NCAA Poised to Create New Division for Power Conferences

January 18, 2014 at 11:36a    by DJ Byrnes    
27 Comments
NCAA PResident Mark Emmert

The power conference delivered an ultimatum to NCAA President Mark Emmert: change, or else. This week, at the Division I NCAA conclave, it appears Emmert has heeded that call. From Yahoo! Sports:

Polling of the roughly 800 administrators at the NCAA convention's dialog on governance revealed solid support for an autonomous voting body for the five most powerful conferences – the SEC, Big Ten, ACC, Pac-12 and Big 12. Fifty-eight percent of those administrators – from all levels of NCAA membership – were in support of autonomy for the power conferences; 30 percent were opposed; 12 percent were neutral.

To NCAA president Mark Emmert, that's a significant change in outlook.

"It makes sense for the five big revenue conferences to have their own voice," Emmert told Yahoo Sports Friday. "A year ago that would have been a very difficult conversation. Now [member schools] are saying, 'Yeah, that makes sense.' … People have just become more comfortable with the ideas and concepts of it.'"

The Big Ten's Boss Hogg, Jim Delany, has been vocal about the need for reform in big-time college athletics to stay ahead of the times. This would be the first step to shaking things up.


27 Comments

Comments

popeurban's picture

It is a brave new world, and I am not sure what to make of it.  I wonder if in twenty years we will say this was a good thing?  I know that what we have, is not by any means perfect, but in some ways this concerns me.
 

elitesmithie's picture

I think it makes more sense for places like Akron to compete with Youngstown St then Ohio State considering resources. Would this just have D1 be like 50 -60 schools and add the rest to D1AA?

bigbadbuck's picture

On one hand I agree with this but a part of me wonders if the money for sustainability will be there for the smaller schools if the bigger schools aren't on the schedule.

Gentlemen, you can't fight in here its a war room

NoVA Buckeye's picture

Yep. Those mismatches go to support an entire athletic department. Hard to see where the budget comes from if this happens.

The offseason begins when your season ends. Even then there are no days off.

Kaceybrown's picture

I don't see why they couldn't still be on big time school's schedules like they are now. Just not in the same division 

CPDenn's picture

Isn't this more just greater voting power for the big conferences, rather than a new division?

IBLEEDSCARLETANDGRAY's picture

The big question I have about the power conferences getting autonomy. Will the NCAA bylaws apply? Or will it be like the wild wild west where anything goes? Will the NCAA even try to enforce them? Or will they only bust Ohio State but ignore everyone else?

"Sherman ran an option play right through the south" - Greatest Civil War analogy EVER.

LadyBuck's picture

You act like they don't do this for the most part already.

Hoody Wayes's picture

The NCAA recognizes the football powers have dispatched their lawyers to hatch a plan to pay players, that the Department of Education will find acceptable.
The NCAA's trying to survive. The NCAA is on Gilligan's Island and it will be forgotten, soon.

740's picture

this would really ruin march madness if I'm interpreting this correctly

wojodta's picture

Agreed. You have to keep the little guys with the big guys. It just makes it more interesting. This could turn CFB into the NFL where the teams aren't really all that different in terms of talent (which is boring to me). Plus what happens with March Madness? They'd have to shrink the field if they're cutting down the number of conferences. Not a good idea IMO.

johnblairgobucks's picture

You have to keep the little guys with the big guys. It just makes it more interesting. This could turn CFB into the NFL where the teams aren't really all that different in terms of talent (which is boring to me). Plus what happens with March Madness?

lots of great points there.
 
on top of that, I can't wait:  
till the first elite prospect requires a fee from potential schools for the rights to recruit the kid.
till the first returning Heisman hopeful or All-American "holds out" for more money
till we have a whole football team act like the "Fab 5" or the late 80's Miami Hurricanes because they are getting paid amounts of money ( that will be sure to increase every year) to play football at a school, instead of playing for the love of the game, school  or teammates.
I remember when the top paid MLB, NBA and NFL players was getting 2 to 3 millions a year, now they are in the 15 to 20 million per year.  No reason to believe that in a span of 10 to 20 years, some these college players will be making as much as the President of the USA.
 
 

d5k's picture

Ok so the innocence is gone now that big $ is at stake.  But I'd rather players get money than Jerry Jones getting to keep it all (and the profits from his taxpayer funded monstrosity of a stadium).

Torpedo Vegas's picture

Considering the President makes around $400,000 a year I think that might be sooner rather than later.

Go1Bucks's picture

The thought that players would get paid, sicken me.  It would manifest a whole class of individuals that would assume that they are going to get paid as players and their actions would become unbearable. (at least until they find out they dont get to play at all). But we already have a work ethic issue with the current generation and it will only exacerbate their mind set (note: not all of this generation are that way, but many athletes are, unfortunately)

Go Bucks!

CPDenn's picture

Based off what? A lot/all of these kids work their asses off to get to this level.

countrybuckeye's picture

And the other kid, a neighbor and a friend of this "star athlete" who will be paid at the college level -- that scrawny brainiac who will go to med school, work his ass off, and then later in life save his BMOC friend's Dad's life with open heart surgery -- what about paying him to go to school?
Hmmm?

"Momma told me there would be days like this."

Scarlet_Lutefisk's picture

And the other kid, a neighbor and a friend of this "star athlete" who will be paid at the college level -- that scrawny brainiac who will go to med school, work his ass off, and then later in life save his BMOC friend's Dad's life with open heart surgery -- what about paying him to go to school?

He won't have a jersey you can buy (preferably in black), and let's be honest, that's really all that most of the pay for play crowd is worried about.

Torpedo Vegas's picture

The football player wouldn't be paid to go to school, he'd be paid to provide the labor in a billion dollar entertainment industry. And that scrawny brainiac still has control over his/her likeness and name, the right to accept gifts, sell his/her own property, be overpaid for a summer job, etc. etc. 

Scarlet_Lutefisk's picture

Be careful what you wish for.
 

Ultrabuckeyehomer's picture

I agree that this could be a toothpaste back into the tube issue and everyone must be careful. But, given the lack of specifics, I'm withholding judgment until there is any indication as to what is the end game. Is it to simply provide those conferences with a greater say within the existing structure? Like the UN's security council? Or, are we talking about a split altogether from smaller schools?  I do like the idea of no more Mac schools on the schedule, but I also don't want to see the Ohio U and Akron's of the world lose their programs. I know those two wishes may not be compatible, though. 
 

Run_Fido_Run's picture

My guess is that, first, there was a shot across the NCAA's bow and, in response, the NCAA and smaller conferences/schools realized that they better be more flexible.
With that flexibility, (again, I'm guessing here), the "big five" conferences will set up a two-tiered system within FBS, but not a separate division. Both tiers will still compete in the same playoff/bowl system, but the upper-tier conferences will allow more robust compensation packages for bball/fball student-athletes.
Yes, the disparities between the big five (and other conferences that elect to go upper-tier) versus the poorer, lower-tier conferences will become greater, but it was either that, or the big five would have explore exit options.
What I am still unclear about is if/how Title IX complicates any plans to offer enhanced compensation packages to (males) in fball/bball.    

Whoa Nellie's picture

First step on the road to paid college athletes. 

“Don’t fear criticism. The stands are full of critics. They play no ball. They fight no fights. They make no mistakes because they attempt nothing. Down on the field are the doers, they make mistakes because they attempt many things.”

JOhio1560's picture

If this happens, Notre Dame is going to be so pissed.
Almost makes it worth it.

"You Win With People" - Woody Hayes

CowCat's picture

A modest proposal (feel free to shoot it down )
A lot of the "pay the players" talk stems from the fact that players don't really have time to work off-campus jobs.   Even in the summer "off" period they're expected to train themselves for the upcoming season.
Maybe players could be paid during the summer IF they showed up to training facilities and met certain targets (slackers would be paid less or not at all)   Players would also be free to work other jobs, as long as they were legitimate
Once the academic calendar starts, the players are simply on scholarship, as they are now.
Thoughts?
 
 

"We get paid to score touchdowns, not kick field goals"
-- Urban Meyer

Knarcisi's picture

I'm ok with players being taken care of for normal school and living expenses. But it needs to be sensible and controlled. Also maybe a modest pool for them to draw from once they depart school. Let me stress that is needs to be modest, and very much controlled.
You allow this to get out of hand with sponsors and contracts for individual players, it's going to get out of control very quickly.