A New Division For Power Conferences?

[NDWorld247]

Board adopts new Division I structure | NCAA Public Home Page - NCAA.org

This is one of the most significant, positive changes the NCAA has made in recent years. It's going to be interesting to see what autonomous rule changes the Power 5 put on the table in the near future.

What about the push to go to nine conference games? I think that is where ND will get some pressure. It seems like that is one of the biggest things being pushed, especially by the Pac 12 schools since they already play the nine games.

I don't think ND will feel any pressure from the 9-game movement. If anyone feels pressure, it will be the ACC and SEC but they hold enough votes to block any movement in that direction IF they stick together, which should be a real concern to those that oppose it within the two conferences as there is dissention amongst the schools. I am not sure if it's that big of an issue though as both of those conferences have instituted a 9th game vs. Power 5 rule and, politically, it's probably not smart for the Pac12, Big12 and Big10 to push the SEC and ACC around right out of the gate. It may be better for the other three conferences to allow the SEC and ACC to make that decision on their own in the near future.

Notre Dame wouldn't fall under any conference legislation and I'm sure any pressure would be met with a simple rule guaranteeing ND plays nine or ten Power 5 schools every season, which we do anyway and I'm sure Swarbrick/ND would agree to in order to stay in the Power 5 good graces, rather than pressure to join a conference (ACC) for football. The main issue at play with the 9-game movement is that everyone is playing relatively even schedules and there are few in the country that would argue ND's schedule gives them an advantage as it pertains to the playoffs.

 

[T Town Tommy]

This is one of the most significant, positive changes the NCAA has made in recent years. It's going to be interesting to see what autonomous rule changes the Power 5 put on the table in the near future.




I don't think ND will feel any pressure from the 9-game movement. If anyone feels pressure, it will be the ACC and SEC but they hold enough votes to block any movement in that direction IF they stick together, which should be a real concern to those that oppose it within the two conferences as there is dissention amongst the schools. I am not sure if it's that big of an issue though as both of those conferences have instituted a 9th game vs. Power 5 rule and, politically, it's probably not smart for the Pac12, Big12 and Big10 to push the SEC and ACC around right out of the gate. It may be better for the other three conferences to allow the SEC and ACC to make that decision on their own in the near future.

Notre Dame wouldn't fall under any conference legislation and I'm sure any pressure would be met with a simple rule guaranteeing ND plays nine or ten Power 5 schools every season, which we do anyway and I'm sure Swarbrick/ND would agree to in order to stay in the Power 5 good graces, rather than pressure to join a conference (ACC) for football. The main issue at play with the 9-game movement is that everyone is playing relatively even schedules and there are few in the country that would argue ND's schedule gives them an advantage as it pertains to the playoffs.

Agree for the most part. But the B1G is still at eight games, correct?

 

[NDWorld247]

Agree for the most part. But the B1G is still at eight games, correct?

They voted last year to begin playing a 9-game conference schedule in 2016.

 

[T Town Tommy]

They voted last year to begin playing a 9-game conference schedule in 2016.

I thought so but wasn't sure. I am in favor of the nine game schedule as well. The SEC needs to make that happen.

 

[Irish#1]

So, how do the schools offer stipends or full cost in the face of Title IX?

Brilliant move by the "have nots" in D1. They know the power grabbers will have to pay every athlete or face a lawsuit. My guess is the power conferences will decide against paying because there are a lot of schools that already operate in the red or barely break even.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Brilliant move by the "have nots" in D1. They know the power grabbers will have to pay every athlete or face a lawsuit. My guess is the power conferences will decide against paying because there are a lot of schools that already operate in the red or barely break even.

They will just cut out other sports to make it work if needed. That's the negative that seems to get lost in the argument to compensate college athletes. The schools in the power conferences that barely break even will have no choice but to reduce the number of sports programs they offer thus reducing scholarships.

 

[D-BOE34]

Florida State finds a way to pay Jameis Winston

Schools already have an account to help athletes. I am sure someone will find a loophole to all of this now that it's exposed.

As for new Power 5 schedules. I am all for 10 games against power 5 with a rotation of teams. That way Bama or FSU or ND doesn't call Indiana and Minnesota to sign a 10 year deal or something along those lines. Limit games vs certain conferences within an amount of years. Also limit same teams beyond a set OOC schedule.

EX: ND plays 9 ACC every year. Can only rotate 2 teams per conference over a 5 year period. So 9 acc, 2 SEC, and 1 free pick inside FBS (Navy).

I am sure someone here can do the math to make it better suited but a formula that will keep teams from picking cupcakes each year. Maybe something like you can't play same OOC team until you have played every team in their side of their conference? I just feel like it can be done while also keeping teams from being sneaky within the Power 5.

 

[Irish#1]

They will just cut out other sports to make it work if needed. That's the negative that seems to get lost in the argument to compensate college athletes. The schools in the power conferences that barely break even will have no choice but to reduce the number of sports programs they offer thus reducing scholarships.

Wouldn't surprise me, unless they can get an exemption for football like they did with Title IX.

 

[Legacy]

The 4 things to know about the new NCAA's autonomy structure

Autonomy and What I Think it Means for College Football

 

[Irish#1]

This is going to get real interesting. I want to see how all of these schools from the Power 5 come to an agreement on how much each athlete should get, or will they let each school determine that on their own?

 

[Legacy]

The NCAA's new Governance structure for these decisions

The NCAA's new Governance structure for these decisions

This is going to get real interesting. I want to see how all of these schools from the Power 5 come to an agreement on how much each athlete should get, or will they let each school determine that on their own?

Board adopts new Division I structure (first posted by ResLife Hero above)

This details the new governance model and Council as well as voting rules for proposals for changes.

 

[PANDFAN]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>The Beginning of the End: What Power 5 "autonomy" means for <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NotreDame?src=hash">#NotreDame</a>: <a href="http://t.co/FD1UWihNnB">http://t.co/FD1UWihNnB</a></p>— Keith Arnold (@KeithArnold) <a href="https://twitter.com/KeithArnold/statuses/497789862788227072">August 8, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[woolybug25]

Even though Notre Dame has never played an FCS team and plays almost exclusively Power Five opponents already, Irish coach Brian Kelly said he would be against it if it meant no longer playing Navy.

Kelly said removing Navy from Notre Dame's schedule would be "a deal-breaker." Even with teams playing tougher schedules, Kelly said he doesn't favor teams with losing records playing in bowls.

Majority of Power Five coaches want Power Five-only schedules - ESPN


We're in a tough position here. While the essence of a "Power 5" would be better for football, better for Notre Dame and better for fans (imo). Navy isn't on our schedule because they are a cupcake, they are on our schedule because of historical significance and because, frankly... we owe them.

How Navy saved Notre Dame after World War II – the team’s shared histories - IrishCentral.com

 

[Whiskeyjack]

We're in a tough position here. While the essence of a "Power 5" would be better for football, better for Notre Dame and better for fans (imo). Navy isn't on our schedule because they are a cupcake, they are on our schedule because of historical significance and because, frankly... we owe them.

That concept is entirely foreign in the modern mercenary world of CFB.

 

[woolybug25]

That concept is entirely foreign in the modern mercenary world of CFB.

That's unfortunate.

 

[NDohio]

Majority of Power Five coaches want Power Five-only schedules - ESPN


We're in a tough position here. While the essence of a "Power 5" would be better for football, better for Notre Dame and better for fans (imo). Navy isn't on our schedule because they are a cupcake, they are on our schedule because of historical significance and because, frankly... we owe them.

How Navy saved Notre Dame after World War II – the team’s shared histories - IrishCentral.com

Yeah, but CBK doesn't give a flip about history or tradition. See: Field Turf, Jumbotrons and Alma Mater.

 

[irishog77]

That concept is entirely foreign in the modern mercenary world of CFB.

Wow. That really is true. From the fans to the "media" to the players to the coaches and everywhere down the line.

I do have a few non ND fans that are aware of the ND-Navy history and like the story...but the vast majority of peeps out there, even if they are aware of the story, probably don't give a shit.

 

[IrishLax]

I mean the obvious solution... especially for the simple fact of scheduling logistics... is to make it all Power 5 + 1. So 11 games versus Power 5 teams, and 1 game versus any FBS level team. All problems solved. Even 10 + 2 people would find acceptable and would be a HUGE increase in the overall quality of games.

 

[T Town Tommy]

That concept is entirely foreign in the modern mercenary world of CFB.

Maybe... but the SEC said the same thing about keeping eight games in order to preserve traditional rivals and was blasted by many for it. Does Alabama vs Tenn mean much to fans outside the south? No. But don't ask a Bama or UT fan what generally the third Saturday in October means. I am in favor of nine conference games, but we do need to find a way to keep some of these rivalries in place that may very well be gone in the near future.

I agree that ND should do everything in their power to save the Navy matchup. As it's been stated prior, the two schools have historically helped each other in times of need. To do away with that game would go against some long standing principles and what CFB really should be about.

 

[T Town Tommy]

We've already seen that $ trumps traditional rivalries w/ the loss of Mizzou/KU and TX/aTm.

Not necessarily. Bruised egos ended those rivalries much more than $$$.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Maybe... but the SEC said the same thing about keeping eight games in order to preserve traditional rivals and was blasted by many for it.

That's a little different. We play Navy not just because it's traditional, but because we owe them a serious debt, and have pledged to repay it by keeping them on our schedule forever. I can't think of any other rivalry in CFB with a similar history.

The recommendations currently on the table wouldn't threaten any meaningful SEC rivalries.

To go to nine games would create a situation where the traditional rivalry games would only be played once every six years or so. Has nothing to do with other schools. If that's the future of CFB then so be it. But it's sad IMO.

The SEC could easily fix that. If the game between 'Bama and UT is important enough, you can continue to play it every year. Current intra-conference scheduling rules aren't much of a counter-argument.

 

[T Town Tommy]

That's a little different. We play Navy not just because it's traditional, but because we owe them a serious debt, and have pledged to repay it by keeping them on our schedule forever. I can't think of any other rivalry in CFB with a similar history.

The recommendations currently on the table wouldn't threaten any meaningful SEC rivalries.

Try telling that to a Ga fan playing Auburn. Or UT and Bama. Or Fla and LSU. They are just as relevent to the SEC fan base as ND vs Navy is to theirs. Relevent in different ways of course, but still just as relevent.

 

[IrishLax]

Can't think of any other rivalry games where the visiting team is CHEERED before and after the game like Navy-Notre Dame.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Try telling that to a Ga fan playing Auburn. Or UT and Bama. Or Fla and LSU. They are just as relevent to the SEC fan base as ND vs Navy is to theirs. Relevent in different ways of course, but still just as relevent.

They aren't threatened by these recommendations. If they're threatened at all, it's by the SEC's current intra-conference scheduling conventions. Which Slive could change at the drop of a hat. Drop the AA cupcake games, and you would have room for every meaningful rivalry and then some.

 

[T Town Tommy]

That's a little different. We play Navy not just because it's traditional, but because we owe them a serious debt, and have pledged to repay it by keeping them on our schedule forever. I can't think of any other rivalry in CFB with a similar history.

The recommendations currently on the table wouldn't threaten any meaningful SEC rivalries.



The SEC could easily fix that. If the game between 'Bama and UT is important enough, you can continue to play it every year. Current intra-conference scheduling rules aren't much of a counter-argument.

Maybe... but in the push for schedule equality - especially coming from some other conferences - our traditional rivalies would probably not hold up.

I just think it is half a dozen of one and six of another. Every fan base has what they consider traditional games. And every fan base has their reasons. And every fan base is correct. But with the future of CFB heading the way it is, I am afraid a lot of those rivalries will be lost. SO be it I guess... all in the name of advancement - in the pocketbook.

 

[Irish#1]

Can't really blame them for their cynicism. That's a reasonable assumption for pretty much every other team in the nation.

Though if we were scheduling like that, I'd rather play a consistently more difficult team than Navy, if only to save our DL from cut blocks.

Navy's been pretty difficult over the last decade. Look at the other teams that face them for the first time and how they fared. OSU squeeked out a win a few years ago and IU ended up on the short end of the stick last year. But I agree about the cut blocks.

 

[irishog77]

How would ADDING an additional conference game threaten a conference rivalry?

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Maybe... but in the push for schedule equality - especially coming from some other conferences - our traditional rivalies would probably not hold up.

I just think it is half a dozen of one and six of another. Every fan base has what they consider traditional games. And every fan base has their reasons. And every fan base is correct. But with the future of CFB heading the way it is, I am afraid a lot of those rivalries will be lost. SO be it I guess... all in the name of advancement - in the pocketbook.

The 10+2 or 11+1 suggestions would only threaten those rivalries that include teams not in a "Power-5" conference. ND-Navy is the only one we care about, so 11+1 would be fine for us. Check the list at the top of this page; assuming 11+1, Utah would have to pick between BYU and Utah St. (they'd clearly pick the former), but other than that... no meaningful rivalry is threatened here.

What's the downside with forcing everyone to completely clear their schedules of cupcakes? Almost every SEC game would be compelling, and as long as everyone is playing a similar gauntlet of quality opponents, there's no disadvantage.

 

[T Town Tommy]

They aren't threatened by these recommendations. If they're threatened at all, it's by the SEC's current intra-conference scheduling conventions. Which Slive could change at the drop of a hat. Drop the AA cupcake games, and you would have room for every meaningful rivalry and then some.

That's obviously changing moving forward with the Power 5. But to play every team in our conference - in the name of schedule equality - means that our traditional rival games occur once every six years. I don't think ND would want that arrangement with their Navy game. And for good reason. But to ask other conferences to forego their traditional games is a little condescending.

 

[Irish#1]

Maybe... but the SEC said the same thing about keeping eight games in order to preserve traditional rivals and was blasted by many for it. Does Alabama vs Tenn mean much to fans outside the south? No. But don't ask a Bama or UT fan what generally the third Saturday in October means. I am in favor of nine conference games, but we do need to find a way to keep some of these rivalries in place that may very well be gone in the near future.

I agree that ND should do everything in their power to save the Navy matchup. As it's been stated prior, the two schools have historically helped each other in times of need. To do away with that game would go against some long standing principles and what CFB really should be about.

Not being a smart ass here, but I find that comment interesting. The two times I was in Knoxville for Irish/Vols, UT fans typically told me the two biggest rivals were UGA and UF. Does Bama consider it a bigger rivalry than UT maybe? Granted I only had a small sampling of a few UT fans.