CBS Article: FBS Conferences To Split To New Division?

Submitted by Mr. Yost on May 16th, 2013 at 1:40 PM

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/22247794/big-ten-bracing-for-change-but-how-big-of-a-change

It seems it's only a matter of time to be honest. I'm in my 8th year of athletics administration and I feel that in the next 20 years, the big schools will leave to form their own 12-team conferences.

Will players be paid? Maybe. Could see some other dramatic changes.

Just call it Division 1, Division 2 can be the leftovers + a few (current FCS) schools, Division 3 can be what is now FCS, Division 4 the current D2, and Mount Union can play for the Division 5 Championship.

In trying to make things more simple, I just confused myself.

Comments

DISCUSS Man

May 16th, 2013 at 1:50 PM ^

Talk about confusing. Then what happens with basketball? Is Butler who sucks royally at football and is good at basketball, going to have to play the less thans for the Division II NCAA title? 

Just so many problems. Hockey? Hockey has teams from as low as D3 in it. RIT who is in D3 went to the Frozen Four in 2010. Do they have to go back to the little pool? 

One thing is for sure. Every sport but football will be screwed over.

Monocle Smile

May 16th, 2013 at 2:02 PM ^

this could lead to a split between sports where schools are no longer entirely in one conference for most sports.

Hockey isn't so much of a problem because it does its own thing anyway (CCHA, WCHA aren't all that indicative of Big Ten or Mountain West/Pac 12). But a bunch of other sports will have issues.

jblaze

May 16th, 2013 at 2:54 PM ^

which is why splitting basketball and football conferences will not happen. It decreases the importance and impact of conference networks, which is something the B1G has been playing up big time.

Also, when you have the 4-5 big time conferences, what's their incentive to make sure Butler (and the like) are treated fairly.

It's more likely that smaller basketball schools are basketball only members of a conference.

Mr. Yost

May 17th, 2013 at 11:23 AM ^

Hopefully you're still checking the thread.

I can say without question this would ONLY be for football. I've spoken with multiple people and it'll have no effect on basketball other than basketball schools with football teams in this new division would have oodles of money.

It would be very interesting to see what happens to schools like Kentucky, Indiana and Kansas.

Also, if a school like Vandy got in...you could see their basketball team go NUTS due to all of the new resources.

ShockFX

May 16th, 2013 at 2:01 PM ^

There are too many important football voices outside of the BCS automatic-qualifying structure that shouldn't be ignored, Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said.

Did he manage this with a straight face?

joeyb

May 16th, 2013 at 2:49 PM ^

You can't just call division 3 division 5. The divisions actually have implications on the rules such as scholarship limits, e.g. division 3 allows no scholarships. That is across all sports. Just go back to Divisions I-A and I-AA and I-AAA. FBS means nothing anymore.

BornInAA

May 16th, 2013 at 3:00 PM ^

The handfull of good teams with resources from the American, Mountain West, Conference USA, Mid-American Conference and Sun Belt conferences need to be assimilated into the big conferences with the rest dropping down to a lower division.

maize-blue

May 16th, 2013 at 3:52 PM ^

This would be awsome if they broke up the FBS (D-1A). Nobody takes the teams from the MAC, Sunbelt, WAC, etc. serious anyway. If those teams just played in their own division and the major schools just played each other in their own division, I think that would create better games and competition overall.

Tater

May 16th, 2013 at 5:00 PM ^

I have hoped for this since the movement toward expansion into "super-conferences" started.    I was hoping for four conferences with a de facto eight team playoff: four conference championship games and an official four-team playoff of champions.

It won't happen, but it would be great to see five conferences and five-team playoff with the two lowest-ranked champions playing a 4-5 game to get into the main grid.  Or, they could let all five champions play and have three at-large teams to satisfy the SEC.  

I have thought a breakaway was a fait accompli for a long time.  My only question is whether they form a new conference or a new athletic organization.  

NCAA nabobs can talk about "tradition" all they want, but their only true "tradition" is to have their hands out for as much money as they can grab.  The schools that make all of the money have the same voting power as those who make none, but there are more smaller schools.  The big schools are outnumbered, and the smaller schools get to vote on how to spend the money the big schools bring in.  

It really makes sense to break away.

 

Perkis-Size Me

May 16th, 2013 at 6:27 PM ^

So how is this going to work when you've got schools like UNLV, Butler, Gonzaga, VCU, etc. that have pretty crappy football teams (compared to FBS level), but good, nationally recognized basketball teams? Is this a "just football" potential division, because if not, there are going to be a lot of really good mid-major basketball schools that will have a problem with this.

LSAClassOf2000

May 16th, 2013 at 7:26 PM ^

One ofthe linked articles had an interview with Gene Smith (HERE). 

Obviously, this talk about a division with different legislative guidelines is vague at this point, but in the interview, Smith points to his theory that "60-70 schools" (presumably, the most successful half of Division I, by and large) are different in nature. He specifically mentions recruiting, pointing out that it is a very different thing at his school versus, using his example, Middle Tennessee. Of course, the gripe would seem to be that you have the schools from lesser discussed conference voting on any legislation with the same relative power as a Big Ten or SEC school. 

Mr. Yost

May 17th, 2013 at 11:29 AM ^

...who is in your 64 team league?

I've tried this before. #55-#70 is going to be excruciating to separate. Partially because your natural instinct is going to use basketball to help separate (i.e. Kansas, IU, Kentucky). Also, current conference affliation makes it hard (Nevada vs. Mississippi St.)

In the end, I don't know if they'd get to 64. 64 teams truly can't hang in the big boy division. Really it should be four 8 or 10 team conferences if you're going off of money.

I'll say 48 teams, and make it four 12 team conferences.