This thread is to discuss possible reforms for NCAA football.

1. The most popular is, of course, a playoff. Since there is a playoff thread, this is is for how do we convience the powers that be to get one.

2. Title IX. Some reports suggest that 30 to 50 % of D1A schools are losing money. While I believe that there are too many 1A teams, the threat to FB as we know it is REAL. My suggestion is that Title 9 be ammended to say that money spent BEYOND WHAT THE SPORT TAKES IN be split evenly. I.e. FB and men's BB would count as $0.00 since that take in more than they spend. The emphisis would shift to marketable sports, but that would be the price to keep FB.

I have ideas for how to influence Congress if anyone is interested.

3. Many fans of non-BCS schools are understandably irritated that legacy BCS conference programs that do not even try to compete in FB still get the BIG $ from their conferences, while up and comming non-BCS schools are left out of the BCS. Often, they have trouble scheduling good teams to prove their BCS worth.

I don't have an answer for this one. I previously suggested a requirement for minimum wins to stay in a BCS conference and conference scheduling of some ooc games. Others have suggested that bowl teams keep half the money and split the rest. Any suggestions? ???

4. I AM SURE that I have overlooked at LEAST a couple of needed reforms. Any suggestions? ???

FBfan

FBfan,

I agree with you on Title IX, excellent suggestion, but I think we could stretch Title IX to serve the playoff argument. Many institutions will react to protect themselves from a legal attack that appears dangerous, even if they feel they are in the right. I'd suggest that the non-BCS programs focus on the detriment their women's programs face beacuse of their being left out of the BCS. With a bigger share of the pie, their atheltic programs as a whole, particularly the women's programs, most of which generate little or no revenue (notable exceptions at Tennessee and UConn, both BCS schools), could take dramatic steps forward. Along that same line the schools could argue that a playoff system in which their conference champion was guaranteed a seed would be even more beneficial.

I think the fundamental inequities of 6 conferences locking everyone else out should be enough, but pity won't really push an agenda. Fear of legal action might. If the non-BCS schools put a Title IX slant to their grievances, that will turn some heads. If not, it's time to get on the phone to the usual cast of hell raisers (there's gotta be some special interest groups who make a living publicizing issues for trial lawyers to pounce on). It's playing a bit dirty, but the BCS conferences really aren't giving the non-BCS guys a choice. There's not even a plan in place to allow them to earn the right to enter the BCS based on performance.

The MWC should lead the way with this agenda. Adding a Title IX slant to the proposal made by San Diego State's AD

http://goaztecs.ocsn.com/genrel/bay-index.html
(headings 7. and 8. on the agenda)

would be an excellent start.

Non-BCS schools probably won't ever call the shots, but they could add enough pressure to have a playoff system openly discussed on more than just sports radio. Their complaints may also provide a justification to the powers-that-be for making the change to a playoff system. They can't just tell everyone "because we'll make more money." If they can dress this up as a change not only for the fans benefit, but in order to assure fundamental fairness in support of Title IX, that'll be an easier pill to swallow (or at least it'll sound better on C-Span).

NEWS FLASH

One of the links today (Jan 13, '03) is to :
www.indystar.com/print/articles/4/015293-036.html
The article quotes Dr. Brand (the new president of the NCAA) about proposing as 'reform' to "postseason bans for teams, not just individuals, because of poor preformance in the classroom." He also went on to say "extra schlorships or more revenue have been mentioned as possible incentives" to improve.

I have already heard those suggestions before from Vandy's president. Vandy has shown that they do not want to compete in the SEC, but they want the SEC's money. Virtually all of the C-USA schools are more deserving of revenue sharing than Vandy! AND THEY WANT MORE!! There are words for that kind of behavior, but I will only say that I would not leave my wallet laying around in the same room with him.

Yes; classroom work is important! However, there are overlooked issues that MUST be addressed. The prime one is players leaving early for the NFL or NBA. Many of thes players gratuate, but they do so after the time window to count. The time window to graduate should not start untill their NFL or NBA career is over.

The second is that on top tier teams, you will have good players that are beat out by better ones. They wind up transferring, and graduating from other programs, but count as drop-outs for the 1st school. MY suggestion is that to transfer and play sports, a student must be on schedule to graduate. He(she) would then not count toward graduation rates for the 1st school.

Vandy does not have either of these problems because anyone good enough to play in the pros, or even start on a top tier team go elsewhere! The 'players' have no where else to go. (Yes, I am harsh, but Vandy deserves it!)

FBfan

FBfan,

If they targeted schools like Marshall (If FSU wouldn't let Moss in but he survived at marshall, that's saying something . . .) or Fresno State where there are very strong suspicions of academic foul play, that'd be one thing. But just penalizing schools for not graduating enough players is bogus. If they're gonna do that, then schools that don't produce on the field should get hammered financially. Duke, Vandy, Baylor, and Northwestern should lose half of their share of the conference pie every season they fail to go over .500. It's not fair for those schools to cry foul over the graduation rates at other schools while they rake in cash from the big business of college football. If they want clean hands, then they shouldn't get a share of the profits. If they are consistently bowl eligible with scholar atheletes, then, maybe, they have the right to complain.

It's funny that the real scholar athletes, the service academy players, don't complain like this. Only the BCS conference cellar dwellars. If anyone should complain, it's Air Force. However high the standards at Duke and Vandy may be, I have no doubt that its easier for scholarship players there to skate by than it is at Air Force. Their rules are ironclad. And Air Force actually wins games. I'm positive that over thelast 20 years, Vandy has sent many more players to the NFL than Air Force.

ACCNole2,

You are preaching to the choir, but keep it up! Others are listening too! My question to Vandy's president is: If Vandy is so tough, why is the graduation rate so high? Could to be the the tough standards have to do more with daddy's bank account than the students work habits? (Admittedly, there IS a connection.)

If you base graduation rates against each schools overall graduation rates it would be more fair. Should Vandy be penalized for having 'players' who never start?
Perhaps athletes who don't meet certains standards should not count toward graduation since they are not really athletes?! REAL competive athletes want to win!
If Vandy had real student-athletes instead of student-bookworms masquarading as student-athletes, they could win at least 2 conference games per year. A SEC team should also win 2 non-conference games per year.

My suggestion is that their graduation rate be lowered by 25% for each game under 4 that they win.
If they only win 2 games a year, their graduation rate would be listed as a max of 50%.

In all honesty, my previous suggestion of not counting time spent in the pros is fair, and some schools have a lower graduation over all than others. Rocky Top should not be penalized for being a tougher school than the 'doors. After all, if it is too easy, you don't learn anything!

FBfan

Penalty For Failure To Perform

You're penalty suggestion would definitely help even the score if this postseason ban was put in place. Schools like Vandy would also have to consider that if their conference is, by their own standards, an habitual offender, then they're annual conference pot o' gold would be diminished if one of the SEC teams missed a BCS pay day. There's better ways to reward academics, and it's virtually impossible to keep schools totally honest. Some schools protect their athletes very well, and others make little or no effort to put a competitive product on the field. I think we should be honest and look for a system to reward the schools that manage, by some miracle (or financial good fortune) to do both.

Positive Incentive for True Scholar Athlete Programs

My suggestion would be to create a pool separate from the BCS. To qualify for the ranking system, each school would have to graduate beyond a certain rate. In addition, the averge number of players enrolled in one or two programs could only reach a certain percentage (can't have everyone in leisure studies and/or kinesiology). Gpa should be weighed in some manner. All of these factors can be artificially inflated by a school, but by surveying all three factors, I think you'd have about as good an academic screen as possible in place. If you graduate everyone with an average way below 3.0, you're out. If everyone is in the same one or two majors, you know there's something fishy, so you're out. If you're starters average too far below the guys on the bench, you're out.

These factors wouldn't determine a school's ranking, but some basic thresholds would be set for allowing them to be a poll eligible for the special system. The schools that qualify would then be ranked based on their success on the field and strength of schedule, similar to the current BCS system. Vandy would receive more quality points competing in the SEC, but without a minimum number of wins it wouldn't matter. A minimum threshold of wins over IA teams sould be set, probably at 5 or 6. More quality points should be awarded for beating a BCS opponent (so that Air Force wouldn't always be ranked #1). Major points should be awarded for upsetting a ranked opponent.

At the end of the season, the top 2 teams would receive special bowl bids (assuming they aren't already in a bowl and/or a playoff, depending on what system is in place then). They'd play each other out in Hawaii or some fairly fun location. The players would get additional exposure, a fun trip, and a chance to play in a bowl game or two. They're the actual scholar athletes, not the administrators, so they deserve the reward. The coaches would have an additional game for developing and evaluating talent as well as an incentive for future recruits. The coaches are the captain's of the ship, so they should have some incentive for producing in the classroom as well as the football field. The university's themselves would get added (very positive) exposure. That's fair because these schools should be showcased, and they should receive some sort of financial incentive for supporting thier football programs.

My guess is that this year you'd have only 2-4 teams even qualify for the bowl. This year Wake and Air Force would (probably) have been shoe-ins. I'm not so sure that their bowl tie-ins would pay them any more than this theoretical bowl would. Wake and Air Force would actually have been an appealing match-up this year. Most fans will watch any game as long as it's on, and if a service academny team or private school actually went .500 or more, I have no doubt that the game would get decent numbers (at least by Seattle Bowl standards). Attendance would probably be fairly high depending on the location, and the positive press surrounding this thing, especially once it had been running for a couple of years, would be big. Hey, if I still see WNBA coverage, why not this? The NCAA could really pat itself on the back. Only programs committed to producing true scholar athletes would be rewarded.

One more thought on the bowl game incentive idea.

That game might be a realistic enough hope to get folks at Baylor, Rice, Vandy, Navy, Army, and Duke, to reinvest in their football programs, to the extent they aren't already doing that. C-USA, the WAC, and the MWC should get behind the idea, because they're the most likely conferences to field atl least one qualifier. An extra pay day wouldn't hurt them. Once you have most of these programs shooting for at least .500 knowing that they can play in a bowl, I think you'll see them play harder over the last several games just to stay alive.

At any rate, however unlikely that incentive is, it beats the heck out of penalizing people. Fortunately that'll never happen because the conferences want their dough.

fbfan -- an sec team like vandy SHOULD be able to win 2 conference games a year.

the problem is, one of those games is invariably against vandy!!!! :P

Sbro,

Your right! :) Vandy's problems in the SEC are one thing. Their preformance against non BCS schools is another! >:( Perhaps I should post a "dream conference" on the dream thread.

Vandy, Duke, Baylor, Memphis, Wake Forest, Temple

I need 2 or 3 more. Any suggestions for a leave the BCS conference? ??? ;)

In seriousness, most of the gripes that I read on this board are from fans of non BCS schools that feel unfairly left out. A 16 teams playoff is too many. I have not read a way to include teams like Marshall in BCS conferences, or to exclude teams like Vandy. Some turnover would be good, but would break up long standing rivalries.
Any ideas?

FBfan

sbfan,

You're idea for an all academic (but crappy on the field) football league really works. Except for Temple, it works geographically, and one oddball wouldn't kill the whole thing. I'd axe Memphis (I don't think academics are the reason they're losing) and add Army, Navy, and Rice. Wake and Duke will never leave the ACC, but who knows what kind of sports realignment we might see in 10 years. If FSU and the football schools hijack the ACC and force expansion the conference could disintegrate, and the core academic/basketball schools would probably leave and start their own league with some like-minded schools. Baylor, Army, Navy, Rice, and especially Vandy would fit right in.

You'd basically have a southern/mid-atlantic Ivy League with better football, awesome basketball and baseball, and phenomenal academics. There are schools all over the south that would consider moving back to IA in football (they wouldn't have to invest too much to compete in this league) to participate. Even my school Davidson, the tiniest school in IA athletics, fields a decent basketball team and used to play division IA football in the 80's. These schools would probably form a tight clique with fierce rivalries very quicky, and the alums could pour money into and make money from basketball without having to spend too much on football. They'd be set in basketball and academics, which is what these schools really care about anyway.

Maybe Georgetown could field a weak IA team and participate? They'd fit right in to. I bet it would be easy to find 12 members and you could have an Atlantic/Colonial and Southern division. If you combined an Ivy League type rivalry with southern football fanaticism I bet the games would be fun to watch, even if the teams weren't that good. It'd be pretty amusing to see a brawl between two groups of fans in coat and tie and/or uniforms.

sbfan,

I think Marshall will have to wait for someone to move out of C-USA. They have a shot at being added, but I think Temple and SMU have the inside track. Sooner or later TCU is gonna find a way into the Big 12. Maybe they'll dump Baylor, or maybe Missouri or Iowa State will go to the Big 10. Until then, Marshall is probably stuck.

By the time Marshall joins C-USA, I think the BCS will have expanded to include, with certain additional restrictions, the C-USA and MWC champs. I think the key will be for a conference to have adequate attendance, 12 members, and a title game. This will just be for the non-BCS conferences wanting admission to the BCS. The ACC, BE, Pac-10, and Big 10, won't be affected. C-USA is already headed for a title game and USF is going to add another solid program to their ranks. The MWC (unless they're nuts) will raid the WAC for Boise State, Fresno, and will bring in two other programs that will offer as many positives for their conference as possible. In order to be eligible for a BCS bowl, MWC and C-USA conference champs will have to not only win their conference, but win a certain number of games against BCS opponents during the regular season. If they can't schedule the games or can't win them, they'll be stuck in the same old bowl games. But if they manage to win/schedule enough BCS games and they roll through their conference and win the title, they'll be in. It's unlikely that will ever happen, though there wil probably be a near-miss every year. If it ever does happen, then the team will have had such an amazing season that the bowl that's stuck with them probably won't be too unhappy. Boise, Fresno, and Colorado St. are quality programs, but TCU, BYU, and Marshall are probably the only teams that could pull this off, and they'd bring more of an audience than some of the BCS schools would. Anyway, C-USA is probably Marshall's only vehicle into the BCS, or whatever the system will be called then. That's not too much of a longshot.

the all-books conference:

vanderbilt
duke
wake forest
northwestern
army
navy
rice
baylor
air force

and i'm STILL not sure vandy could win two conference games.

The Big XII is going to find it hard to dump Baylor from the conference if it wants to keep the other Texas schools. The Texas legislature would force the rest of the state schools still in the Big XII out of the conference if the Big XII took any action to kick Baylor out.


The traditional football schools of the ACC (FSU,GT, Clemson) will never be able to take over the ACC because of the Tabakky Road schools voting together. Usually whatever the "Big 4" decide, UVA and Maryland simply fall in line. As a lifelong Clemson fan I know for a fact that anything that the ACC could do that would threaten any of the four NC schools will be shot down in short order. ACC commish John Swofford bleeds tarheel blue when he nicks himself shaving, and although there is the normal rivalry between the NC schools....they know that their best interests are served by voting together.

There seems to be a conflict between the FB and BB schools concerning who is the boss. This is especially true in the ACC and BE. Many of the BB schools also seem to think of themselves as elite "academic" schools, while the FB schools favor "universal education." Vandy is definately elitest.

This brings up an idea. Since the FB schools in the ACC and BE have more in common with each other than they do with the BB schools, what if they bolt their conferences and form a new one. The BCS would welcome them. Who would not want Miami (FL), FSU, Pitt, GT, WV,Clemson,Va Tech. If VA,Syracuse,MD or Marshall (pick any 2 or more) also joined, you would have a VERY competitive FB conference with 4 home games each year.

The BB schools with FB teams would probably join together, and if we are lucky, take Vandy with them. ;) :) At that point, you are not to far from the Southern Ivy or all books conference. It might even ease this talk from the NCAA's new elitest president.

FBfan

sbro,

That's pretty cruel . . . and you're probably right!

catdaddy2402,

I'm sure Vandy would pose similar problems for the SEC if they wanted to boot them, and the ACC has a knot of elitist schools that cling pretty tightly together as you've said. UNC in particular ticks me off. You can't have the Ivy League attitude if you have high in-state enrollement with standards WAY below Ivy League, Stanford, Duke, Vandy, etc. Sorry for the personal diatribe there . . .

NC State probably has football school leaing but ultimately the research triangle ties are too tight. Wake is too small and too academically/basketball inclined to go against the other NC schools, even if they aren't chummy with them. UVA just has too much in common with the NC schools to go against them. I think Maryland is the only school that might flip and vote with the football schools. But with a tarheel comissioner, I doubt FSU and the football schools will ever pull that off. I wouldn't be surprised if this got really ugly in a few years. I just hope it happens it doesn't happen after all the major realignments have taken place.

FBfan, I bet it'll take a major catalyst like an ACC split to bring a major shift, but if that ever did happen I wouldn't be surprised if Vandy didn't leave the SEC on its own.