NCAA exploring Big 5 conference autonomy | Page 4 | The Boneyard

NCAA exploring Big 5 conference autonomy

Status
Not open for further replies.
HawkHusky said:
We just need the P5 to agree on having the same number (16) of conference members before they take off from the rest of the G5.
Expand ...
Or if they agree that only conf. champs can qualify for the playoff... either will put things in motion.
 
We've had plenty of decent discussions, Dan. No worries. But I do not believe that the NCAA's football revenue is negligible. I didn't bring up bogus numbers, they are all well supported by the NCAA itself. It stands to reason that the NCAA gets a cut in some way shape or form from football. If football is the money maker, they are taking a slice, however big the piece is, which also affects other revenue streams.
 
UConn Dan said:
Or if they agree that only conf. champs can qualify for the playoff... either will put things in motion.
Expand ...
This is what I had thought would be the ultimate end game. Each FBS conference champ would get a seat at the table (i.e. in the bracket), plus a few at larges from the P5. Now? Not as much.
 
Husky25 said:
This is what I had thought would be the ultimate end game. Each FBS conference champ would get a seat at the table (i.e. in the bracket), plus a few at larges from the P5. Now? Not as much.
Expand ...
Right... none of us should hold our breath - especially on anything that helps UConn.

Wake me up before we go-go.
 
If we are left behind, I would hope attorney general for CT fill the lawsuit against the ACC and ESPiN ASAP. It will simply make our damages even greater.
 
I'm not sure how we get out of this. A lawsuit from the state of CT would be like a mosquito bite on a baboon's ass.

I still don't understand how they can keep out conferences (or schools) that want to abide by the power 5 guidelines. I would love some clarification by someone that actually will know how it will all go down. If BYU wants to compete will they be allowed? I know Notre Dame already has a pass into the club since all the references from conf commishes (e.g., Bob) are to the 65 teams. So, if the AAC is allowed to live by the P5 guidelines and it's required that every team in a conference abides by the guidelines, but a majority of the AAC does not want to - I assume we go indy at that point? Or form yet another national conference - the coalition of the left behinds (UConn, Cincy, USF, UCF, Houston, SMU, Boise St, San Diego State, maybe Navy and Air Force).

We're c ked... I just want some clarification on whether the big boy conferences will allow schools (or conferences) that want to play with them in the new deal.
 
.-.
I have no idea what we might be suing for.

The new autonomy deal is bad news all around for us.

The worst case scenario is that we're not permitted to offer the same benefits of a P5 school. That's game over - we'd get a crack at a kid only after every single P5 passed on him.

The second-worst case scenario is being permitted to offer those same benefits while having to exist on an American Conference revenue stream. It's like running the Indy 500 with 1/15th of the gasoline that the other cars have. Eventually, we'd crack.

It's really a remarkable kick in the nuts when you thought that you could not possibly get kicked again.
 
UConn Dan said:
I'm not sure how we get out of this. A lawsuit from the state of CT would be like a mosquito bite on a baboon's ass.

I still don't understand how they can keep out conferences (or schools) that want to abide by the power 5 guidelines. I would love some clarification by someone that actually will know how it will all go down. If BYU wants to compete will they be allowed? I know Notre Dame already has a pass into the club since all the references from conf commishes (e.g., Bob) are to the 65 teams. So, if the AAC is allowed to live by the P5 guidelines and it's required that every team in a conference abides by the guidelines, but a majority of the AAC does not want to - I assume we go indy at that point? Or form yet another national conference - the coalition of the left behinds (UConn, Cincy, USF, UCF, Houston, SMU, Boise St, San Diego State, maybe Navy and Air Force).

We're c ked... I just want some clarification on whether the big boy conferences will allow schools (or conferences) that want to play with them in the new deal.
Expand ...
The way I read this is that they set the rules, you can play by them or not as you wish. Like, you want to be in this club? Come on. These are the rules. So, I think we can play for awhile.
 
Fishy said:
I have no idea what we might be suing for.
Expand ...

We will be suing for all the dirty deeds done by ESPiN and the ACC during the destruction of the BE. I have a good feeling Cincy and USF will join that lawsuit as well.
 
gars44 said:
The way I read this is that they set the rules, you can play by them or not as you wish. Like, you want to be in this club? Come on. These are the rules. So, I think we can play for awhile.
Expand ...
Yes, I read the below, but we'll see how this really shakes out...

Few details emerged as to how this so-called voting federation would work, but presumably schools from outside those conferences would be free to adopt the same policies. The Mountain West and American Athletic Conference have already said they would likely provide athlete stipends if allowed. However, many Division I schools admittedly could not afford such provisions, thus contradicting the NCAA's age-old "level playing field" mission.

Some delegates from non-power conferences indicated they'd be fine with that divide as long as the Power 5 schools can't alter fundamental competition standards like scholarship limits per sport.

Other administrators from the non-power conferences took to the microphone Friday to express their reservations about autonomy. However, there's a collective sense they may have no choice. Alienating the Power 5 and causing some larger split could jeopardize the all-important NCAA basketball tournament.

"Taking about 120 schools and breaking off would be a much easier alternative," one power-conference official said Friday. "Even creating another [subdivision] would be an easier alternative."

However, those more radical options now appear unlikely, as the commissioners' strong preference remains to "keep everyone under the big tent," said Slive.

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/co...n-i-power-conferences-autonomy/#ixzz2qiQcxR3Y
 
The stipend thing is going to bite them in the butt eventually. Especially the no power-5 schools. It will result in getting rid of as many men's sports as possible. Either that or somehow funding these without student fees given to the AD. Students are pretty savvy and they realize their money is going to fund the athletic department, but now they're going to realize that their money is funding $5k in cash for all the athletes on campus, not just the revenue sports. Looking at this, the P5 are better off breaking and creating a unique corporation in which the players really are employees, and they get the full cost of an education in cash, then they're allowed to pay the school to go to classes if they want. The P5 want to keep the appearance of sports being related to academics, but really this has become a huge farce and they should just admit it and get on with training players to be professionals, like the rest of the world does.
 
.-.
After viewing this thread, I am at a loss to see a scenario where we remain solvent and able to compete at a p5 level. Why would any conference, other than the b12 expand and the b12 wont take us. I think we are screwed.
 
Stinger92860 said:
After viewing this thread, I am at a loss to see a scenario where we remain solvent and able to compete at a p5 level. Why would any conference, other than the b12 expand and the b12 wont take us. I think we are screwed.
Expand ...

It depends if the Big 12 wants 2 to get to the minimum for a Championship Game or 4 to get to 14 like the ACC, SEC, and B1G. The only real targets available are UCF, USF, Cincinnati, BYU, and UCONN. I really think they'd have too many issues with BYU to add them. The Big 12 is probably the only relatively soon P5 expansion to take place (unless the race to 16 is suddenly put into play).

UCONN may be a longshot, but I don't think it's all that far-fetched given the few options that the Big 12 has.
 
Stinger92860 said:
After viewing this thread, I am at a loss to see a scenario where we remain solvent and able to compete at a p5 level. Why would any conference, other than the b12 expand and the b12 wont take us. I think we are screwed.
Expand ...

The stipend would probably cost no more than 1 Million per year, UCONN athletics will not be torpedoed by that nor will any team in the AAC. People are forgetting about the exit fee money the AAC is sitting on. Longer term, the next TV contract is unlikely to be as bad but more likely we end up in one of the P5 conferences.

Houston and Tulane are opening up new stadiums in 2014, there is no way they will be playing FCS football in those stadiums.
 
HawkHusky said:
It depends if the Big 12 wants 2 to get to the minimum for a Championship Game or 4 to get to 14 like the ACC, SEC, and B1G. The only real targets available are UCF, USF, Cincinnati, BYU, and UCONN. I really think they'd have too many issues with BYU to add them. The Big 12 is probably the only relatively soon P5 expansion to take place (unless the race to 16 is suddenly put into play).

UCONN may be a longshot, but I don't think it's all that far-fetched given the few options that the Big 12 has.
Expand ...

This is true, if the B12 decided to expand by 4 tomorrow I would think UCONN would be a lock. You can't find 4 better options than UCONN and I am not sure you can even find two. UCONN is unique in that they can also make Women's Basketball a money maker for any conference that picks them up.
 
Last edited:
upstater said:
The stipend thing is going to bite them in the butt eventually. Especially the no power-5 schools. It will result in getting rid of as many men's sports as possible. Either that or somehow funding these without student fees given to the AD. Students are pretty savvy and they realize their money is going to fund the athletic department, but now they're going to realize that their money is funding $5k in cash for all the athletes on campus, not just the revenue sports. Looking at this, the P5 are better off breaking and creating a unique corporation in which the players really are employees, and they get the full cost of an education in cash, then they're allowed to pay the school to go to classes if they want. The P5 want to keep the appearance of sports being related to academics, but really this has become a huge farce and they should just admit it and get on with training players to be professionals, like the rest of the world does.
Expand ...

I agree with this entirely. And I would take it one step farther. This is going to whittle down the elite of college athletics to something like 30-40 programs and it will be exactly what it is - NFL and NBA light. All that differentiates college athletics will be pretty much gone. Texas, Alabama, UNC, UCLA, Michigan will all have much larger shares of a shrinking pie. We could very well be watching the ruin of college athletics at its highest levels.

Also, I shutter to think what these athletic programs will do to kids that don't pan out athletically under these types of new rules. Honor their "scholarships"? I don't think so.....
 
uconndogs said:
I agree with this entirely. And I would take it one step farther. This is going to whittle down the elite of college athletics to something like 30-40 programs and it will be exactly what it is - NFL and NBA light. All that differentiates college athletics will be pretty much gone. Texas, Alabama, UNC, UCLA, Michigan will all have much larger shares of a shrinking pie. We could very well be watching the ruin of college athletics at its highest levels.

Also, I shutter to think what these athletic programs will do to kids that don't pan out athletically under these types of new rules. Honor their "scholarships"? I don't think so.....
Expand ...

If the P5 decide to turn "pro" it will be the P4 because the B1G wants no part of it. It's not happening.
 
.-.
metsfan2323 said:
If the P5 decide to turn "pro" it will be the P4 because the B1G wants no part of it. It's not happening.
Expand ...

This will be the beginning of a gradual slide and the BiG will have no choice but to go along. I just don't see this being good for the smaller members of the P5. A school like Texas will go down this road a million miles an hour and there is now way a Baylor can even begin to keep up. If they expand the scholarship max, forget about it. All the talent will end up at about 15-20 schools.
 
uconndogs said:
This will be the beginning of a gradual slide and the BiG will have no choice but to go along. I just don't see this being good for the smaller members of the P5. A school like Texas will go down this road a million miles an hour and there is now way a Baylor can even begin to keep up. If they expand the scholarship max, forget about it. All the talent will end up at about 15-20 schools.
Expand ...

You have to think though that a lot of these good young gun players will realize when they get to a school like Texas and are barely getting out on the field, something's gotta change. Schools like Texas may originally get all the talent, but I also see a lot of transferring taking place when those star kids realize they'll be sitting on the bench more often than not.

In times like these, it's going to be very important to have a coaching staff that can recruit and convince transfers to come aboard. I'm glad UCONN seems to have that in place.
 
We'll see how it all pans out, but it has the potential to rewrite history. For instance, it may prove that the 1980's SMU football program was simply ahead of their time with regard to their pursuit of "autonomy". . .
 
Fishy said:
The second-worst case scenario is being permitted to offer those same benefits while having to exist on an American Conference revenue stream. It's like running the Indy 500 with 1/15th of the gasoline that the other cars have. Eventually, we'd crack.
Expand ...
This has been my big fear. Offering more benefits is just another way to distinguish between the have and have nots. Autonomy is, in many ways, a smoke screen. I can see the non P5 saying, well we can't keep up so let them leave (either outright or by a new sub-division) and we'll compete in own division that maintains the integrity of the amateur athletics. Sound familiar? It's how the Ivies became, for the most part, irrelevant in sports.

For the most part I ignore it and focus on the games, but we are watching the emasculating of UConn athletics. It is happening right before our eyes and there is not a damn thing that we can do about it.
 
Last edited:
CL82 said:
This has been my big fear. Offering more benefits is just another way to distinguish between the have and have nots. Autonomy is, in many ways, a smoke screen. I can see the non P5 saying, well we can't keep up so let them leave (either outright or by a new sub-division) and we'll compete in own division that maintains the integrity of the amateur athletics. Sound familiar? It's how the Ivies became, for the most, part irrelevant in sports.

For the most part, I ignore it and focus on the games, but we are watching the emasculating of UConn athletics. It is happening right before our eyes and there is not a damn thing that we can do about it.
Expand ...
This has been my fear since the Louisville to the ACC debacle. We are seriously going to have to consider going independent with a regional network like SNY (they were willing to pay as much for our women's BB as the entire AAC payout from TV). There is no way, barring a huge increase to the AAC in TV contract money, to keep up with the changes. Everything that could go wrong has gone wrong, this is why I'm rooting for Ed O'bannon or is that over?
 
noeynox said:
This has been my fear since the Louisville to the ACC debacle. We are seriously going to have to consider going independent with a regional network like SNY (they were willing to pay as much for our women's BB as the entire AAC payout from TV). There is no way, barring a huge increase to the AAC in TV contract money, to keep up with the changes. Everything that could go wrong has gone wrong, this is why I'm rooting for Ed O'bannon or is that over?
Expand ...

O'Bannon never had a chance. This whole thing opens up a can of worms for universities when it comes to students and work-study and assistantships. This is why Emmert is emphasizing they are not employees. But then other students who may be considered employees are actually getting the same forms of recompense (in most cases, a lot less) than the athletes. I can't see how the school distinguishes between athletes, students with TAs or even work-study. AND, an even bigger concern comes when the money they want to give is $5k. Well, the DOE passed a law that says all schools have to list incidentals above fees and tuition (ie. entire cost of attendance) on their websites. In other words, this is a figure that is federally regulated. You can't just list a low number (as most schools do now) and then give the athletes $5k. The stipend for athletes has to correlate to the additional expenses listed. So Uconn is right now listing $850 for additional expenses, with the grand total for in-state students being $23,744 (includes tuition, fees, room & board) while out of state is $42,692.

These schools are going to jack up their estimated cost of attendance (and potentially scare off students) even though the school doesn't actually receive any of the revenue from the "additional costs" category.

I totally get that students will spend extra money on clothes, furniture, blankets, extra meals, travel, transportation on campus, etc., but these are likely costs that students would have also incurred at home as well. Whether you're in college or not, you need transport, food, utilities, a roof over your head, clothes. Only books seem to me an extra expense.
 
Last edited:
.-.
We just gave Bob Diaco, a nice competitive contract for a first year HC. The market is already being reset where what we gave him, will look pretty pedestrian by industry standards in a few years. Dabo Swinney maded 2.2 million last year and is getting bumped up to 3.4 million. No way we can keep up going forward given our current predicament. It was nice for Warde to throw i a barb in there about revenue being added to the core value slide, but the truth is we are so fugged from an athletic department standpoint.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...bo-swinney-receives-a-new-eight-year-contract
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that simple explanation. I'll admit I have a hard time keeping up with what all this full cost of attendance means. I paid for college with cash and credit cards. Rolled the credit card debt into the first house I bought.
 
The ACC is going to need a network if they want to compete with the SEC, B1G and PAC12. They will need to expand into new markets to make that happen. That is the only hope UC and UConn have. I guess there is also an outside shot of Big 12 expansion but I do not see it.
 
upstater said:
The stipend thing is going to bite them in the butt eventually. Especially the no power-5 schools. It will result in getting rid of as many men's sports as possible. Either that or somehow funding these without student fees given to the AD. Students are pretty savvy and they realize their money is going to fund the athletic department, but now they're going to realize that their money is funding $5k in cash for all the athletes on campus, not just the revenue sports. Looking at this, the P5 are better off breaking and creating a unique corporation in which the players really are employees, and they get the full cost of an education in cash, then they're allowed to pay the school to go to classes if they want. The P5 want to keep the appearance of sports being related to academics, but really this has become a huge farce and they should just admit it and get on with training players to be professionals, like the rest of the world does.
Expand ...

I like it. This would make the relationship of the universities to their football teams similar to that of Joe's Autobody to a Little League team. It's only defect is that it's an honest system.
 
pj said:
I like it. This would make the relationship of the universities to their football teams similar to that of Joe's Autobody to a Little League team. It's only defect is that it's an honest system.
Expand ...

Precisely. At this point, this is how it should be. Then you avoid the Title9 questions, and you pay players what the market will bear.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,333
Messages
4,564,900
Members
10,464
Latest member
Rollskies27


Top Bottom