Professional and College Basketball Forums banner
4561 - 4580 of 4604 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,268 Posts
Augustana has already been rejected by the Summit League twice. I guess they are hoping having hockey will make them more attractive?
It's possible. They have a hockey-playing contingent in the league, so perhaps they see the execution of it as a trial run? I think it being easier to set up without having to fully jump up helps, along with a reformed CCHA likely wanting 2 more members within its footprint to get to an even 10 team league. Being backed by a billionaire and richest man in the state who has some very yikes headlines helps too. (Billionaire T. Denny Sanford Was Under Investigation for Child Pornography)

But, if they were rejected twice by a natural fit conference for a D3 school (albeit one in a major metro area with a similar enrollment and endowment bigger than every single AE school), that says something, especially if they're backed by some big pockets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,759 Posts
It's possible. They have a hockey-playing contingent in the league, so perhaps they see the execution of it as a trial run? I think it being easier to set up without having to fully jump up helps, along with a reformed CCHA likely wanting 2 more members within its footprint to get to an even 10 team league. Being backed by a billionaire and richest man in the state who has some very yikes headlines helps too. (Billionaire T. Denny Sanford Was Under Investigation for Child Pornography)

But, if they were rejected twice by a natural fit conference for a D3 school (albeit one in a major metro area with a similar enrollment and endowment bigger than every single AE school), that says something, especially if they're backed by some big pockets.
I think the story was that the four Dakota schools (particularly USD/SDSU) felt that there were enough D-I schools in the Dakotas for the small population base.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,622 Posts
I think the story was that the four Dakota schools (particularly USD/SDSU) felt that there were enough D-I schools in the Dakotas for the small population base.
I seem to recall hearing something along those lines as well. Crazy that those states will have a combined 5 D-I schools when the total population of the 2 states is just under 1.65 million (885K in SD, 762K in ND). By comparison, the 3 states of Maine, NH and Vermont have a combined population of just under 3.4 million and only 4 D-I schools. I do understand that those states have Mass, Conn and NY nearby with their tons of schools.
 
  • Like
Reactions: catpower

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,268 Posts
I think the story was that the four Dakota schools (particularly USD/SDSU) felt that there were enough D-I schools in the Dakotas for the small population base.
Well, I'd agree with the state schools on that front. But school administrators + wealthy donors who see athletics as some PR ploy = hard to stop them from thinking otherwise.

Augustana should just play up in hockey and stay D2. I don't think it bothers their current conference mates, the Duluths, St Cloud, Mankatos etc that they're not fully D1 as some sort of "legitimacy" or whatever. 17 of the 60 some odd hockey playing schools aren't so it's not like they'd be some outlier.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,454 Posts
“We’re tired of being told by some small school up in the northeast that we can’t do something,” says one SEC school administrator. “Why is Alabama and Binghamton in the same division? We continue to put those two on equal footing and it’s about time that all of us admitted that.”
Binghamton, what’d you do, and who did you piss off?

Honestly, I’m not worried about conferences like the SEC having more autonomy in governance, but this:
Last October, the Knight Commission released a sweeping survey in which it polled college administrators on two potential future NCAA models: (1) create a fourth division made up only of the 65 Power 5 teams; (2) separate the sport of football for an FBS-only association. More than 60% of Power 5 administrators supported the first option, the survey said…
The Power 5 seceding from the NCAA has its problems, too. That move may crater what is historically college sports’ most significant event, the men’s basketball tournament, as well as countless other Olympic sports championships in which non-Power 5 programs often shine and even win titles (this past year, for instance, six of those teams won D-I championships).
All because the SEC is making bank in football, conferences like the AE shouldn’t be allowed a CWS run like Stony Brook, or a College Cup run like UMBC, lacrosse runs like Albany, or a hockey championship like UMass-Lowell? That would be completely short-sighted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,268 Posts
I mean, Mark Emmert doesn't necessarily disagree that something has to change, but not necessarily the Knight Commission stuff:


I'll state what I think I said before in here: Olympic sports just need to eliminate conference affiliation and in some cases divisional status. There are 79 field hockey schools nearly all on the east coast. There's 26 D2. There's no point to D2 field hockey (just like ice hockey: go down to D3 already NE10!). If they want to offer a form of scholarship money to its athletes, you're now "D1." If not, you're D3 (158 teams) so find a league to take you on in the sport.

Are any conferences going to be really upset they no longer sponsor field hockey? Could take the AE, Big East, CAA, NEC, PL and A10 and split the 48 or so teams into 6 groups of 8 geographically to minimize the travel costs and you're not losing any auto bids in the process. A revamp of the old ECAC model for sports like this wouldn't necessarily be the changes Emmert may be talking about, but I think giving schools the freedom to organize a sport they have into a league that makes sense for all parties, not having to keep teams strictly in their all-sports conference for Olympic sports is a way better pathway to help keep these sports viable.

Power conferences, most probably would keep sponsoring Olympic sports, but some might not see particular sports as relevant and would go for the above model for a few things too.
 

·
Gr8t Dane
Joined
·
764 Posts
I mean, Mark Emmert doesn't necessarily disagree that something has to change, but not necessarily the Knight Commission stuff:


I'll state what I think I said before in here: Olympic sports just need to eliminate conference affiliation and in some cases divisional status. There are 79 field hockey schools nearly all on the east coast. There's 26 D2. There's no point to D2 field hockey (just like ice hockey: go down to D3 already NE10!). If they want to offer a form of scholarship money to its athletes, you're now "D1." If not, you're D3 (158 teams) so find a league to take you on in the sport.

Are any conferences going to be really upset they no longer sponsor field hockey? Could take the AE, Big East, CAA, NEC, PL and A10 and split the 48 or so teams into 6 groups of 8 geographically to minimize the travel costs and you're not losing any auto bids in the process. A revamp of the old ECAC model for sports like this wouldn't necessarily be the changes Emmert may be talking about, but I think giving schools the freedom to organize a sport they have into a league that makes sense for all parties, not having to keep teams strictly in their all-sports conference for Olympic sports is a way better pathway to help keep these sports viable.

Power conferences, most probably would keep sponsoring Olympic sports, but some might not see particular sports as relevant and would go for the above model for a few things too.
Just don't forget the Title IX implications of any changes of divisions and sports available and scholarships available....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,268 Posts
Just don't forget the Title IX implications of any changes of divisions and sports available and scholarships available....
Yeah. It was pretty late/early in the morning when I was writing the thing, so forgive me there. That goes without question if you're dropping any women's sport down from offering scholarships, you do the same to get in compliance on the men's side. Also, you still have to balance your opportunity as well with the number of sports offered, scholarship or not. Can't just add a bunch of non-scholarship men's sports without adding any women's.

As for field hockey, Google says 12 is the max limit for scholarships in D1, 6.3 in D2. What type of competition dynamic that would create who knows. But, I'm pretty confident most the schools in conferences I said should all merge under some ECAC-like regional banner are not giving out the max 12. UVM definitely is not. And, Title IX is only about whether an individual institution is compliant with the sports they have, it's not based on what their peers are doing. So, as long as a school is offering any form of scholarship and in Title IX compliance, you're classified in "D1" in this case and placed in a regional conference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,622 Posts
We started this thread over ten years ago with big speculation that turned out to be true. This is almost new-thread worthy.

Don't you even think about starting a new thread!

I think there is a lot to this rumor this time around. Once they go to 16, does the B1G decide they need to grab 2 more? Talks were actually pretty serious with UNC a few years ago. I still can't see them leaving the ACC and that relationship with Duke, but who the hell knows nowadays. My understanding is that a lot of this has to do with what is happening with NIL and what will come down the road later (possible Power 5 separation). There could be some more re-aligning at that level and I believe there are a few schools that are looking to get into that group prior the potential split. Openings in the Big XII would certainly help a school like Houston that is definitely one of those schools looking to make the move up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mainejeff

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,268 Posts
When we're all obliterated by the planet boiling over and Branson/Bezos/Musk have rounded up their billionaire friends to head to space while we are left to see out the end, I want this thread to be uncovered years later like an ancient text to show how routinely wrong I am about guessing the logic of college and university athletic programs and their conference affiliations. It's the only legacy I can give.

Long live the thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
187 Posts
Don't you even think about starting a new thread!

I think there is a lot to this rumor this time around. Once they go to 16, does the B1G decide they need to grab 2 more? Talks were actually pretty serious with UNC a few years ago. I still can't see them leaving the ACC and that relationship with Duke, but who the hell knows nowadays. My understanding is that a lot of this has to do with what is happening with NIL and what will come down the road later (possible Power 5 separation). There could be some more re-aligning at that level and I believe there are a few schools that are looking to get into that group prior the potential split. Openings in the Big XII would certainly help a school like Houston that is definitely one of those schools looking to make the move up.
I think the tides may be turning at BYU as well re:the big 12. If the power 5 are splitting off they will want to be in it and will need to find a dance partner.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,622 Posts
True. I mean, I can't help but get giddy thinking about Rutgers @ Washington State...or Utah @ Penn State.

In reality, the Big Ten has only added schools that were in states that bordered current member states. Well, guess what. The state of Nebraska borders the state of Colorado, which borders Utah, which borders Arizona and the rest is history. So, I guess they technically could.

You could then easily create a West/East alignment by shifting Nebraska to the West and have 13 schools in each division.

Northwestern and Stanford would now have a similar member in being private and having smaller undergrad enrollments.

However, one kicker could be that none of Arizona State, Oregon State and Washington State are members of the AAU. I know Nebraska is no longer a member but they were when invited to the Big Ten.

I highly doubt the two would combine but it is kinda fun to think about.

If the Power 5 do split away, that would ultimately force Notre Dame's hand and they would have to join the ACC entirely or just switch allegiance to the Big Ten.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,518 Posts
It's all just cannibalism, really. Sure Houston can join the Big 12 if Texas and Oklahoma leave, but let's be real -- the Big 12 is dying. If Texas and Oklahoma leave, then the remaining members are trying to leave -- not getting excited about new rivalries with Houston and BYU.

Rather than open up opportunities in the Power 5, Texas and Oklahoma jumping ship is the first step in moving towards a Power 4 or even Power 3. It is effectively the expulsion of schools like Iowa State and K-State from the Power 5.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,155 Posts
It's all just cannibalism, really. Sure Houston can join the Big 12 if Texas and Oklahoma leave, but let's be real -- the Big 12 is dying. If Texas and Oklahoma leave, then the remaining members are trying to leave -- not getting excited about new rivalries with Houston and BYU.
There's those schools who are always chasing, and one step too late. You saw it with schools who thought they were joining the Big East...only to have it turn into the American. Some of those schools also joined the CUSA...right after all the good teams left for the Big East! Houston tries really hard, but at some point if the "good" Big 12 wanted Houston, they'd already have Houston. You're still Houston. Or any other school not in a Power league.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,622 Posts
It is effectively the expulsion of schools like Iowa State and K-State from the Power 5.
I don't know about that when it comes to Iowa State. Their men's basketball program has been in 7 of the last 10 NCAA Tournaments and won 4 of the last 8 Big XII titles while routinely having huge crowds in Hilton Coliseum. Add to that a young, up & coming football head coach that had them ranked in the top 10 this past season and finished the year beating Oregon in a New Year's Day bowl game. The future is pretty bright for them in athletics in my opinion. If the Big XII loses Texas & Oklahoma and is suddenly ripe for the picking, I think the Big Ten may be interested (Iowa St is an AAU school) but I don't know if Iowa would allow it. Honestly, they would be a perfect fit for the conference (Iowa State has the 3rd largest football stadium in the Big XII, behind only Texas & Oklahoma).

I gotta say, I do love all the articles that pop up when these rumors start. All sorts of speculation.

Edit: I just started reading an article and saw this, which is exactly what I had heard and posted yesterday:

There is so much that goes into this, but in my opinion, it has more to do with the overall future of the sport than anything.

It feels like something larger is at play here – something the public is not aware of. Post NIL plans by the SEC – and whoever else – to seismically shift the college sports landscape as we know it.

Otherwise, the move simply doesn’t make much sense.

The realignment era from 2010 was about television eyeballs and money.

After NIL, the one-time transfer era, and most importantly, the Supreme Court flipping the bird to the NCAA a few weeks ago, this seems much, much larger than any realignment story of the past.

Simply put: Competitively, Oklahoma and Texas are much better off where they are. And since they are the only two schools in the Big 12 that don’t have to give their third-tier television property to ESPN-Plus, they are in a fantastic financial spot as well.

Again, it just feels like this is a much bigger conversation than a few teams (albeit two of the biggest brands in the sport) making a move.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aceinthehole

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,622 Posts
Just saw an article that said the SEC conducted discussions without Texas A&M involved and that this has been ongoing for possibly 6 months. If both of those things are true, wow. First, how great must Texas A&M feel right about now? Obviously they are vehemently opposed to Texas coming into the SEC and it's clear that the SEC really doesn't care. Funny that Florida clearly has the clout to keep Florida State out (assuming FSU had/has interest) and yeah, I know, Florida has been a member for a long time while A&M is pretty new, but it would appear that the SEC doesn't really care what their opinion or argument would be. And secondly, how on earth is something like this kept a secret for 6 months, especially with so many people involved.

Anyway, it does appear that this is pretty much a done deal but man, there are a lot of things to sort out. I saw that any school leaving would have to pay twice what they got for a payout from the conference, which was $38 million/school last year. In addition to the $76 million, those 2 schools also signed over their Tier1 & Tier2 sport rights (includes football & men's basketball) to the Big XII through 2025 when the TV deal runs out. I can't imagine Texas, Oklahoma or the SEC want that to be the case. We tend to think money is no object with some of these schools, but all of that adds up to a pretty big chunk of change, esp when we are coming off the loss of millions over the past year and a half with covid.
 
4561 - 4580 of 4604 Posts
Top