Truth & Rumors > NCAAF

NCAA: Fourth large school subdivision could work

Views
2423
Comments
30

09:26 AM ET 06.01 | NCAA president Mark Emmert met with Big 12 leaders Wednesday, hinting that a possible fourth subdivision of larger schools could happen within the NCAA's framework. Texas athletic director DeLoss Dodds was glad Emmert was there. He came armed with suggestions that he believes would help in NCAA operations. Dodds suggested Thursday at the Big 12's spring meetings that some of the larger schools in the NCAA have problems that are unique to them among college athletic institutions. "I wouldn't say they're outraged or up in arms," Dodds said. "I just think they're concerned, and somehow the NCAA needs to federate in a way that people with common programs can vote on their programs." Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby said Emmert's 45-minute speech was frank about some of the problems some perceive with the NCAA. "I think he's confronting those fears head-on," Bowlsby said. "I think he knows there's apprehension out there, and he didn't propose any sort of magic scenario that will solve all of our problems." Some have speculated the fourth subdivision would include teams from the five power football conferences. Emmert conceded that the idea could work within the NCAA's current framework but ultimately will have to be decided by its member institutions.

Houston Chronicle

Mark Emmert, Getty Images Mark Emmert, Getty Images
June 1, 2013  09:50 AM ET

This is about the NCAA's legislative and governance processes, not the level of on-field competition.

"We (athletic directors) used to be involved when it was one institution, one vote. But then commissioners took it over, presidents took it over," Dodds said. "The athletic directors are on the ground, and they need to be somewhere in the mix."

I agree. I personally don't care what Gordon Gee, Bill Powers, Bowtie Lofton or any other university chancellor has to say about athletics. The problem is they have assumed too much power. For instance they are the ones who control the selection of (conference-friendly) Harris panelists.

Comment #2 has been removed
June 1, 2013  11:07 AM ET

This is a necessary step in the process of athletics as a business unit of the university. Athletics for profit only works at a few schools now, but with the increasing payouts from television, it is conceivable that all members of the big five will at least break even. The rest of the schools operate athletics as a financial loss, requiring school support to pay the bills. If the big schools don't have their own category within the NCAA, the smaller schools will force revenue sharing to help pay their bills. This is what happened in basketball; the big schools won't let it happen in football.

June 1, 2013  11:25 AM ET
QUOTE(#1):

This is about the NCAA's legislative and governance processes, not the level of on-field competition.

Bingo! They are becoming completely irrelevant in the CFB picture and are looking for any foothold they can gain.

June 1, 2013  11:46 AM ET

College football died for me a few years ago. Hate the direction it's gone on the field and in the conferences. It's only going to get worse. Saddens me that I don't watch college football from 10 in the morning until 11 at night.

June 1, 2013  11:54 AM ET
QUOTE(#1):

This is about the NCAA's legislative and governance processes, not the level of on-field competition."We (athletic directors) used to be involved when it was one institution, one vote. But then commissioners took it over, presidents took it over," Dodds said. "The athletic directors are on the ground, and they need to be somewhere in the mix."I agree. I personally don't care what Gordon Gee, Bill Powers, Bowtie Lofton or any other university chancellor has to say about athletics. The problem is they have assumed too much power. For instance they are the ones who control the selection of (conference-friendly) Harris panelists.

Very well put!

June 1, 2013  11:54 AM ET
QUOTE(#5):

College football died for me a few years ago. Hate the direction it's gone on the field and in the conferences. It's only going to get worse. Saddens me that I don't watch college football from 10 in the morning until 11 at night.

College football doesn't miss you.

June 1, 2013  12:31 PM ET
QUOTE(#5):

College football died for me a few years ago. Hate the direction it's gone on the field and in the conferences. It's only going to get worse. Saddens me that I don't watch college football from 10 in the morning until 11 at night.

If you watch college football from 10 in the morning till 11 at night you need to get a job or a hobby, maybe both.

June 1, 2013  12:39 PM ET
QUOTE(#8):

If you watch college football from 10 in the morning till 11 at night you need to get a job or a hobby, maybe both.

It is my hobby...

June 1, 2013  01:17 PM ET

Sounds like possibly institutionalizing the "tail wags the dog" approach to revenue-producing sports at the college level.
Do the institutions exist to educate, or to entertain? It's becoming harder to keep sports subservient to academics because of the growing pile of money in sports.

June 1, 2013  01:17 PM ET

So Emmert finally said it. This is, folks, the long-anticipated birth of the Superconference we've discussed here on FN before. This Fourth Subdivision will be 25 teams cherry-picked from the top CFB moneymakers across the present conferences. I'm basing this on Business Insiders' article from 1/16/13 ("The top 25 Schools That Make the Most Money in College Football"):

Seven are from the B1G- Michigan, Ohio State, Michigan State, Penn State, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Nebraska.

Nine are from the SEC- Alabama, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Auburn, Georgia, LSU, aTm, and Arkansas.

Three are from the Big 12: Texas, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State.

Two are from the ACC/Indy: Clemson and Notre Dame.

Four are from the PAC-12: Oregon, USC, Washington, and Arizona State.

These schools' football programs operate well into the black financially, and IMO would be the core of the Superconference. You've already got a Top-25 ranking system built in. With the eight-team playoff format, you got four automatic conference bids plus room for four at-large bids. Every member would then have a roughly 33% chance of making the playoffs.

Of course this is just one scenario. This fourth subdivision could even be doubled in size for schools operating in the +$10-34 million range. But whatever its makeup, I do sadly believe it's coming.

June 1, 2013  02:03 PM ET
QUOTE(#9):

It is my hobby...

Mine, too. Seasonal, naturally.

June 1, 2013  02:05 PM ET
QUOTE(#11):

So Emmert finally said it. This is, folks, the long-anticipated birth of the Superconference we've discussed here on FN before. This Fourth Subdivision will be 25 teams cherry-picked from the top CFB moneymakers across the present conferences. I'm basing this on Business Insiders' article from 1/16/13 ("The top 25 Schools That Make the Most Money in College Football"):Seven are from the B1G- Michigan, Ohio State, Michigan State, Penn State, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Nebraska.Nine are from the SEC- Alabama, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Auburn, Georgia, LSU, aTm, and Arkansas.Three are from the Big 12: Texas, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State.Two are from the ACC/Indy: Clemson and Notre Dame.Four are from the PAC-12: Oregon, USC, Washington, and Arizona State.These schools' football programs operate well into the black financially, and IMO would be the core of the Superconference. You've already got a Top-25 ranking system built in. With the eight-team playoff format, you got four automatic conference bids plus room for four at-large bids. Every member would then have a roughly 33% chance of making the playoffs.Of course this is just one scenario. This fourth subdivision could even be doubled in size for schools operating in the +$10-34 million range. But whatever its makeup, I do sadly believe it's coming.

Yep, but I do thing your double scenario is what will happen, about 48-60 teams. About the size D1/A was when it first split from D1/AA. This would allow schools that were close to profits when the report was produced, that now are after getting full $$ from the money conf; Maryland, TCU, WVU, Utah, etc...

June 1, 2013  05:14 PM ET
QUOTE(#8):

If you watch college football from 10 in the morning till 11 at night you need to get a job or a hobby, maybe both.

Got a job, got a hobby. But thanks for adding such a intelligent response.

June 1, 2013  05:14 PM ET

Have a job, have a couple of hobbies. But thank you for a very intelligent response.

June 1, 2013  05:21 PM ET
QUOTE(#7):

College football doesn't miss you.

I did not realize that. I thank you for making me aware of that fact. The brilliance in your reply allows me to "really" take another look at myself.

June 1, 2013  05:49 PM ET

DR....little thin skinned?

Post that crap and then take umbrage when you get called on it....???

Glad you have a job and a hobby or two..

June 1, 2013  05:51 PM ET
QUOTE(#13):

Yep, but I do thing your double scenario is what will happen, about 48-60 teams. About the size D1/A was when it first split from D1/AA. This would allow schools that were close to profits when the report was produced, that now are after getting full $$ from the money conf; Maryland, TCU, WVU, Utah, etc...

I would think a little more....4x16 team conferences...each with two divisions of 8.

Playoffs would be the 8 division winners with the CC getting a bye. Might even throw in 4 wildcards teams...

June 1, 2013  07:05 PM ET
QUOTE(#9):

It is my hobby...

Mine three!

 
Comment #20 has been removed

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Kerr 'absolutely expects' Knicks offer
    Views
    3230
    Comments
    1435
  2. 2
    Tuukka Rask takes blame for Bruins' Game 1 loss
    Views
    1630
    Comments
    220
  3. 3
    No return timetable for Lightning MVP
    Views
    1683
    Comments
    219
  4. 4
    Yankees, Mets, Red Sox among Hanrahan hopefuls
    Views
    6433
    Comments
    177
  5. 5
    Smush Parker allegedly punches high schooler
    Views
    1362
    Comments
    136

SI.com

SI Photos