread made it clear that the MVC wasn't kicking out Evansville or Indiana State (the only MVC team with any real NCAA history).

[clenz]

This isn't just Huggins. Read OBSF's thread called Interesting Convo. There is real talk about this kind of thing. The talk is causing the MVC to look at adding teams like Butler and SLU and dropping teams like Evansville and Indiana State.

I read it. But again, I will believe it when I see it - I know that the big guys have advocated this for years, but it hasn't happened. The Big guys get the lion's share of the money, and I firmly believe splitting the division would lower the total, and that is the bottom line.

I DO think, as stated, that the DI requirements will be tightened.

And if this were to somehow pass, any current DI team could be in the upper division, provided they met the criteria.


Also - the thread made it clear that the MVC wasn't kicking out Evansville or Indiana State (the only MVC team with any real NCAA history).

That thread didn't make it clear they weren't going. There is real talk about it, especially if SLU joins. Indiana State's history is1979, but just skip the sweet 16s that the conference has had this past decade...that's ok

[OSBF]

First off, this is one guy (huggins) flapping his gums.
Second, who knows what criteria they would set.

I don't think huggy bear is smart enough to come up with this on his own. It is being discussed among AD's and university presidents, perhaps with the NCAA involved, in the BCS conferences. He heard the talk, or was involved, and opened his mouth when he probably shouldn't have.

Spilled the beans, let the cat out of the bag, whatever.

[collegesportsinfo]

Conferences like the MVC and A10 would be unaffected. It's the extreme lower level conferences that would be the issue. It's basketball programs from conferences like the NEC, Asun, BSouth, Great West, MEAC, summit, Southland, SWAC, etc that are why people like Huggins feel this way. Programs in "tweener" conferences would certainly be at the highest level if they were dedicated to their programs. There are lots of schools that fit this category like Gonzaga, Butler, etc.

It's just that the gap from D2 to say A-Sun might be closer than the gap from A-sun to SEC. The new NCAa criteria are in place to stop future upgrades. But there are so many current schools that just aren't even close to the level of the SEC or even A10, yet they get money come tourney time.

So you are saying the MVC would still get the NCAA 1A big and not the 1AA tourney?

Exactly. The sport in discussion is basketball. But many people seem to hear a quote like "two divisions like there are in football" and just assume what is meant is "just taking the existing split football divisions and applying it to football".

That's not the case.

There are 347 D1 college basketball programs. And a great many of them are not even at the same level as say, the teams in the middle of the pack.

But there are (2) conferences, the A10 and MVC, that top to bottom (except for Fordham) are a high enough quality product. Plenty of other schools are in conferences are right below them. Huggins certainly isn't talking about programs like Crieghton, Gonzaga, Charlotte, St. Louis, Butler and Siena here. He's talking about the MEAC, SWAC, Asun, ets, conferences that ar ecloser in quality to D2 than D1. There are a great number of programs in non-BCS conferences that are exceptional and better than many in bCS conferences. But let's face it, not all that many of the 347 programs are all that good.

73 BCS level programs
66 other FCS programs
= 139

And then you have another 80 or so schools from other conferences

So you're still talking about over 200 schools, just cutting out those from the bottom of the barrel.

[collegesportsinfo]

First off, this is one guy (huggins) flapping his gums.
Second, who knows what criteria they would set.

I don't think huggy bear is smart enough to come up with this on his own. It is being discussed among AD's and university presidents, perhaps with the NCAA involved, in the BCS conferences. He heard the talk, or was involved, and opened his mouth when he probably shouldn't have.

Spilled the beans, let the cat out of the bag, whatever.

I dont' think there is any real talk about this at the highest levels. Fans seem to think that there were discussions about the BCS schools splitting from the NCAA to start their own division. Remember all those posts on message boards? But truth is, there were never talks of any kind like that. Just speculation from fans/media based on the perceived influence and power by the BCS conferences.

[FargoBison]

What is it to Huggy if these programs are in DI? Even if they are terrible, each of these smaller schools get maybe about 200k from the big dance. If cut you out 147 schools you are basically creating an extra $29.4 million. Divide that by 200 schools and it is an extra 147k per school. That is a drop in the bucket for every BCS team.

This is dumbest idea in the history of college athletics. If schools can't compete there are other divisions for them to pursue, but if they want to take on the big boys I say why stop them? Them not being competitive is certainly not hurting Huggins one bit, nor is it hurting the BCS schools.

I actually think 347 teams creates a better DI, most of the smaller conferences are capable of producing one or two good teams every year. Teams that can compete with all but the elite of DI, it is really only one or two conferences that have basically become a joke.

.

[SuperHornet]

You mean compete on a consistent basis, right, Fargo?

If not, you're completely ignoring UOP taking out Providence and Pitt (not to mention coming close to knocking off BC), Tulsa and Princeton beating UCLA, and Weber State taking care of North Carolina. And then there's Valpo's incredible run of a few years ago and George Mason just recently. Things like that happen quite a bit.

[FargoBison]

You mean compete on a consistent basis, right, Fargo?

If not, you're completely ignoring UOP taking out Providence and Pitt (not to mention coming close to knocking off BC), Tulsa and Princeton beating UCLA, and Weber State taking care of North Carolina. And then there's Valpo's incredible run of a few years ago and George Mason just recently. Things like that happen quite a bit.

Yeah, I guess you could say that. I didn't want to say they couldn't compete, it is just an elite school that always ends up winning the thing. Maybe one year a mid-major will do it, I wouldn't surprised if this could be another big year for the mids. The power conferences are a bit down, there is no team as dominate as UNC was last year.

[EPJr]

sorry Thuggins but the NCAA is going to a 96-team tourney

[∞∞∞]

I think this is a terrible idea. I believe that sometimes we forget about the actual student athletes in all of this. From a purely non-monetary aspect, and from the view of spirited and fair competition, there are a lot of athletes out there who have dreams of making the NCAA Tournament...an accomplishment that many will remember a lifetime. Unfortunately, a lot of basketball players will never fit the role to be in the Top 200 or so programs. For them, there's the rest, the "low-mids" some call 'em, that provide this opportunity. Sure some will never make the dance in their four years, but to others who just aren't as talented as the mid/upper echelon players, the MEAC, or the NEC, or the Atlantic Sun, and etc. provide them that opportunity to go dancing...and possibly to pull off the impossible? I consider collegiate athletes the same as high school students. Some get these amazing grades in high school and go to the best schools. Other people don't and get into an average school but make something out of themselves there. It's the same with athletes...some bloom later than others and those lower conferences provide them the chance to show off their talents on the big stage. I mean, isn't that what collegiate sports should be about...the chance?

[collegesportsinfo]

You mean compete on a consistent basis, right, Fargo?

If not, you're completely ignoring UOP taking out Providence and Pitt (not to mention coming close to knocking off BC), Tulsa and Princeton beating UCLA, and Weber State taking care of North Carolina. And then there's Valpo's incredible run of a few years ago and George Mason just recently. Things like that happen quite a bit.

And a D2 basketball program will on occasion beat a D1 program from a conference like the A-Sun, MEAc, Big South, etc. In football, there will be the occasional win by an FBS school over an FBS school (App St vs Michigan) and plenty of D2 football programs that have beat FCS football schools.

But the rare upset isn't cause for one to think there is parity.

Look at the Final Fours from the past decade.

Last 10 NCAA Tournaments, with 4 Final Four Teams each:
40 total teams
*38 were from BCS conferences
1 was still FBS (Memphis)
1 was non-FBS (George Mason)
* includes the 2 instances where Big East non-football schools advanced to the Final Four.

If the lower conferences really had any programs that were at the same level, they would have at least made it to the Final Four. Even the great programs outside of the BCS that are strong ever year of late...Gonzaga, Xavier, Butler...none have made it to the Final Four.

Just pointing out the trends: there is a big difference between 1-200 and 201-347. And it's hardly a bell curve.