PDA

View Full Version : Anti-BCS faction forming in DI



BisonInTexas
07-23-2003, 05:13 PM
This is somewhat off-topic, but the Dallas Morning News reported the following article today (the DMN requires (free) registration to view, so I am quoting the full article for everyone's convenience).

This has some ramifications for NDSU in that it shows that Idaho isn't going to come back to the Big Sky (at least not without a fight) like many hope they will, and may change the thinking of Big Sky members on accepting NDSU and SDSU. *

I personally abhor the BCS system and hope we have a true national championship in DI-A football eventually, so I fully support this, regardless if it affects NDSU's bid for conference membership.

Craig



BCS critics unite

07/23/2003

By AL CARTER / The Dallas Morning News

College football moved a step closer to open revolt Tuesday when a group of presidents challenging the Bowl Championship Series announced the formation of a coalition to fight for greater consideration on issues in the NCAA's Division I-A ranks.

Blasting the BSC as a cartel and a possible violation of antitrust laws, officials representing 44 schools announced a new alliance - the Presidential Coalition for Athletics Reform - to press grievances against the BCS and the NCAA.

Tulane president Scott Cowen, who chaired a Tuesday teleconference during which the coalition was formed, said the group plans to push for a revamping of the bowl selection process, tighter academic standards and a reconsideration of tougher criteria for Division I-A membership.

The rallying point for the group was clearly the BCS, a coalition of five major conferences that sets the criteria for participation in major bowl games, including the national championship game in Division I-A.

"The BCS," Cowen said, "is anti-competitive, has the characteristics of a cartel, and we welcome the fact that there will be congressional inquiries looking into the BCS."

Six conferences - the Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-10, Southeastern, Atlantic Coast and Big East - make up the BCS.

Cowen said the anti-BCS coalition consists of five conferences - the Western Athletic, Conference USA, Sun Belt, Mid-American and Mountain West - as well as independents. He said 44 of the 52 non-BCS-aligned schools have joined the coalition. That includes WAC member SMU, C-USA member TCU and Sun Belt member North Texas.

Cowen said coalition members have agreed to attend a meeting proposed Monday by the BCS oversight committee. That meeting, called to discuss concerns of the non-BCS schools, is set for Sept. 8 in Chicago.

Cowen stressed the importance of having a "two-way conversation." Returning fire to the BCS' refusal to consider an expanded playoff format, he urged both sides to "come to the discussion with an open mind."

Comments by officials of the non-BCS group indicated a major conflict ahead.

Bill Greiner, president of the University of Buffalo, called the actions of BCS-affiliated schools "classic cartel stuff" and compared the BCS to John D. Rockefeller's oil monopoly in the 19th century.

"There are some people who are, or think they are, the haves," Greiner said. "And for reasons that escape me, they intend to do their damnedest to beat on the have-nots."

Cowen said it is not the intent of the new coalition to force membership into the BCS. Said Cowen: "Our preference would be that the BCS system go away completely and be replaced by some other system - just like we have in every other NCAA-sponsored sport."

Cowen acknowledged that Tulane has discussed the BCS with antitrust lawyers and hinted at litigation.

"That would be a very, very last result, as far as I'm concerned," he said. "It would not be productive for higher education for our institutions to be suing each other. But we cannot rule out any options right now."

Cowen said his group also plans to fight tougher NCAA standards, most involving higher funding, for maintaining I-A membership. The standards are set to go into effect next year.

Rice president Malcolm Gillis said the new requirements are "well designed to try to reduce the number of schools in Division I-A."

"They want to drive people out of competition at the Division I-A level," Greiner said. "That, I think, is just plain, flat-out wrong."

E-mail acarter@dallasnews.com

tony
07-23-2003, 10:09 PM
I wouldn't cry if the rest of the NCAA kicked the BCS out the NCAA in all sports.

All the other 300 or so members would have to do to bring them under control or force them out is put a cap on athletic budgets depending on division - say something like $12 million for a DI program with football, $6 million for DII, and $2 million for DIII.

BisonInTexas
07-24-2003, 12:40 AM
I wouldn't cry if the rest of the NCAA kicked the BCS out the NCAA in all sports.

All the other 300 or so members would have to do to bring them under control or force them out is put a cap on athletic budgets depending on division - say something like $12 million for a DI program with football, $6 million for DII, and $2 million for DIII.





I agree, but I think that would bring about the second scenario - the BCS conferences would simply take their game outside of the NCAA to a super-division or new collegiate association. Come to think of it, that is what they are trying to do with DI-A football anyway. It all comes down to who brings the most money to the table for the schools - the BCS with their made-for-TV bowl games, or the NCAA, with the fat NCAA BB tourney money. It will be an interesting scenario to see play out.

Craig

tony
07-24-2003, 12:53 AM
As I want the BCS either to reform or leave the NCAA altogether, I'd be happy either way - they either accept limits to their athletic budgets or they leave.

In the long, the former would be better for their universities than the latter because they will lose all credibility by leaving the NCAA.

The_Sicatoka
07-29-2003, 01:40 PM
All the other 300 or so members would have to do to bring them under control or force them out is put a cap on athletic budgets depending on division - say something like $12 million for a DI program with football, $6 million for DII, and $2 million for DIII.


The newest members in a division advocate mandatory smaller expenditures to the larger budgeted, longer standing members of the division. Interesting.

BisonInTexas
07-29-2003, 02:40 PM
The newest members in a division advocate mandatory smaller expenditures to the larger budgeted, longer standing members of the division. Interesting.

Who said anything about the newest members of the division? I assume you are sideways referring to NDSU as advocating a budget cap when they move up to DI, when the reason that they are leaving DII is due to the influx of smaller schools voting to reduce scholarship levels. I don't know where you came up with that one - show me where NDSU said it wanted to play DIA football and be involved with the BCS or stated that they wanted to reduce the scholarship levels of DIAA. On the other hand, what is happening to DII is a fact as proven by the downward trend of maximum scholarships in football since its inception in 1973 (or was it 1974?).

Tony was referring to one scenario in how to eliminate the BCS. It is a rather unlikely one, as the NCAA would reorganize before it would allow 50-75% cuts in the budgets of BCS schools. Regardless, there was no mention of "the newest members" advocating a budget cap in his scenario.

Craig

mojobison
07-29-2003, 04:39 PM
Four questions for The Sicatoka:

Does Tony speak for NDSU?
Is NDSU going D1 without the intention of funding the maximum number of scholarships? Is putting a spending cap on each division the same as conferences like the NSIC moving up to D2 and then trying to lower the number of scholarships other schools can offer? Can a person be opposed to $50 million budgets on one hand and be against cutting scholarships on the other?

If you want to say somebody is a hypocrite, try being a man and say it instead of implying it.

The_Sicatoka
07-29-2003, 05:35 PM
The statement was "a DI program with football" with no specification beyond that. A spending cap has similar effects as a scholarship limit reduction: You are lowering the limit of what they can spend the money they have on. I was surprised to see it brought up by fans of a school who just used the other side of the conversation as a basis for a divisional change.

I've wondered why "level of play" (divisions) isn't set by what the schools spend on programs, so I don't completely disagree with the concept.

And, no, tony doesn't speak for 'SU just as I don't for UND.

mojobison
07-29-2003, 06:39 PM
NDSU is not going D1 because of spending limits - there are none.

This is probably too fine a point for a UND grad to understand, but spending caps and scholarship maximums are not the same thing. BCS schools have doubled and tripled the amount of money they spend on athletics while decreasing the number of scholarships they offer.