RE: New NCAA eligibility requirements
I do not know how likely any of it is. I do think that it is certainly possible though. Whether or not it will work in the long run I do not know and neither do they.- Posted by Ken D.- Posted by Pack pride lead investigatorFor the record I support every one of the new rules and the things that Ken suggested sound well reasoned too.- Posted by Sauras69Ken. Your 2nd paragraph on the 1st page hit it for me. I truly don't see any school leaving the NCAA. In spite of their many flaws, they are at least trying to make an effort now.- Posted by Ken D.
I find it hard to believe that the Big Ten, which ranks second to the ACC in academic prestige, and which would only accept schools who were members of the academically prestigious Association of American Universities, would leave the NCAA because they wanted higher academic standards. Especially if those standards reduced the competitive advantage the SEC now enjoys. I don't see the PAC 10 doing it either. The SEC and Big XII couldn't go it alone - they need the NCAA.
I have (somewhat unfortunately) had a good deal of contact with the programs that I am talking about would possibly leave. The idea of them leaving is not some far fetched thing that I am just throwing out there it is what they openly suggested was in their best interest going back some 35 odd years. And they really believe it. I do not advocate it for my school or think that a university should be anything but a university first but I will play devils advocate and tell you what they believe like I have been told by them.
First of all, the contracts are with ESPN not the NCAA. It is just a governing body. What is the difference in having a "conference realignment and leaving the NCAA out of it?Also, it would give us the ability to pay our players what they deserve to play football. And we do not have to pretend that they are in school learning anything when most of them are not. They vast majority of them are not getting a real degree at any institution anywhere. We could shut down the "communications major" department and put real students with real majors in their place. We could offer a higher product of football that more people would watch. Less schools would just mean that we would shift to 8 game schedules that would leave room for the 16 team playoff system we have always supported along with paying the players.
Now back to reality...have you heard 90% of these ideas constantly and suddenly espoused from any certain major news source? For the record football used to be about schools and family bragging rights and the institution. Now not so much. Do I think it is likely? I did not think it would be likely that Texas a&m would leave their rivals since forever ...for the money. I did not think the NCAA would even look at playing players but they have...for the money. I would think a lot of things about
I think many of the folks that expressed those sentiments think that a large number of schools outside their own conferences would go along with them if they left the NCAA. I don't believe that would be the case.
As for shorter schedules and larger playoffs, the schools who would drive this wouldn't accept fewer home games to have more playoff games. And I don't think there would be enough teams in total to have more than a four team playoff. Let's say you are in a conference whose schools rank near the bottom in the academic prestige category. Those would be the Sunbelt, and now, to an extent, C-USA.
Do you really want to pull out of the NCAA so you can be dominated by the SEC and Big XII teams who would go with you? Do you think you will somehow get more TV and bowl money than you get now for your willingness to be cannon fodder for Alabama, LSU and Oklahoma? While there are some great teams there, I don't think ESPN would pay as much to televise games that are only relevant in the deep south. Those schools would never be playing for a true "national" championship. And in the long run, I think that would hurt their quality as much as in the short run paying players might help it. Just my opinion.
Beware of unintended consequences. Words to live by.
But here is another thing. I think that there are plenty of other teams that if given a viable option would go in the complete other direction. They would offer less or no scholarships if everyone else would also. In particular, a lot of the schools not in a current BCS conference. Most of them have administration that is sick of kids in there school that have no business in college.
They may have a point too. If your team still played most of its conference rivals and rivalry games on the same footing with each other, what would those other schools do matter anyway? If it was solely for the sake of competitive football would Vanderbilt choose to be in the SEC? Do you think their fans and boosters really enjoy that or would they rather play Wake Forrest and other academic schools like that week in and week out?
As to would other schools join them and sacrifice the competitiveness of their football program? Yes. If the money was right, yes. Did someone mention Vanderbilt awhile ago?
There are many schools out there that already do just that.
As far as true national championship, it seems to me the way the sports media works now it would just be whoever ESPN said it was. And if this D League is partly their creation and they put up the contract for it then I can guess who they will put the crown on.