P5 wants to give extra benes.

[bobbyinaz]

What Bobbyinaz is saying makes sense to me. They (the p5) are not saying were going to do this whether you like it or not. They threatened to separate if they didn't get their own set of rules, and the other schools gave them the autonomy they sought. This is a scary, scary time The G5 schools better start screaming and real soon, because its the non FBS football playing schools who stand to be happy in this arrangement. The g5, in particularly the AAC, and MWC conferences are getting royally effed in this. Long Live the P5 Cartel.

Unfortunately there is nothing to scream about. The majority of the membership will approve this for the P5 and would never approve it for the G5 (i.e. AAC & MWC). That is why waiting this out for a few years will be a death sentence. Looking at it from just a football perspective the AAC will be much closer to the MAC than to the ACC in 5 years.

The ability to recruit talent is the lifeblood to any program. Yes, I know all about coaching players up but, there are only so many diamonds in the rough that can be found each year. When the regional rivals we are recruiting against can offer stipends, access to agents, unlimited time to complete your degree, health insurance etc. there is almost no chance a kid will choose to come here when he can go to BC, Syracuse or Rutgers and get those benefits

 

[upstater]

Today they do have to get permission. They cannot announce that effective today they are going to pay a $200 stipend to their athletes without approval from the membership

The permission to make their own rules is what they are "asking" for.

I thought this is what the whole thread is about. The new proposal.

 

[huskymedic]

The P5 is not "saying" we are going to have our own rules. They are asking for and will get permission from its peer members for their own rules. Legally the G5 can petition the membership for their own rules as well. The problem for the G5 is that they will not get a majority vote to allow them to do it.

Curious as to why not - why would the other members of the G5 care what another individual university does if it's in-line with what has already been approved for the P5 school?

 

[bobbyinaz]

I thought this is what the whole thread is about. The new proposal.

It is a new proposal that has not been voted on yet by the NCAA. It is expected to be voted on in August

In today's world the P5 schools cannot make their own rules. If the proposed legislation passes, they will be able to make their own rules

 

[bobbyinaz]

Curious as to why not - why would the other members of the G5 care what another individual university does if it's in-line with what has already been approved for the P5 school?

Because the G5 schools are competing against each other in a race to get to one of the P5 conferences. Allowing one of their own the opportunity to increase their ability to compete at the highest level will be perceived as giving that school a leg up

 

[SubbaBub]

We're not going to be forced to join anything. We are in the ACC already.

I am amazed that the real ND fans tolerate this.

 

[huskymedic]

Curious as to why not - why would the other members of the G5 care what another individual university does if it's in-line with what has already been approved for the P5 school?

Because the G5 schools are competing against each other in a race to get to one of the P5 conferences. Allowing one of their own the opportunity to increase their ability to compete at the highest level will be perceived as giving that school a leg up

All the more reason I think that the actionable and permissive language and parameters will change before the August vote. I think there will be an outcry by some specific members of G5 or other conferences to allow self determination to comply by singular institutions. This whole process still has some moving pieces.

 

[UConn Dan]

All the more reason I think that the actionable and permissive language and parameters will change before the August vote. I think there will be an outcry by some specific members of G5 or other conferences to allow self determination to comply by singular institutions. This whole process still has some moving pieces.

the NCAA in today's release has stated that the "actionable" requirement will not be included in the August proposal. Each conference or Indy will be permissible to adopt p5 legislation.

 

[UConn Dan]

There will be 3 distinct tiers. P5, those conferences in G5 that choose to adopt P5 legislation (most likely AAC, MWC and BYU/Army), and then everybody else. If the sunbelt and Conf USA want they will prob follow as well. Big east and A-10 will follow in bball.

 

[upstater]

the NCAA in today's release has stated that the "actionable" requirement will not be included in the August proposal. Each conference or Indy will be permissible to adopt p5 legislation.

So, they put that crazy requirement out there to make the rest of the document look more reasonable. This is what they do in Congress all the time. When you want to grab a foot, you ask for a yard.

 

[UCFBfan]

How does Title IX fit into this? No way most schools could afford to pay for their women's teams, specifically bball. Would they allow UConn to be left out in that sport??

 

[Fishy]

the NCAA in today's release has stated that the "actionable" requirement will not be included in the August proposal. Each conference or Indy will be permissible to adopt p5 legislation.

That is not correct.

What has happened is that the P5 attempted to force the AAC and others into a category including all 27 non-P5 conferences.

It didn't succeed, but it didn't fail. Basically, they tried to force UConn to huddle under the same tent as Central Connecticut.

The 'next 5' conferences have stuck their foot in the door while it was being slammed shut and now have until August to either force the door to be left open or to have their foot squished.

The board will seek feedback on some questions raised by members of governance bodies in recent days, including: the process by which items decided by the full division could become part of the list of autonomous areas; the voting, interpretation and enforcement processes within the five highest-profile conferences; and the core structure that separates not only the five highest-profile conferences into their own group but also continues a separation of the next five conferences (the American Athletic Conference, Conference-USA, Mid-American Conference, Mountain West Conference and Sun Belt Conference) from the remaining 22.

 

[UConn Dan]

That is not correct. What has happened is that the P5 attempted to force the AAC and others into a category including all 27 non-P5 conferences. It didn't succeed, but it didn't fail. Basically, they tried to force UConn to huddle under the same tent as Central Connecticut. The 'next 5' conferences have stuck their foot in the door while it was being slammed shut and now have until August to either force the door to be left open or to have their foot squished. The board will seek feedback on some questions raised by members of governance bodies in recent days, including: the process by which items decided by the full division could become part of the list of autonomous areas; the voting, interpretation and enforcement processes within the five highest-profile conferences; and the core structure that separates not only the five highest-profile conferences into their own group but also continues a separation of the next five conferences (the American Athletic Conference, Conference-USA, Mid-American Conference, Mountain West Conference and Sun Belt Conference) from the remaining 22.

I take it you missed this major blurb:
While retaining the concepts that were included in the “actionable” category, the board decided that the process it had identified as “actionable” - requiring the conferences other than the highest-profile five to take a separate vote – would not be included in the proposal.

 

[noeynox]

I Am So Digging Confused. Are We Effed, Or Not????

 

[Danzz]

I had a business school professor that was one of the top expert witnesses in the entire world in anti-trust litigation. He always said, "if you discuss price with your competitors, or try to divide the market, you will probably go to jail". I don't understand how the P5 can issue written proposals that would, with minor editing, be the lawsuit against them for anti-competitive behavior. And I am not just talking about civil litigation. This stuff is all criminal.

The track record of major sports in antitrust litigation is terrible to begin with. The sports usually lose. The BCS was formed out of a successful lawsuit against the NCAA. I predict there will be successful litigation against the P5 too.

Cocoa Cola and Pepsi have been dividing their market for years. Their promotions alternate weekly.

 

[Danzz]

I Am So Digging Confused. Are We Effed, Or Not????

The confused club is a big one. Count me in.

 

[The Funster]

Don't be confused. Either the G5 will go with a full fledged breakaway and sell out big time college athletics to the devil OR they will be so concerned about antitrust and cost of paying the athletes that they will draft a weak and largely ineffective proposal that will be of little significance.

I think committees tend to sacrifice "bite" for consensus and the current landscape has enough landmines that boldness will be quickly laid aside.

On the flipside, some institutions may be forceful enough to push the bold plan through and the rest of the G5 schools will be swept up in the surge. However, those 65 would soon be divided again. There will be schools (mostly the SEC and their ilk) that will push for more power and more money while other schools (those who still value academics) will pull away and desire to divorce itself from the inevitable near semi-pro model that will emerge.

I can even see a scenario where resentment of the SEC (and its goal of total FB domination) compels one of the G5 conferences to pull out of the G5 proposal. This would be a power play in its own right and the only two conferences that have the power to pull that off would be the B1G or the PAC.

See, I don't think the G5 will be united enough to build a sustainable model that is mutually beneficial. It's member's missions are too disparate and there are too many big egos and not enough trust to make it happen. What they would need to build would be NFL-like and I just can't see that level of cooperation, let alone profit sharing, happening.

 

[upstater]

Don't be confused. Either the G5 will go with a full fledged breakaway and sell out big time college athletics to the devil OR they will be so concerned about antitrust and cost of paying the athletes that they will draft a weak and largely ineffective proposal that will be of little significance.

I think committees tend to sacrifice "bite" for consensus and the current landscape has enough landmines that boldness will be quickly laid aside.

On the flipside, some institutions may be forceful enough to push the bold plan through and the rest of the G5 schools will be swept up in the surge. However, those 65 would soon be divided again. There will be schools (mostly the SEC and their ilk) that will push for more power and more money while other schools (those who still value academics) will pull away and desire to divorce itself from the inevitable near semi-pro model that will emerge.

I can even see a scenario where resentment of the SEC (and its goal of total FB domination) compels one of the G5 conferences to pull out of the G5 proposal. This would be a power play in its own right and the only two conferences that have the power to pull that off would be the B1G or the PAC.

See, I don't think the G5 will be united enough to build a sustainable model that is mutually beneficial. It's member's missions are too disparate and there are too many big egos and not enough trust to make it happen. What they would need to build would be NFL-like and I just can't see that level of cooperation, let alone profit sharing, happening.

Because the model for funding universities is now private-public partnerships, don't be surprised if a semi-pro model fits in precisely with the ethics of a 21st century research university. It may not be seen as hypocritical at all, since autonomy is increasingly a quaint notion from the 21st century. For all the money that will pour into UConn over the next 10 years (a billion or more) you can't forget that $100m has been cut and the yearly state appropriation is still tens of millions below what it was. So, over a 10 year period, you give the university $300 million less for its operating budget, and then you turn around and give it $1 billion more for private-public partnerships. How is this different than a semi-pro sports league?

The only question is whether or not fans and alumni will buy it. I am pretty certain that presidents will not have any trouble approving it.

 

[UConnCat]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...big-conference-autonomy/8108647/?sf25407099=1

The board of directors eliminated a two-category approach to autonomy. The draft proposal called for "permissive legislation," in which the Big Five would have the ability to enact rules, and the other Division I members could determine whether or not to adopt the rules, as well.

The categories of possible autonomy that weren't approved Thursday had been placed in the "actionable" legislation category, which would have required the other 27 Division I conferences to take a separate vote to enact similar legislation.

But Hatch said the board of directors determined the two-pronged system would have been unnecessarily complicated. Instead, all of the legislation categorized as Big Five autonomy will be considered "permissive."

He said the board of directors wanted more feedback on some of the areas of autonomy, as well as on how the remainder of Division I schools could adopt rules enacted by the Big Five. Could a rule be adopted by other Division I members on a school-by-school basis, or only by conferences?

 

[UCFBfan]

This is all being looked at from a football angle it seems but this will destroy, in the long run, the NCAA tournament in basketball. Why would any decent player go to a mid-major anymore? The Big East can't keep up with these guidelines and teams like Wichita St and A-10 schools won't be able to keep up any more. How are you going to fill a 65 team bracket that keeps people interested. You can't. It's funny. They're all filling their own fat bellies while slowly slitting their own throats in the long term. Interest will wain if it's just the same 65 schools that can get any decent players.....sad....

 

[UConn Dan]

This is all being looked at from a football angle it seems but this will destroy, in the long run, the NCAA tournament in basketball. Why would any decent player go to a mid-major anymore? The Big East can't keep up with these guidelines and teams like Wichita St and A-10 schools won't be able to keep up any more. How are you going to fill a 65 team bracket that keeps people interested. You can't. It's funny. They're all filling their own fat bellies while slowly slitting their own throats in the long term. Interest will wain if it's just the same 65 schools that can get any decent players.....sad....

I think the hardest rule to overcome would be if the p5 decided to up the number of scholarships, but I don't think that's on the table right now as an autonomous category. We'll know more by August.

 

[jostar1]

Dennis Dodd‏@dennisdoddcbs 5h
Why are some proposals "permissive" and some "actionable"? What's the difference?

Dennis Dodd‏@dennisdoddcbs 5h
I'm really starting to sense a hard line approach from board/steering committee. Not a good look at all considering climate.

Dennis Dodd‏@dennisdoddcbs 5h
I want to know the how and why and who decided actionable and permissive.

 

[WestHartHusk]

This is a bit of a rant, but I am so fuc&ing annoyed that administrators at podunk schools with podunk fans in podunk places like Mississippi, Alabama and Tennessee have us by the balls right now. I truly truly can't wait for the day when the football ascent comes crashing down and we all laugh that 2 schools in Mississippi were the "haves" of this world.

 

[jostar1]

Even lower-profile conferences believe in the general outline, though they acknowledge some additional details still need to be worked out.

"Do I think it can work? Probably," Horizon League commissioner Jon LeCrone said. "Is it perfect? Probably not. But I think it's going to work better than what we've got now."

Still to be determined is how, or if, the other 27 Division I conferences might apply measures approved through the autonomy rules.

"If it's approved by the five conferences, the Horizon League should decide if it wants to adopt that approach," said LeCrone, whose league approved providing the full cost-of-attendance for its athletes after the measure initially passed in October 2011.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ncaa-board-endorses-more-power-big-schools

 

[UCFBfan]

I wonder if this is going to cause a lot of shifting among lower conferences. If some go for the P5 rules and some don't, I can see some schools who can afford going the P5 rule route leaving their conference to go to another. For example, if the A-10 supports the stipends and all that good stuff and the Horizon League doesn't, maybe UW-Milwaukee decides it wants to pay the stipend, etc so it leaves the Horizon and looks for the A-10 to pick them up. While St. Joes can't afford the stipend so they need to leave the A-10 and maybe go to the Horizon. (The schools I just pulled out of thin air b/c I know they're in those leagues. No clue if they can afford it or not) This will be interesting on multiple levels.