http://www.oneafar.org/Governance_Proposal.pdf
what's everybody's opinion on this ? what does it mean for the future if approved ?
what's everybody's opinion on this ? what does it mean for the future if approved ?
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Proposal To Change College Football As We Know It
- Thread starter InTheBuff
- Start date
tl;dr I am keeping up with the gubmint shutdown thread...
Lukeasaurus
Well-Known Member
SUMMARY:
I don't know if it would really change much. I think they are signifying the split between "FBS" programs and "Others". I guess that the FBS schools have been held back in some areas to accommodate the FCS and lower NCAA portions. (i.e. Womens scholarships numbers as noted).
They mention that "Those w/ Similar Resources and Interests" will be grouped (at least BCS conferences,us included). I think the power conferences get their distinction at least in that the board be made up of 1 president from each conference (ACC but perhaps NOT the former big east).
Basically. I don't think it would change much
PS. I've been lurking here for years. I figured i might as well respond to something lol
I don't know if it would really change much. I think they are signifying the split between "FBS" programs and "Others". I guess that the FBS schools have been held back in some areas to accommodate the FCS and lower NCAA portions. (i.e. Womens scholarships numbers as noted).
They mention that "Those w/ Similar Resources and Interests" will be grouped (at least BCS conferences,us included). I think the power conferences get their distinction at least in that the board be made up of 1 president from each conference (ACC but perhaps NOT the former big east).
Basically. I don't think it would change much
PS. I've been lurking here for years. I figured i might as well respond to something lol
Yep, basically FBS becomes its own separate division rather than a new subdivision. The new FBS gets their own governance board and gets to set their own rules...so if they want to offer full cost of attendance scholarships or increase the scholarship headcounts for existing women's sports to improve Title IX compliance without adding new sports (both items that were passed in the last couple of years by the NCAA only to be overridden when a majority veto occurred due to votes of the smaller schools) they can do so. It's apparently still an open item on whether the former BCS conferences will have a more heavily weighted vote when it comes to votes.
The fact that the new division gets to have their own governance board and set their own rules complicates things because they are recommending that the NCAA championships for the new FBS division and all of the schools currently included in Division 1 remain as unified championships (mostly due to the NCAA b-ball tourney almost completely funding the NCAA, and an unwillingness to damage the cinderella appeal of a school like VCU or Butler going on a deep run and beating some of the big boys). This means that if the new FBS division votes for say full cost of attendance, the VCU's of the world may be competing with a Kansas where the athletes are going to get more money to live on if they attend Kansas rather than VCU. That may lead to fewer cinderellas, but it may also lead to the rest of D1 deciding that full cost of attendance schollies isn't such a bad idea if they want to compete with the big boys and can no longer get away with their pocket vetoes to save some money.
The fact that the new division gets to have their own governance board and set their own rules complicates things because they are recommending that the NCAA championships for the new FBS division and all of the schools currently included in Division 1 remain as unified championships (mostly due to the NCAA b-ball tourney almost completely funding the NCAA, and an unwillingness to damage the cinderella appeal of a school like VCU or Butler going on a deep run and beating some of the big boys). This means that if the new FBS division votes for say full cost of attendance, the VCU's of the world may be competing with a Kansas where the athletes are going to get more money to live on if they attend Kansas rather than VCU. That may lead to fewer cinderellas, but it may also lead to the rest of D1 deciding that full cost of attendance schollies isn't such a bad idea if they want to compete with the big boys and can no longer get away with their pocket vetoes to save some money.
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
CU is on board with this proposal.
I like it. It's better than splitting off. And it's about time. There is way too much difference between the BCS programs and the rest of FBS in terms of resources for one set of rules to work for everyone. 'Bama and Troy are so far from being comparable that it's ridiculous to treat them as such.