The Big Five Conferences are going to break away

[Kevin Caliendo]

Its clear, based on the public comments this past week by Slive, Swofford, and Bowlsby, that the big time conferences are coordinating an effort to move away from the NCAA and create an organziation that excludes the rest of the schools and conferences. It makes sense to a certain degree, they can create a new governing body and eliminate any items that might have benefited the smaller schools and conferences. Of course, this is a disaster for Uconn and likely college basketball, but what else is new? Its funny, Bowlsby said this am that "a group of basically 75 schools wins every national championship." Ummm, Uconn has won more than its share me thinks...

If it were to happen, Uconn is the AAC would have to seriously consider its football program's viability.

 

[frankthetank]

This is moving away from a theoretical exercise to tangible procedural movement. The latest comments from Swofford today indicate that there could be a vote by January on a new "super division":

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ssioner-john-swofford-super-division/2574369/

This isn't a full split from the NCAA, but rather a creation of a "Super FBS" division that's made up of the power conferences.

 

[freescooter]

Its clear, based on the public comments this past week by Slive, Swofford, and Bowlsby, that the big time conferences are coordinating an effort to move away from the NCAA and create an organziation that excludes the rest of the schools and conferences. It makes sense to a certain degree, they can create a new governing body and eliminate any items that might have benefited the smaller schools and conferences. Of course, this is a disaster for Uconn and likely college basketball, but what else is new? Its funny, Bowlsby said this am that "a group of basically 75 schools wins every national championship." Ummm, Uconn has won more than its share me thinks...

If it were to happen, Uconn is the AAC would have to seriously consider its football program's viability.

They'd have to consider the viability of every program. In all seriousness, playing basketball and football, baseball would not be viable.We'd effectively be competing for a sub-level title in every sport. We'd be better served joining the Patriot League or something similar and competing at that level in everything.

 

[specialisthusky]

Well I guess we haven't hit rock bottom just yet. If it hurts UCONN you can bank on it happening at this point.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[MilliniumPrince]

Sounds like a split to me.

 

[CTGoonie]

Its clear, based on the public comments this past week by Slive, Swofford, and Bowlsby, that the big time conferences are coordinating an effort to move away from the NCAA and create an organziation that excludes the rest of the schools and conferences. It makes sense to a certain degree, they can create a new governing body and eliminate any items that might have benefited the smaller schools and conferences. Of course, this is a disaster for Uconn and likely college basketball, but what else is new? Its funny, Bowlsby said this am that "a group of basically 75 schools wins every national championship." Ummm, Uconn has won more than its share me thinks...

If it were to happen, Uconn is the AAC would have to seriously consider its football program's viability.

The quote is actually "Bowlsby said that there are 70 schools that win 90 percent of the championships in the NCAA and, “We have a bunch of others that don't look like the others yet are trying to compete.” He added that he believed it was time to think about federation by size and scope and perhaps by sport."

Number of schools in the Big 5 next year: 65 (including ND).

 

[UConnJim]

I'm not so sure. The AAC and the MWC are basically aligned with the Big 5 and most have the revenues to compete. Even if you included these 2 conferences, the Big 5 would still have a majority of schools. The MAC, Sun Belt, and CUSA would be in a tougher spot. And, I would think there would be no change to other sports. The NCAA basketball tourney is a huge money maker and having a tourney including a selection from only say 60 schools would not be as big of a money maker.

 

[OkaForPrez]

Its funny, Bowlsby said this am that "a group of basically 75 schools wins every national championship." Ummm, Uconn has won more than its share me thinks...

There are 63 teams in the "power 5" Saying 75 schools is interesting.

 

[UCFBfan]

If this does go doen the P5 need to seriously reassess their own conferences. Do you need to bring Iowa St, Vandy, Wake, etc to the big leagues or do you boot them and fill with teams that bring more to the table in all or many sports. Let's be honest, there's a lot of dead weight in the P5 that could be swapped out with other schools. I find it /$#ing insane that these schools who bring nothing, athletically or market wise, get a free pass. Am I biased in thinking UConn brings more than Wake or Iowa St, hell yeah. But am I really off in thinking this??

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[pj]

There are 63 teams in the "power 5" Saying 75 schools is interesting.

If the AAC, MWC, and BYU are considered equals, then 75 wouldn't include all of them. But it would at least include UConn.

If they break away from the NCAA without including major schools like UConn, there will surely be an antitrust lawsuit.

I don't see why the lesser schools would allow the P5 conferences to set up a separate division within the NCAA. It obviously means less sharing of basketball tourney revenue to the other 250 D1 basketball schools. It also means no chance to move up in football. Look for this to be voted down again, as a stipend was in 2011. And I don't think the P5 are ready to make a full break. They have monetary superiority already, and if they lost an antitrust lawsuit it could all come tumbling down.

So we can expect the current arrangement to continue for a few more years. It will be interesting to see how the tensions play out.

 

[Srqhusky]

I they do break away would they be allowed to play NCAA schools

 

[frankthetank]

If this does go doen the P5 need to seriously reassess their own conferences. Do you need to bring Iowa St, Vandy, Wake, etc to the big leagues or do you boot them and fill with teams that bring more to the table in all or many sports. Let's be honest, there's a lot of dead weight in the P5 that could be swapped out with other schools. I find it /$#ing insane that these schools who bring nothing, athletically or market wise, get a free pass. Am I biased in thinking UConn brings more than Wake or Iowa St, hell yeah. But am I really off in thinking this??

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

This is put into the "anything is possible in theory" category in the sense that, sure, anything is possible on paper, but it's just not practical. Schools simply don't get booted out from conferences without some extreme circumstances that go far beyond losing on the field. Temple got kicked out of the old Big East, but that was as an affiliate member for only a single sport and a very clear record of a lack of investment in that one particular sport. The Iowa States and Wakes of the world are also born lucky - they've been part of the blue blood establishment for many decades, so that makes them blue bloods for the purposes of the reorganization of college football. The only way that they get kicked out of the power club is if their conferences themselves collapse in the way that the SWC and old Big East did.

 

[frankthetank]

If the AAC, MWC, and BYU are considered equals, then 75 wouldn't include all of them. But it would at least include UConn.

If they break away from the NCAA without including major schools like UConn, there will surely be an antitrust lawsuit.

I don't see why the lesser schools would allow the P5 conferences to set up a separate division within the NCAA. It obviously means less sharing of basketball tourney revenue to the other 250 D1 basketball schools. It also means no chance to move up in football. Look for this to be voted down again, as a stipend was in 2011. And I don't think the P5 are ready to make a full break. They have monetary superiority already, and if they lost an antitrust lawsuit it could all come tumbling down.

So we can expect the current arrangement to continue for a few more years. It will be interesting to see how the tensions play out.

That's honestly an optimistic look from a Group of Five conference point of view. There's always this assumption from laypeople that there could be an antitrust lawsuit in college football (whether it's with respect to the playoff system or a split of the conferences), but they're making a wrong assumption about American antitrust law. That is, they mistakenly believe that American antitrust law is set up to preserve competition in and of itself, but the reality is that American antitrust law is to preserve the free market. They are not one and the same, as the free market often ends up with winners and losers that pretty explicitly kill off competition and often end up with oligopolies (think Wal-Mart and Target) with a handful of power players. In fact, based on the University of Oklahoma case that the NCAA lost in the 1980s that effectively opened up the TV rights/realignment-driven competition between conferences that we see today, there's a very strong argument that the NCAA Tournament (with the way that it redistributes income from the power conferences to less valuable smaller conferences) is much more at risk of losing an antitrust lawsuit if it were ever challenged by the power conferences than the power conferences would be at risk with any legal challenges to the then-BCS/now-CFP bowl system.

That's why all that we've heard is talk, talk, and more talk about antitrust challenges to the power players in college football for the past 15 years, yet not a single legal action has ever been filed in a country where sneezing in the wrong place at the wrong time can be the subject of litigation. Plus, even if the non-power conferences could somehow win on the legal merits, much like the USFL's lawsuit against the NFL where the USFL "won" but only were awarded $1 in damages, it would be a Pyrrhic victory since it would be a monumental task to show that the non-power conferences would have received a single cent more in TV or bowl revenue on their own (meaning that non-power conferences can't just say that they should be receiving 50% of the postseason revenue instead of 80% - they actually have to prove that a true free market would still pay them 50%) regardless of what the power conferences wanted to do.

 

[freescooter]

I'm not so sure. The AAC and the MWC are basically aligned with the Big 5 and most have the revenues to compete. Even if you included these 2 conferences, the Big 5 would still have a majority of schools. The MAC, Sun Belt, and CUSA would be in a tougher spot. And, I would think there would be no change to other sports. The NCAA basketball tourney is a huge money maker and having a tourney including a selection from only say 60 schools would not be as big of a money maker.

Problem is that if the top schools are in essence paying their players a salary, how are the other going to compete? It is going to be hard enough as it is, because you can almost predict that Auburn and Florida will cheat, figure out how to pad the payment. And since "cost of attendance" actually varies from school to school. UConn is actually higher than some, and allows 2750 for "miscellaneous" expenses compared to $2050 for Michigan and Duke $3580. Alabama is less, still. But you can bet that if this happens, suddenly the cost of living in Tuscaloosa will increase dramatically, at least for some players.

And while the NCAA basketball tournament money is real money, it pales in comparison to football money, and even if there is a modest reduction for the P-5 men's basketball championship, something I'm not completely convinced will happen, if you don't need to siphon off money for D2 and D3 and share with the NEC and the MAAC, I'm not sure that the loss won't be offset pretty quickly. On the other hand, if the P-5 Tourney Champ is Duke, and the NCAA Champ is Butler, who do you think will be recognized as the National Champ? Even if you had all 60 or 75 teams in the P-5 tourney, it would "seem tougher" than an NCAA tourney without Ducke, UNC, UCLA, Kansas et al.

 

[metsfan2323]

I think this crap gets floated for recruiting purposes, they want to scare recruits away from anyone not in the top 5. This is recruiting hardball.

If there is a split (again I think its BS) there will be one more major round of expansion first and UCONN will be included. We are the obvious team to be next in line.

What is most annoying is the number of Boneyard posters who seem to get their kicks off of any negative talk that would be damaging to school they pretend to root for.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

So the Big 5 conferences are going to form a super conference.
In essence creating a football or sports cartel. Be completely honest that's the objective.
Iliminating opportunity for anyone not currently in the cartel to to ever advance beyond their current status. That is really an American idea.
Frank you suppose to be a lawyer.
You don't. see anti -trust violations written all over this gambit.
This group certainly is ingaged in interstate commerence.
The only way this will ever fly is if anyone who wants to be in can be.



Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[Husky25]

This would cut off the nose of the already fragile face of the "Student-Athlete" playing either college basketball or football.

I don't see how the programs could still, in good faith, consider themselves a part of the institution they claim to represent. There is at least a fine line of association now, but GORs and TV contracts are systematically blurring that line. In all probability, it opens the door to pay-for-play, and the new Super league becomes a de facto low level professional league...a farm system for the farm system. One thing that the actions of sports fans have proven over the years is that we appreciate the best, and part of the appeal of watching college sports is that these are the best "amateurs" in their sport. There is a reason the XFL and UFL failed, New Britain Stadium seats 7,000, and the NBDL games are rarely aired. The best professionals play in different leagues. I for one will take serious stock in whether to support this structure or not and I don't think I would be in the minority.

Beyond that, I also believe there will be Title IX implications. If men's football and basketball lose their innocence and break from the NCAA or form a super division (which is what Div. 1A and 1AA was supposed to do all those years ago), schools will find a way to classify the sports differently as well. That means reduced spending on the zero revenue sports, which disproportionately include women's sports.

But that is only how I feel.

 

[Marty Jackson]

This is put into the "anything is possible in theory" category in the sense that, sure, anything is possible on paper, but it's just not practical. Schools simply don't get booted out from conferences without some extreme circumstances that go far beyond losing on the field. Temple got kicked out of the old Big East, but that was as an affiliate member for only a single sport and a very clear record of a lack of investment in that one particular sport. The Iowa States and Wakes of the world are also born lucky - they've been part of the blue blood establishment for many decades, so that makes them blue bloods for the purposes of the reorganization of college football. The only way that they get kicked out of the power club is if their conferences themselves collapse in the way that the SWC and old Big East did.

I think this could be the next shoe to drop that creates movement for Uconn.
If it comes down to this, and let's be honest there aren't a lot of facts yet, I can't see uconn willingly being left out simply because of conference affiliation. Not when you compare the profile of Uconn to the portfolio of schools potentially being included. Uconn is easily in the top half for most in terms of budget, revenue, facilities, investments, etc...

It's different if a school fails to make the financial commitment to keep up and is booted (Temple), or simply decides to de-emphasize athletics (Ivy League). There is no way a monumental shift like this happens and a school that has and is willing to compete financially with the other schools is left out. The legal case for Uconn (and Cincy and USF) would be pretty strong being they were BCS schools and are now left out (I'm sure the case could be made that through this process these schools have lost tens of millions if not hundreds)...

 

[UCFBfan]

Would they allow ND into their precious club if they weren't in a conference? I think I already know the answer but if some folks already don't like that they get special privilege, this might be their way of forcing them into a conference. Not sure....

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[frankthetank]

So the Big 5 conferences are going to form a super conference.
In essence creating a football or sports cartel. Be completely honest that's the objective.
Iliminating opportunity for anyone not currently in the cartel to to ever advance beyond their current status. That is really an American idea.
Frank you suppose to be a lawyer.
You don't. see anti -trust violations written all over this gambit.
This group certainly is ingaged in interstate commerence.
The only way this will ever fly is if anyone who wants to be in can be.



Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

You can attempt to make the antitrust argument, but it's MUCH weaker than what fans of non-power conferences want to believe. That's why there has never, ever been an actual legal claim filed against the BCS system despite all of the squawking from lawyers and politicians over the years. Like I've said, the way that the NCAA Tournament distributes income is arguably more of an antitrust violation than the BCS/CFP system. The power conferences can argue that if there were a true free market for college basketball, they'd be receiving 90% of the revenue in the same manner as they do for college football. That's one of the proverbial hammers that the power conferences have here: just because they make more money than everyone else right now doesn't mean that they wouldn't be able to receive more revenue if a "true" free market exists (and such "true" free market doesn't exist because of the way the NCAA is set up right now), so they can turn the argument around and state that they're the ones being subjected to anticompetitive practices (much in the same way that the University of Oklahoma and other power schools challenged the NCAA regarding TV rights back in the 1980s). The NCAA knows this and that's why they don't ever even attempt to push the power conferences on football revenue issues.

If there's one thing to remember here, antitrust law does NOT mean equality. Quite the contrary, antitrust law is about making sure that those entities are receiving what they would have received in a true free market (and that is often inherently unequal), and the power conferences (as evidenced by TV and bowl contracts) can argue that they are still receiving less from the NCAA than what they would have in a true free market on their own (and they'd probably be correct).

 

[frankthetank]

Would they allow ND into their precious club if they weren't in a conference? I think I already know the answer but if some folks already don't like that they get special privilege, this might be their way of forcing them into a conference. Not sure....

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

Yes, they would be allowed in. Every single move that was supposed to "force" ND to join a conference over the past 20 years has ended up providing them with an explicit exception to keep ND happy. Every. Single. One.

CFP playoff? Top 4 playoff without any conference championship requirement AND Notre Dame gets a contract with the Orange Bowl. Heck, the power conference commissioners chose ND's AD to actually announce the details of the playoff.

Pac-12 rule on not playing non-conference games after the Pac-12 season has started? An exception was quickly put into place that effectively ONLY applied to Pac-12 games with Notre Dame.

The Big Ten/Pac-12 alliance that ultimately didn't work? The Big Ten and Pac-12 kept all of those talks completely secret... except for keeping ND's AD fully informed so that he wouldn't get worried about scheduling arrangements.

The Big 12/SEC alliance in the Champions Bowl? Much like the Big Ten/Pac-12 alliance, the Big 12 and SEC kept those talks quiet... except for keeping ND's AD fully informed so that he would have a full understanding of bowl access.

The ACC, of course, is directly in bed with Notre Dame at this point.

Fans from other conferences might hate Notre Dame. Coaches from other conferences might hate Notre Dame. University presidents and ADs, however, love Notre Dame because they still make money for the power system. As long as they are a money maker instead of a money taker, they're going to be welcomed with open arms with the only people that matter (AKA the rational people that deal with money off-the-field instead of the hothead coaches on-the-field).

 

[Marty Jackson]

You can attempt to make the antitrust argument, but it's MUCH weaker than what fans of non-power conferences want to believe. That's why there has never, ever been an actual legal claim filed against the BCS system despite all of the squawking from lawyers and politicians over the years. Like I've said, the way that the NCAA Tournament distributes income is arguably more of an antitrust violation than the BCS/CFP system. The power conferences can argue that if there were a true free market for college basketball, they'd be receiving 90% of the revenue in the same manner as they do for college football. That's one of the proverbial hammers that the power conferences have here: just because they make more money than everyone else right now doesn't mean that they wouldn't be able to receive more revenue if a "true" free market exists (and such "true" free market doesn't exist because of the way the NCAA is set up right now), so they can turn the argument around and state that they're the ones being subjected to anticompetitive practices (much in the same way that the University of Oklahoma and other power schools challenged the NCAA regarding TV rights back in the 1980s). The NCAA knows this and that's why they don't ever even attempt to push the power conferences on football revenue issues.

If there's one thing to remember here, antitrust law does NOT mean equality. Quite the contrary, antitrust law is about making sure that those entities are receiving what they would have received in a true free market (and that is often inherently unequal), and the power conferences (as evidenced by TV and bowl contracts) can argue that they are still receiving less from the NCAA than what they would have in a true free market on their own (and they'd probably be correct).

I assume ND would be included, which nullifies the 'Power 5 Conferences' argument. Does BYU get left out?
then you have Boise, Uconn, Cincy, and USF as legit programs with major investments left empty handed.

We're talking about public funds for many of these schools.

 

[UConn Dan]

@John_Infante: @DanWolken See, in my vision of how this shakes out, full cost of attendance scholarships are mandatory.

@DanWolken: @John_Infante I guess it depends on where you want to put the dividing line. To me, that isn't as consequential.

@tsnmike: @DanWolken @John_Infante Mandating COA would solve problem of what to do with Cincy, UConn, Memphis, Boise. I mean, can't just say no.

 

[UConn Dan]

So the dividing line will most likely be which schools/conferences want to play by the rules of the new division and spend the money. I think UConn still fits the bill. I don't think UConn or The American get shut out as long as they pay players full cost of attendance and meet other criteria set forth in the new division.

Just look at our budget and our revenue. We are a "Power 5" school.

 

[huskymedic]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...missioner-bob-bowlsby-super-division/2574925/

>>Suggesting a special convention might need to be called to achieve "transformational change" in the NCAA, Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby suggested Monday it's time to consider a new "federation" of schools with like resources – and perhaps separation by sport.

"It's probably unrealistic to think that we can manage football and field hockey by the same set of rules," Bowlsby said. "I think some kind of reconfiguration of how we govern is in order."<<