June 02, 2003

Could 60 teams secede from the NCAA?: A slippery slope argument saying that this would be the next logical step for the new super conferences and their increasing greed.

posted by corpse to general at 10:51 AM - 6 comments

The NCAA sucks, but this would suck even worse. Wow.

posted by Mookieproof at 11:21 AM on June 02, 2003

"If these 60 or so schools are bringing in all the revenue, that means they're taking all the risk," said Ken Haines, president of Raycom Sports. "And so the question becomes, Should they not benefit from the revenue that is associated with that risk-taking?" What risk is this jizzbot talking about? These schools are not taking any risk, and in fact the lesser schools are since they haven't got anywhere close to the guaranteed income of the majors. What a load of money grubbing horse plop! Sorry for the french but it's bad enough that universities are pretending to be about the education but when they come out and drop all pretense it gets me all kinds of worked up. Though I suppose, given the general tenor of these time, I shouldn't expect anything different. I believe it was only a few weeks ago that we had a discussion about amateurs in athletics but clearly that's in the past.

posted by billsaysthis at 02:31 PM on June 02, 2003

Several thoughts on the "big picture": 1) Do ADs at the other 60 demoted I-A schools continue as cannon-fodder for the annointed 60 to get easy home wins on their schedule? Or do they grow a set and give the collective middle-finger to the largest programs? 2) Do the big programs penalize themselves for wins against the "other" 60 (or 260 in the other sports) the way I-AA and Division II wins are treated now (as non-wins for purposes of RPI or BCS)? 3) How soon does 60 turn into 40, or even 30? Only a matter of time, especially if No. 2 becomes true. For one, Duke, Vandy, N'Western, Kansas and Baylor have only so many non-conference ass-kickings to take from the NC States and K-States of the world. And others will join their ranks, because they no longer have New Mexico State to lean on. And unlike the pros, there's not a draft to help weak teams get better. Of course, by the time this day comes, our grand-children will be running the BCS. 4) Who ends up as the final team chosen out of the 60 -- assuming that they want a neat number -- after you've accounted for the soon-to-be aligned 57 teams and roped in Notre Dame and Brigham Young? Is it Utah, for an Pac-12? Is it Virginia Tech, for its current football prowess? Or is it a strong overall program with good football potential, like Connecticut? Or do they go include all five "orphaned" Big East teams and go with 64 teams? 5) The easiest way is to include Notre Dame, BYU and Utah, in that order. But does a credible alliance require a coordinated re-alignment (as opposed to raiding)? Requiring, for instance: A Connecticut move into the ACC, Georgia Tech or Florida State moving to the SEC, Arkansas going to the Big 12 and Colorado joining BYU in a Pac-12, in addition to the Big Ten's inclusion of Notre Dame.

posted by jackhererra at 06:17 PM on June 02, 2003

You know, I wrote a column here on SpoFi about this a few months ago, never expecting this to happen. Now that it looks imminent, I feel like such a schmuck. I do believe that SU and BC will not bolt for the ACC, but Miami will. Va Tech might replace the other two, with Marshall, East Carolina, or South Florida possibly stepping up to the big time. The NCAA could offset this by allowing conferences with ten or more teams to split into two divisions. If that were the case, the ACC could opt for Va Tech and the Big East would not be seriously harmed.

posted by jasonbondshow at 11:08 PM on June 02, 2003

"The NCAA could offset this by allowing conferences with ten or more teams to split into two divisions. If that were the case, the ACC could opt for Va Tech and the Big East would not be seriously harmed." It's almost as if the current rule forces leagues to make commerce-related moves like most expansion, such as the push on the Pac-10 to add BYU and Utah, or the same on the Big Ten to add Pitt or West Virginia. For two reasons, the hunch here is that schools are going to keep limiting title schools to 12-school leagues. One is that the ACC, SEC and Big 12 make up the majority of the major schools, so they'll fight any change. The other is that it keeps the pressure on Notre Dame to join a league, with the hope that it will eventually buckle in the same manner that the Rose Bowl did. If the ACC has one school to pick to make 10 schools, it's going to be Miami, not Virginia Tech. As far as Marshall, East Carolina and South Florida are concerned, the shop has as many "big-time" programs as it's going to have and is pretty much closed.

posted by jackhererra at 06:26 AM on June 03, 2003

My girlfriend just got an email from Tulane University and they are seriously considering dropping to 1-AA or even Division 2 and cutting football loose. This ACC move is going to have serious repercussions on Conference USA. Even my USF Bulls are weighing their options.

posted by usfbull at 12:02 AM on June 04, 2003

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.