mid major division

wardly · July 10, 2012

Looking ahead, its clear that in Division 1a [old term]there is a big gap between the haves and have nots. Just as Division 1aa was created in about 1978, i can see another split ahead. CUSA,MWC,Sun Belt,MAC,and Big East would form a new mid major division.For example, U.Texas with a $100million+ athletic budget and UL@Monroe with a budget of less that $10million just don't belong in the same division.Thoughts?

stebo · July 10, 2012

I don't see that happening. The examples that you are using are the crazy far flung ones. Most of the ACC schools have budgets in the $40-$50 range while the CUSA schools range from $20-$30 mil. The new system is more about wins and losses. They need us just as much as we need them. It will become nearly impossible to move up (from FCS) in the future - as an invite from a conference needs to take place and the conferences are about tapped out. With the WAC dropping football next year, we should see some stabilization. There is no overnight success - but if you spend the money and have the commitment - a school can change it's destiny. Several schools have been able to move up the ladder over the last few years and with the new point system - all that a school has to do is win and a conference will want to bring them in to get their points that travel with the program. The only way they could pull it off would be to break away from the NCAA completely and if that was going to happen - it would have happened during the last round of negotiations. All of the conference commissioners signed off on the playoff (basically it is a plus one). If a monetary commitment was set up to weed schools out, we would find a way. We just spent over $100 million on facilities and we would up our budget in some way to stay with the have's rather than by pushed back down to the have not's. There are already a ton of requirements for FBS schools regarding minimum number of sports played, scholarships, etc... we have met them every time they have adjusted. About the only other thing the big boys could roll out would be the budget requirements and they couldn't go too much higher than $30-$35 million/year because there are big schools with budgets just above our's. When it comes to budgets - accounting can go a long way.

Edited July 10, 2012 by stebo

trussbussdad · July 10, 2012

major thought on the new system .... wish there was a way to factor in a "cinderella" team out of one of the "mid-majors". we would need to have a 16 team playoff system caping on new years day with the championship game. every year in basketball and baseball, you have an under dog team or two that does well.

forevereagle · July 10, 2012

I thought that was what we just got with this new "Playoff".

MeanGreen61 · July 10, 2012

I hate the term "mid-major".

Rudy · July 11, 2012

I'd hate to see a "mid major" division. That would be the final push to permanently create a gap between the AQ assholes and the rest of us. I think most understand that and would fight to keep it from happening.

greenminer · July 11, 2012

Despite any legal implications, part of me still fears it's only a matter of time before these big boys try and separate from the NCAA and the rest of us to form their own league/division/whatever.

NThomas · July 11, 2012

major thought on the new system .... wish there was a way to factor in a "cinderella" team out of one of the "mid-majors". we would need to have a 16 team playoff system caping on new years day with the championship game. every year in basketball and baseball, you have an under dog team or two that does well.

That's the best thing the BCS was/is good for, matching conference champions from mid-majors (MWC:Boise State, TCU, & Utah; WAC: Boise State & Hawai'i) to compete with champions/at-large teams from AQs. With the new "playoff" system, there'll be no TCU vs. Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl, Boise Stae vs. Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl or Utah vs. Alabama in the Sugar Bowl (all of which the mid-major team they faced). Now when those tie-in teams like the Pac-12 or Big Ten have their conference champions in the 4-team playoff, the next best team in the conference standing will replace them instead of an at-large slot for a mid-major conference champion (if they qualified).

If there's an undefeated team from the Big East, C-USA, MAC, or Sun Belt, it'll be hard for the selection committee to take that 12-0/13-0 team over a 10-2 SEC team. There's no room for Cinderellas in FBS football.

shaft · July 11, 2012

I don't think a split in D1 will occur. Its not in the "haves" best interest.

First of all it would take a lot of politics to let big state schools go off and leave their little buddies behind.

Second, the "have nots" get a vote and wouldn't go willingly.

Third, why would there be more money for the big five conferences? They already make their own tv deals, why would ESPN pay more ACC games if the MWC was in a different division.

Fourth, the "have nots" could simply refuse to play the "haves". Good luck filling out your bowl slots when your mid-level Big Ten teams have to play the SEC teams for their OOC games.

untjim1995 · July 12, 2012

I think the shift will occur, but it will be in phases. I think that the bottom part of the current FBS is definitely at risk of this occuring in the next decade, your SBC and MAC schools. THe next culling could be out aways, but maybe not. That's your current CUSA, MWC, and Big East schools. Not all of the schools in those conferences would get left out, but your Rice's, Tulane's, UAB's, SAn Jose State's, would be at risk, just as we would be. But, I don't think it will happen to CUSA/MWC/BE schools for a longer time out because those schools do have decent budgets, history, and markets. The NCAA has no power over college football, other than "enforcement", which is obviously selective. The threat of eventually having the top 40-50 teams pulling out of the NCAA to form their own coalition is completely possible if the NCAA tried to overstep their bounds in the eyes of the big programs. Besides, legally, there is nothing that forces the NCAA to be the only governing body of college athletics. If it was, then college football would be controlled by the NCAA. What's to say a College Athletics Association wouldn't get formed to "regulate" the new coalition? Its not hard to envision a day where the bigger schools from the BIg XII, SEC, ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12, Notre Dame, and a handful of others would create a football coalition of their own if the NCAA came down too hard on them. ESPN and Fox would be waiting at the door to hand out $$$ that would be incredible if you got a NFL-lite league going. Many will argue that Congress would get involved, but those big schools make up the majority of the legislatures in their states, plus provide economic benefits that far surpass any other schools in their state (i.e. UT and A&M versus anyone else in the state, LSU vs anyone else in LA). If you doubt this, just think of our fair state, where the PUF funds belong to two schools with the most power in the legislature, Texas and A&M. Tech, Houston, North Texas, etc...get squat from that fund. That has been in effect for more than a century!! LSU, the Okie schools, Arkansas all get the same treatment in their own states, in terms of funding, power, media, etc...

For North Texas to have a chance in being included in college athletics, the following this had/have to occur:

1.) The university has to actually care about athletics by actually funding a program at a decent level.--getting better

2.) Build a new stadium--done

3.) Get out of Sun Belt Conference and into a better recognized conference--done, thankfully

4.) Win consistently in conference--to be seen

5.) Beat a few big named programs from the AQs--obivously possible, obviously the hardest hurdle of all.

6.) Have the university continue to grow and get better academically as well--most likely, this is the easiest to foresee

7.) Hope that TCU and SMU fall back big time over the next decade. SMu probably will not be a big hurdle, since the far-flung Big East won't last long-term as it is built now, especially now that AQs are basically done. TCU is a true wild card here. Normally, they have sucked as a member of a conference with the big Texas school, but they went the untraditional route and turned themselves into quite a respectable program. If TCU follows the pattern of the conference mate that they look the most like, Baylor, then I suspect that TCU will be back to its SWC form in less than 5 years. Then again, TCU has the Metroplex to recruit kids to stay closer to home while still being a big city environment, unlike Baylor, and FW really supports TCU as its home-town team, which it didn't really start doing until after the SWC broke up and TCU started winning again. If TCU falls back down, to a Baylor-like level (basically any Baylor season in the Big XII minus the RGIII Heisman year), SMU falls back to its regular place of the last 25 years, and North Texas rises to a place it hasn't seen in the past 35 years, you could see a situation come into play where UNT could be attractive to other schools to have us included in a "new highest level" of college football.--Believe it or not, I actually think this could happen, and actually it could happen faster than anyone could ever imagine if the right things happened in Denton, while the wrong things happened in DFW!!

Edited July 12, 2012 by untjim1995

gksmith · July 12, 2012

It seems to be headed that direction.

The "Big 6" BCS conferences + Notre Dame rule the BCS bowl games (except for the BCS Buster every once in a while) and a non-BCS school has little chance of being in the top 4 in the country.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · July 12, 2012

Unfortunately, I don't think the playoff will change anything. It's still the money schools calling the shots about who gets in.

With that in mind, I've had the same thought as wardly.

stebo · July 12, 2012

Despite any legal implications, part of me still fears it's only a matter of time before these big boys try and separate from the NCAA and the rest of us to form their own league/division/whatever.

I don't think that they would do that. The big boys need the little guys. Plus all the "big boys" are not as big as the real big boys. Not all Big 5 budgets are $100 million, there are quite a few teams with $40 million dollar budgets and they can maintain themselves as bigger than most boys in the current alignment. Plus if it was going to happen, it would have happened before this 12 year deal was struck.

Breaking away from the NCAA isn't just about football. They would be leaving basketball as well. And the NCAA would not allow them to have their own separate league and then have the NCAA handle all the non-revenue sports. Do the big boys want to set up an infrastructure to handle women's golf and bowling? Because if they break away - they would have to manage all sports, not just football. Finally, a school like Vandy that is middle of the pack FBS would become bottom of the bottom. Every school, no matter the level wants to be perceived as higher than a group of others. We need them to show we are with the big leagues and they need us to maintain separation from "someone"

PlummMeanGreen · July 13, 2012

I think the shift will occur, but it will be in phases. I think that the bottom part of the current FBS is definitely at risk of this occuring in the next decade, your SBC and MAC schools. THe next culling could be out aways, but maybe not. That's your current CUSA, MWC, and Big East schools. Not all of the schools in those conferences would get left out, but your Rice's, Tulane's, UAB's, SAn Jose State's, would be at risk, just as we would be. But, I don't think it will happen to CUSA/MWC/BE schools for a longer time out because those schools do have decent budgets, history, and markets. The NCAA has no power over college football, other than "enforcement", which is obviously selective. The threat of eventually having the top 40-50 teams pulling out of the NCAA to form their own coalition is completely possible if the NCAA tried to overstep their bounds in the eyes of the big programs. Besides, legally, there is nothing that forces the NCAA to be the only governing body of college athletics. If it was, then college football would be controlled by the NCAA. What's to say a College Athletics Association wouldn't get formed to "regulate" the new coalition? Its not hard to envision a day where the bigger schools from the BIg XII, SEC, ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12, Notre Dame, and a handful of others would create a football coalition of their own if the NCAA came down too hard on them. ESPN and Fox would be waiting at the door to hand out $$$ that would be incredible if you got a NFL-lite league going. Many will argue that Congress would get involved, but those big schools make up the majority of the legislatures in their states, plus provide economic benefits that far surpass any other schools in their state (i.e. UT and A&M versus anyone else in the state, LSU vs anyone else in LA). If you doubt this, just think of our fair state, where the PUF funds belong to two schools with the most power in the legislature, Texas and A&M. Tech, Houston, North Texas, etc...get squat from that fund. That has been in effect for more than a century!! LSU, the Okie schools, Arkansas all get the same treatment in their own states, in terms of funding, power, media, etc...

For North Texas to have a chance in being included in college athletics, the following this had/have to occur:
1.) The university has to actually care about athletics by actually funding a program at a decent level.--getting better
2.) Build a new stadium--done
3.) Get out of Sun Belt Conference and into a better recognized conference--done, thankfully
4.) Win consistently in conference--to be seen
5.) Beat a few big named programs from the AQs--obivously possible, obviously the hardest hurdle of all.
6.) Have the university continue to grow and get better academically as well--most likely, this is the easiest to foresee
7.) Hope that TCU and SMU fall back big time over the next decade. SMu probably will not be a big hurdle, since the far-flung Big East won't last long-term as it is built now, especially now that AQs are basically done. TCU is a true wild card here. Normally, they have sucked as a member of a conference with the big Texas school, but they went the untraditional route and turned themselves into quite a respectable program. If TCU follows the pattern of the conference mate that they look the most like, Baylor, then I suspect that TCU will be back to its SWC form in less than 5 years. Then again, TCU has the Metroplex to recruit kids to stay closer to home while still being a big city environment, unlike Baylor, and FW really supports TCU as its home-town team, which it didn't really start doing until after the SWC broke up and TCU started winning again. If TCU falls back down, to a Baylor-like level (basically any Baylor season in the Big XII minus the RGIII Heisman year), SMU falls back to its regular place of the last 25 years, and North Texas rises to a place it hasn't seen in the past 35 years, you could see a situation come into play where UNT could be attractive to other schools to have us included in a "new highest level" of college football.--Believe it or not, I actually think this could happen, and actually it could happen faster than anyone could ever imagine if the right things happened in Denton, while the wrong things happened in DFW!!

Great post, UNTJim1995...You's and I (and others I know on this board and beyond) seem to be from the same think tank.

Still..........we have to keep the right perspective on where we've been of late and just hope we don't repeat it. It would be so easy for Apogee Stadium to become our next "high quality' venue a la a Super Pit that sits out there looking pretty and that's just about it. We all know what kind of basketball programs we had decade after decade before Johnny Jones came to town, now don't we? Some said or thought: "what a waste of a beautiful, glorious & "fabulous" basketball facility all those years."

Cold, blatant facts are rarely acceptable on this board and even in our country's politics of late but here is one that will freeze your family jewels to their very core: Had our program been located in Ruston or Monroe or Jonesboro................. we would not have gotten a CUSA invite and that would have merely been based on what our media guides of overall performance and attendance figures would have revealed to Brit Banowsky and his staff and I'm talking about our overal performance (at a reasonable NCAA FBS level of quality and annual national ranking out of 100 plus NCAA FBS schools) of varsity athletics of the last 10-15 years. NOTE: For football, see the below link

North Texas had no choice but to build Apogee Stadium. Well............duh? Why make heros out of those associated with that absolute neccessity (outside our UNT students) because our only alternative would have been to drop down, drop out or stay forever the same. And look how successful we've been doing the same of late as in SBC football? Many of us bitched for decades telling deaf ears how Fouts Field was visually (from the interstate) a laughting-stock to our entire UNT community least of all what it had been costing us to get better schools to come to Denton and then want to return to Fouts for games (ya' think Baylor ever wanted to come back after electricity went out in their dressing room during a half time for instance); plus the fact that Fouts Field would keep us from ever getting a conference upgrade which I think most would agree it did first time CUSA looked at us. I can only imagine how Hayden Fry had to to do a Fred Astaire dance number with SWC officials when he wanted North Texas in the SWC and all that because of Fouts Field. (It's been a very interesting ride at North Texas for those who've been around since post-Ice Age, folks).

Now UNT powers-that-be can keep rewarding those for things that they really had nothing to do with till the cows come home, but it will still always be performance which needs to one day in our sweet bye and bye be the reason for getting bonuses and contract extensions at North Texas (and performance of teams who are rising in the rankings and that also being far away from Bottom 25 for starters). And please.........no more awards at North Texas for merely being on staff up there for a jillion years with mediocre (or less) performance results would be something for our higher echelon UNT powers that be to think about before another one of those kind of awards is freely given out with yet another............pay raise. Performance awards would be so much more meaningful and worth the extra income for those who produced over a fair enough of time.

Dan McCarney and Tony Benford give many of us hope for our future in our 2 biggest revenue-producing sports. Outside of that, past performance of others who have produced a helluva' bunch of mediocrity and even been praised for it I would think the jury would still be out as to if they can take this thing to the next level; that is, from an overal poor to moderate success performance at the SBC level in all varsity sports to a much more competitive CUSA level. We need some of that group to re-invent themselves to become something yet unseen for a decade and more or we will I'm afraid in Mean Green Country see much of what we've seen during that same period.

Prevention of repeating much of our history of the last few decades will still be worth a ton of cure for our future NCAA FBS and C-USA success at North Texas is how this all just about sizes up...........IMO.

______________________________________________

http://mcubed.net/ncaaf/teams/nt.shtml

______________________________________________

GMG!

Edited July 13, 2012 by PlummMeanGreen

GreenFlag · July 13, 2012

Follow the money. If the most lucrative four conferences think they can make more money by seperation there will eventually be separation. If they think otherwise there won't be a break. Like Stebo said about Vandy and I can point to Texas Tech.

Just look at the way Texas Tech schedules. They have scheduled 3 or 4 OOC games every year against opponents they think they can beat (throw in a FCS here and there) and they usually win those games. Yes, they scheduled TCU and Houston but that was set up before they were as competitive as they are now. Anyway, if you take out those almost gimme games they are a mediocre team.

Texas Tech's record since 2000 when they started their longest bowl run in FBS.

2000 3-5 vs. AQ 4-1 vs non AQ (Bowl loss to ECU and first of three bowls without a winning record against AQ)

2001 4-6 v AQ, 3-0 vs non AQ (Second bowl without a winning record against AQ)

2002 7-5 v AQ and 2-0 vs non AQ

2003 5-4 v AQ and 3-0 vs non AQ (Bowl win against Navy)

2004 6-3 v AQ and 2-1 vs non AQ

2005 7-3 vs AQ and 3-0 vs non AQ

2006 5-4 vs AQ and 3-1 vs non AQ

2007 5-4 vs AQ and 4-0 vs non AQ

2008 7-2 vs AQ and 4-0 vs non AQ

2009 6-3 vs AQ and 3-1 vs non AQ

2010 5-5 vs AQ and 3-0 vs non AQ (Third bowl without a winning record against AQ)

2011 2-7 vs AQ and 3-0 vs non AQ and bowl run over

This was the most successful run in their history. If you take out last year they are 60-44 against AQ in their most successful era EVER. They went 34-4 against non AQ.

Mike Leach is gone and he ain't coming back. Tuberville is a proven coach and he can't get it done there.

That school is at the absolute breaking point right now. They have to have non AQ wins to count for them to stay relevant in their fans minds. If they aren't relevant in ther fans minds, they won't be relevant in a super non NCAA breakaway conference. Although a school like Texas Tech doesn't want to admit it, they need us. Without non AQ, they are no longer "winners" - they are just mediocre. Mediocre doesn't sell well.

And remember this, Texas Tech has been a "successfull" program during all of this "mediocreness". If you were to look at the Vandy's, Baylors, Iowa State's, Washington State's type schools their records must be awful.

Edited July 13, 2012 by GreenFlag

untjim1995 · July 13, 2012

Follow the money. If the most lucrative four conferences think they can make more money by seperation there will eventually be separation. If they think otherwise there won't be a break. Like Stebo said about Vandy and I can point to Texas Tech.

Just look at the way Texas Tech schedules. They have scheduled 3 or 4 OOC games every year against opponents they think they can beat (throw in a FCS here and there) and they usually win those games. Yes, they scheduled TCU and Houston but that was set up before they were as competitive as they are now. Anyway, if you take out those almost gimme games they are a mediocre team.

Texas Tech's record since 2000 when they started their longest bowl run in FBS.

2000 3-5 vs. AQ 4-1 vs non AQ (Bowl loss to ECU and first of three bowls without a winning record against AQ)
2001 4-6 v AQ, 3-0 vs non AQ (Second bowl without a winning record against AQ)
2002 7-5 v AQ and 2-0 vs non AQ
2003 5-4 v AQ and 3-0 vs non AQ (Bowl win against Navy)
2004 6-3 v AQ and 2-1 vs non AQ
2005 7-3 vs AQ and 3-0 vs non AQ
2006 5-4 vs AQ and 3-1 vs non AQ
2007 5-4 vs AQ and 4-0 vs non AQ
2008 7-2 vs AQ and 4-0 vs non AQ
2009 6-3 vs AQ and 3-1 vs non AQ
2010 5-5 vs AQ and 3-0 vs non AQ (Third bowl without a winning record against AQ)
2011 2-7 vs AQ and 3-0 vs non AQ and bowl run over

This was the most successful run in their history. If you take out last year they are 60-44 against AQ in their most successful era EVER. They went 34-4 against non AQ.

Mike Leach is gone and he ain't coming back. Tuberville is a proven coach and he can't get it done there.

That school is at the absolute breaking point right now. They have to have non AQ wins to count for them to stay relevant in their fans minds. If they aren't relevant in ther fans minds, they won't be relevant in a super non NCAA breakaway conference. Although a school like Texas Tech doesn't want to admit it, they need us. Without non AQ, they are no longer "winners" - they are just mediocre. Mediocre doesn't sell well.

And remember this, Texas Tech has been a "successfull" program during all of this "mediocreness". If you were to look at the Vandy's, Baylors, Iowa State's, Washington State's type schools their records must be awful.

They won't need us if a new league got set up, like the NFL, where you have playoffs, not bowl games. Tech schedules the way they do so that they can get into a bowl every year--its been that simple. Nothing more, nothing less. If you get rid of the bowls and get gargantuan money for being included in a Super BCS, then their schedule gets made for them every year. That's how the shift wouldn't hurt a Tech or Colorado right now. It would kill Vandy or Baylor, though--because I doubt they have the clout to be included in a Super College Football League. And, as far as hoops and baseball go, that same consortium of schools could easily just create their own March Madness and College World Series--and ESPN, Fox, Turner, etc...would be waiting at the door with checks in hand for them.

shaft · July 15, 2012

The "we're being left behind" crowd has yet to respond to a single point in this thread about how that won't happen. And now were making assumptions that the new elitist D1 will only be 4 conferences? So which one goes away the ACC or the Big 12?

The NFL works because of anti-trust exemptions and a revenue sharing platform. Why are these individual conferences and schools going to give up their tv deals to be part of an across the board new system? UT proves a school is not going to give up any of their own deal to help out anyone else.

wardly · July 16, 2012

I think that at some point the Pac 12,Big 12,Big 10,ACC,and SEC will create a new division within the NCAA. They will still play out of conference games with Big East,MWC,CUSA,MAC,and the Belt, much like all D1 schools do now when scheduling a 1aa opponent like SFA, Sam Houston, etc.There will just be 3 degrees of seperation instead of 2. Just an old man's opinion.

GreenFlag · July 18, 2012

They won't need us if a new league got set up, like the NFL, where you have playoffs, not bowl games. Tech schedules the way they do so that they can get into a bowl every year--its been that simple. Nothing more, nothing less. If you get rid of the bowls and get gargantuan money for being included in a Super BCS, then their schedule gets made for them every year. That's how the shift wouldn't hurt a Tech or Colorado right now. It would kill Vandy or Baylor, though--because I doubt they have the clout to be included in a Super College Football League. And, as far as hoops and baseball go, that same consortium of schools could easily just create their own March Madness and College World Series--and ESPN, Fox, Turner, etc...would be waiting at the door with checks in hand for them.

College sports are uniquely different from the pros and it needs to stay that way for their own self preservation.

What you are suggesting is basically a minor league system to the pros. If college football/basketball/baseball becomes more exclusive and more like a minor league to the pros then it becomes less like the college game that is popular. Minor league teams are not a big draw and don't have big TV paydays.

Are NBA fans really followers of the D league?

I know I would never watch a college game ever again if what you are suggesting came to pass and I think far less people would care about the sport. Additionally, do you think Texas would ever agree to a level playing field with Texas Tech or Baylor so they could be in a NFL minor league situation? Never in a million years.

The college game has to remain different from the pro game to stay relevant.

oldguystudent · July 19, 2012

Come September, will there be dead animals smoking over hickory and ice chests full of fermented goodness followed by the skin of an unfortunate porcine flying through the air?

Yes? Fantastic. Then I really don't care what you call it.