Great new Column on Any Given Sat....

[WYOBISONMAN]

Check out Kent's latest column. As usual it is well thought out and a wealth of information. Great work Kent....

http://www.i-aa.org/article.asp?articleid=52740&session=VKpviWqNuK5JYn 8anX2bmeJKbZ

[Bisonfan1234]

LOL! This article should have had a picture of a bunch of Bison fans on their hands & knees saying "Pretty please, BSC??"

[JBB]

I didnt see that at all. It certainly explained the BSC option. The BSC would be good.

[somebison]

LOL! This article should have had a picture of a bunch of Bison fans on their hands & knees saying "Pretty please, BSC??"

Actually it should have a picture of the BSC commisioner on his hands and knees asking for Idaho to please come back

[89rabbit]

Actually it should have a picture of the BSC commisioner on his hands and knees asking for Idaho to please come back


I got that too! :D

[somebison]

I don't think the Big Sky is going to make any real moves until they are sure Idaho is gone (they need some closure)... then things may open for some other schools. I think the same may be said for the NCC.. it seems they are willing hang around at 7 teams for a while until they are sure NDSU/SDSU are gone.

P.S. would NDSU have to add tennis to compete in the Big Sky?... would that be a sticking point

[WYOBISONMAN]

If NDSU could add tennis in exchange for a BSC invite, it would be done yesterday.....

[BisonInTexas]

The following couple of paragraphs from the article are kind of contradictory, at least the way I read it:



I-A requirements sent forth by the NCAA now state that a football team needs to average 15,000 fans per game and also play five home games against I-A competition. However, recent NCAA legislation may lesson these requirements. The I-A Sunbelt Conference?s Middle Tennessee State?s president Dr. Sidney McPhee is the chairmen of an 18 member NCAA Board of Directors who, during NCAA meetings held in Nashville this past January, voted to eliminate one home game from the minimum for the next two years. Another measure looking to eliminate or at least lower the 15,000 attendance minimum was tabled until a future meeting in April.

"I believe most I-A schools want the legislation to pass. In fact, 15,000 may be too little of a number. I wouldn't be opposed in having this number at 20,000 or 25,000", Fullerton said.


Am I reading it right? Is the legislation contemplating lowering the standards for DI-A football membership (i.e. fewer required home games and lower minimum attendance criteria)? Fullerton's comments seem to contradict the attendance minimum legislation.

I liked the objectivity in the article, although it would be nice to know what the Idaho administration thinks of moving back to the BSC. I don't think that they would look too favorably on it, but I may be wrong.

Craig

[Bisonfan1234]

It's obvious that Boise State wants Idaho to go back to D1AA so they'll be the only D1A show in the state.

Also obvious that Idaho doesn't want to go down to D1AA.

[Bison_Kent]

The 15,000 attendence and 5 games against I-A competition are the current laws as of two years ago, I believe.

The lowering to 4 I-A home games is legislation that just passed a week or so ago. The lowering of the 15,000 attendence clause was tabled to an April meeting.

And thanks everyone for your compliments.

[BisonInTexas]

I guess I am just confused when Fullerton states that he thinks that the attendance minimum for DI-A is too low, yet he thinks that everyone in DI-A wants the legislation (the lowering of the minimum attendance) to pass. That is the contradiction I was referring to.

Other than trying to wrap my brain around that after a long day, I thought it was a good article.

Craig

[Bison_Kent]

Fullerton wants to see a larger desparity between I-A and I-AA. By doing this, there would be less schools looking to move up from I-AA to I-A.


He does not want the smaller legilation to come true. But this looks like what is happening.

This looks to be a mistake on my part. The legislation Fullerton was referring to was the current legislation (15,000 atttendence, 5 I-A home game minimums).

[Bisonfan1234]

Kent, i don't see what the big deal is anyway... in a couple years the NCAA and BCS are going to be seperate, am i wrong?

[89rabbit]

Bison1234,

Did you forget to take your meds again ??? ;)

[Bison_Kent]

There are no indications that I know of that the BCS is breaking away from the NCAA. The fact that the Big 10 commissioner was at the I-AA title game this past year would further show to me that they don't want to break off. I do think that the BCS would like to keep the number of I-A teams at the current level or below, however. I believe there are 117 I-A schools right now. This is why the 15,000 attendence and 5- I-A home game minimums were put in place.

I tend to agree with the Big Sky's Fullerton that if I-A and I-AA wanted to differiciate between themselves a larger attendence clause may be the right thing to do. Right now, many I-AA teams average over the 15,000 number.

[BisonInTexas]

Fullerton wants to see a larger desparity between I-A and I-AA. By doing this, there would be less schools looking to move up from I-AA to I-A.


He does not want the smaller legilation to come true. But this looks like what is happening.

This looks to be a mistake on my part. The legislation Fullerton was referring to was the current legislation (15,000 atttendence, 5 I-A home game minimums).

That makes sense. Thanks for clearing it up for me.

Craig

[tony]

Great article.

I'm stilled confused though. The legislation up for a vote is lowering the 15,000 attendance limit. I think Fullerton would definitely oppose that. I guess we'll see how DI-A feels about it in a couple months.

[Bison_Kent]

This 15,000 minimum being lowered is spearheaded by the president of Middle Tennessee State. He is the chairman of this NCAA committee. From what I know, this committee legislates any rules and regulations.

Middle Tennessee State is similar to Idaho. They are a member of the Sunbelt Conference and average just about the 15,000 or a little below for their attendence.

I think the Sun Belt is the only conference that will favor this new 15,000 attendence minimum as a whole but since one of their school's presidents is the chairman of this committee, maybe it will pass. The measure was tabled until April so we will see then if this lowered or not until then.

[GoAgs]

I like the 15,000 number. If you can't get 15,000 you don't belong in I-A. Any of the borderline I-A teams can pull in 20,000+ for one game per year (Homecoming, Parents weekend etc.) but then you look at the late season games and some are getting 5,000-10,000. The teams that are getting crowds of 5,500 for their late season home games just don't belong. 15,000 gives teams like Nevada and Boise State some ability to have a few down seasons but still retain I-A status. If it were pumped up to 25,000 then a solid I-A program like Boise could have a couple of down seasons and terrible weather and be out of I-A football, which doesn't make sense at all.

Fullerton would be happy if the I-A requirement was 50,000. He would be able to keep Montana and on top of that get back Idaho and maybe Nevada/BSU. Montana is the only program in the Big Sky that has drawn well for football in the last couple of seasons. If they were lost the Big Sky would be a lesser conference than the new GWC.

[Bisonfan1234]

It should be more like 30,000. If you can't average that then you're not a D1A team IMO.

Yes i know this would shift down teams that are already D1A teams now.

[GoAgs]

So Boise State isn't a D1 team and two years ago Cal would have been be fighting for I-A status?

[IowaBison]

I think 30,000 is a good number. Even my lowly Iowa State averages 40,000 and that place seems empty to me many weeks.

[Bisonfan1234]

So Boise State isn't a D1 team and two years ago Cal would have been be fighting for I-A status?

This team is right on the verge of being able to compete and every few years they seem to have a top 25 class. However, if they can't get 30,000 coming to every game...they aren't making the big bucks...which is what D1A is all about.

[IowaBison]

I've changed my mind, I don't see why there should be attendance requirements at all. If a school can field a team that is anywhere near profitable, even if being supported primarily by alumni who cares if only 12,000 people show up on Saturday?

[JACKGUY]

I agree with the post above. There is no other sport that has an attendence requirement to maintain membership. I don't see the correlation. Is basketball next? Do you get dropped to DII if you maintain 10,000 average?

[Bisonfan1234]

Tell that to the BCS. If there is any type of profit sharing (i'm sure there is ), they don't want to be flooded with these little schools who care barely draw 15,000 fans per game. These schools neither contribute to the overall profit pool and take large amounts from it.

This is probably the biggest sticking point between the NCAA and BCS. This is why the big schools are going to split away and share the riches only between themselves.

I agree that the talent gap is closing, which is why schools like Marshall, Northern IL, CO St, Fresno St, Boise St, etc are able to compete. But they simply don't have the massive fan bases of the BCS schools.

This is why i'm going to say 30000 (maybe even higher) is going to be the average amount of fans needed to join the new BCS football conference.

[89rabbit]

Bison 1234,

I disagree. What makes the NCAA basketball fun is a team like Valpo, Gonzaga, Creighton can go along ways. That is becoming more true for football as well. You pointed out some of the smaller schools that are coming on we could add TCU, Boise St., Northern Ill. and many others.

I don't think the BCS schools will pull away because of Basketball and because what makes the NCAA great is that most everywhere has a NCAA school. Somehow as a fan you feel connected. Take that connection away and they are nothing better then Semi-Pro teams and I for one would lose a lot of interest if the BCS schools pulled out.

[Bisonfan1234]

BCS is going to be a semi-pro league for football and basketball.

It's true that in basketball it's even easier for smaller teams to compete with the big teams.

But just because they compete doesn't mean anything financially.

Those small teams draw from the revenue sharing and give little back. The big guys are tired of losing all their money tot he little schools.

It's all about the money.

[89rabbit]

The little schools give us the Cinderella stories which adds interest and TV viewers that is what drives the money (that sense of connection, that I was talking about).

No one wants to see the same schools win year after year (look at the NBA ratings in the '80s when it was always the Lakers and Celtics, it took Jordan coming along to save the league). *What would baseball be if all we had was the American League East and National League West. *Do you think fan interest and revenue would go up or down?

We already have Pro Football and Pro Basketball, their is no market for the "Big" schools to form their own Semi-Pro leagues. *I think that the BSC schools are smart enough not to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. *I also think their administrators want to educate kids and not run Pro Sports franchises. *

I think this talk about pulling away is just leverage to get as much $$$ out of the NCAA (never said the administrators weren't greedy). *They will stay in the fold, there is too much money at stake to rock the boat.

[Bison_Kent]

Plus, what do you do with the basketball powers that are I-AA in football? I doubt Georgetown, Villanova, UMass, or Rhode Island would like to be in second division after all have gone deep in the NCAA Tournament or even have won national titles. Also, what do you do with the basketball and no football schools like Marquette, DePaul, and St. Louis? All these schools have done fairly well as well in the NCAA tournament. Marquette was in the Final Four a year ago.

I think the NCAA will have the big schools and the smaller ones alike. The smaller schools (in terms of football) will not stand to be in a second rate division.

[Bisonfan1234]

There is a reason these schools are called BCS schools. Remember BCS football conferences?

Schools not in BCS leagues (regardless of how well they've done in the tournament) are not big schools financially.

They only want the biggest, richest schools in the nation.

These schools have the most fans and get the TV deals, so yes, you WILL be watching them on TV.

I would even go as far as to say that fans of these big schools wouldn't give a crap of the NCAA dissolved right now and every school became an independent as long as their conference ramained and they got to see their schools on tv.

There can be cindirella stories with all big schools as well. Minnesota in football this year was just that. I was fully confident that they would beat Michigan and what a game that was (although they did lose).

The NCAA will still be around, it will just become a little fish in the pond next to the BCS whale. Pretty much what the NAIA is to the NCAA now.

[89rabbit]

Ya, and the BCS will have field turf at all stadiums, and majority rule is BAD, and we never went to the Moon, and LBJ killed Kennedy. It all makes sense to me now. Thank you Bisonfan1234 thank you! ::)

[BisonInTexas]

Wait, I thought that we brought Field Turf back from the moon! Where else would you get something that was that much better than grass?

And I thought that LBJ killed JFK with a Hail Mary pass - a perfect one that didn't go that far and came straight down. ;D

Craig

[Bisonguy]

That little NASA rover thing found Field Turf on Mars today. ;D