Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11
    AGS FCS Champion DFW HOYA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,706

    Re: SI explains the I-A/I-AA split

    Quote Originally Posted by Go Green View Post
    Hindsight is 20/20, but I wonder if Rice would have been better off joining Conference USA from the get-go instead of the WAC.
    Conference USA was formed as a merger of the Metro (formerly Metro 7) and the basketball schools of the Great Midwest (DePaul, Marquette, Dayton, UAB.) They had invited Houston when Houston did not get a WAC invite, but to be fair, the WAC was a stronger entity in 1995 than it turned out to be and C-USA didn't need two Houston schools.

    The Metro 7 was one of the great what-ifs of sports. Not only had they proposed a 16 team eastern superconference that went nowhere, the founding schools were a great football conference of their own, yet the Metro never sponsored football and lent themselves to getting these teams picked off, which they all did.

    The original Metro 7 were Cincinnati, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Memphis, Tulane, St. Louis, and Florida State. Later entrants included Virginia Tech and South Carolina.
    Georgetown: "We play where we do not compete, and compete where we do not play."

  2. #12
    Master FCS Advocate Catamount87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    The Great State of NC
    Posts
    327

    Re: SI explains the I-A/I-AA split

    One of the best lines in the article...

    • "The bigs will rip down all the restraints on spending, open the lid on scholarship limits, coaching staffs and recruiting costs."


    Patently absurd.

    Well, fast forward to today and this is exactly what we've been seeing. For the biggest conferences we have coaching salaries that are through the roof, athletes are now getting 'cost of attendance" stipends and recruiting budgets have gone crazy.

  3. #13
    First Class FCS Ruler
    bobcathpdevil56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    The Project
    Posts
    594

    Re: SI explains the I-A/I-AA split

    I also thought it was interesting that they mention Boise State v. Michigan State recruiting. Today, it is probably a whole lot closer of a recruiting battle then most of these gentlemen's would've thought.

  4. #14
    AGS FCS Champion Lehigh Football Nation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Murray Goodman Stadium
    Posts
    19,987

    Re: SI explains the I-A/I-AA split

    "In the past, when the bigger football schools were asked to swallow still another piece of unpalatable legislation—the "Robin Hood plan" to disperse television money across the board; the periodic moves to base scholarship grants on financial need (a move with vast potential for cheating)—they somehow managed to vote down the offending legislation."

    Yes, how.. unpalatable.. to share TV money! In the end they had to give a crumb to the other schools, more because I think they are/were trying to avoid lawsuits rather than anything from the goodness of their own hearts. Of course, "somehow managing to vote down the legislation" - what a canard. With the money and power centered around the richest, most powerful schools, of course these things would be voted down.

    "And two, a playoff similar to that in Divisions II and III has been formulated to provide a I-AA national championship and a $750,000 television payoff (coming from the Division I package recently signed with ABC). Under the old structure, most I-AA schools could expect never to see the inside of a bowl or the figures on a television check. I-AA schools also would be guaranteed regular-season telecasts."

    Jimeny M. Christmas, what ever happened to the $750,000 kitty????? That would be the equivalent of $3 Million today.
    Follow me on Twitter (User Name LFN)

    The
    Time
    Is
    Now

  5. #15
    Top FCS Ruler CHIP72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Silver Spring, MD
    Posts
    1,512

    Re: SI explains the I-A/I-AA split

    Quote Originally Posted by Lehigh Football Nation View Post
    "In the past, when the bigger football schools were asked to swallow still another piece of unpalatable legislation—the "Robin Hood plan" to disperse television money across the board; the periodic moves to base scholarship grants on financial need (a move with vast potential for cheating)—they somehow managed to vote down the offending legislation."

    Yes, how.. unpalatable.. to share TV money! In the end they had to give a crumb to the other schools, more because I think they are/were trying to avoid lawsuits rather than anything from the goodness of their own hearts. Of course, "somehow managing to vote down the legislation" - what a canard. With the money and power centered around the richest, most powerful schools, of course these things would be voted down.

    "And two, a playoff similar to that in Divisions II and III has been formulated to provide a I-AA national championship and a $750,000 television payoff (coming from the Division I package recently signed with ABC). Under the old structure, most I-AA schools could expect never to see the inside of a bowl or the figures on a television check. I-AA schools also would be guaranteed regular-season telecasts."

    Jimeny M. Christmas, what ever happened to the $750,000 kitty????? That would be the equivalent of $3 Million today.
    Read the Wikipedia entry on the 1984 case "NCAA vs Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma", and more specifically the subsection titled "District Court": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_v...ty_of_Oklahoma

  6. #16
    Top FCS Advocate Herder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    295

    Re: SI explains the I-A/I-AA split

    It’s all about scholarship levels imo. You won’t get G5 P5 games if the G5 schools move down from the 85 level. And, you won’t get a FCS G5 merger with one group at 63 and another at 85. That is the issue. And, P5 at 85 wants very little to do with playing the 63 level. Can any FCS’s afford to go up to even the 70 level to join some G5’s?

    the best solution I see is . . . 3 Championships
    D1 Level 1. Conferences. Scholarship Min. 80 max 85.
    D1 Level 2. Conferences Min 70 max 85. Level 1 agrees to play them during regular season. can goto top level bowls if they qualify, otherwise playing for Nat Championship at this level.
    D1 Level 3 Conferences. Min 0. Max 50. If the Ivies, MEAC and SWAC don’t participate, then do not have a championship at this level, top teams could join level 2 playoff maybe. 0 scholarship conferences would not be considered for Level 2 championship.

    Yes, DI FCS Would be gone as we know it today.
    Last edited by Herder; February 14th, 2018 at 07:27 AM.

  7. #17
    First Class FCS Advocate Lion1983's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    88

    Re: SI explains the I-A/I-AA split

    Quote Originally Posted by Herder View Post
    It’s all about scholarship levels imo. You won’t get G5 P5 games if the G5 schools move down from the 85 level. And, you won’t get a FCS G5 merger with one group at 63 and another at 85. That is the issue. And, P5 at 85 wants very little to do with playing the 63 level. Can any FCS’s afford to go up to even the 70 level to join some G5’s?

    the best solution I see is . . . 3 Championships
    D1 Level 1. Conferences. Scholarship Min. 80 max 85.
    D1 Level 2. Conferences Min 70 max 85. Level 1 agrees to play them during regular season. can goto top level bowls if they qualify, otherwise playing for Nat Championship at this level.
    D1 Level 3 Conferences. Min 0. Max 50. If the Ivies, MEAC and SWAC don’t participate, then do not have a championship at this level, top teams could join level 2 playoff maybe. 0 scholarship conferences would not be considered for Level 2 championship.

    Yes, DI FCS Would be gone as we know it today.
    I think D1 should just be D1 (football) have as little scholarships as you want, understanding that if you choose less, you will more than likely not compete very well. If, for example UNA wanted to have 80 scholarships, so be it. But if they wanted 20, so be it. I honestly believe that when they put a limit on the number of scholarships, it was to help the "smaller schools" and the "big boys" didn't like that. So the splits happened.

    That's my opinion in the last line, may not even go with the time line of everything. But it had to be talked about for years before it happened.

  8. #18
    Top FCS Advocate Herder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    295

    Re: SI explains the I-A/I-AA split

    Quote Originally Posted by Lion1983 View Post
    I think D1 should just be D1 (football) have as little scholarships as you want, understanding that if you choose less, you will more than likely not compete very well. If, for example UNA wanted to have 80 scholarships, so be it. But if they wanted 20, so be it. I honestly believe that when they put a limit on the number of scholarships, it was to help the "smaller schools" and the "big boys" didn't like that. So the splits happened.

    That's my opinion in the last line, may not even go with the time line of everything. But it had to be talked about for years before it happened.
    Having 1 champion for all of DI football is not enough imo, and 3 is probably too many. So where does the 2ndary championship best fit? Is it the current 0-63 scholarship level, or is a true 2nd Level G5/FCS combo level of 70-85 scholarships a better championship level?

Similar Threads

  1. Griz Coach explains schedule.
    By Ronbo in forum FCS Discussion
    Replies: 148
    Last Post: September 14th, 2007, 12:48 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •