Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

[Craig P.]

In print here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/20/sports/20colleges.html?ref=sports
but there have been rumlings locally about this being a possible direction that college football will take in the not-too-distant future.

Specifically, 64 big football schools secede from the NCAA, forming four 16-team superconferences. In rough terms, we might expect those schools to include the five Big Ten schools, Notre Dame, Boston College, and UConn.

Although football (and to a lesser extent basketball) would be the main driver, one might reasonably expect that all of the other widely-sponsored sports would be along for the ride.

What, then, of the sports that are not widely-sponsored? Hockey is the one of interest here, as only eight major football schools also sponsor hockey (the rest are non-football, lower-division, or non-BCS). Would those eight play their own private championship cut off from the rest of what is now Division 1? Would some sort of hybrid be arranged for hockey (and potentially one or two other similar sports like lacrosse)?

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

Dude, just because it's 4/20...

 

[MUhawks628]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

Dude, just because it's 4/20...

I think that about sums it up...

The football landscape has changed drastically in the past, it in no way means that teams are leaving Division I to form their own league separate from the NCAA...wouldn't that essentialy make them club teams with scholarships? I mean I know Michigan and Notre Dame football are down but droping to club level is a little extreme ya know

 

[Craig P.]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

I think that about sums it up...

The football landscape has changed drastically in the past, it in no way means that teams are leaving Division I to form their own league separate from the NCAA...wouldn't that essentialy make them club teams with scholarships?

Rather, I think it would make a sort of a super-NAIA. The NCAA is not the sole arbiter of intercollegiate athletics even now.

I agree that it doesn't mean that a secession from the NCAA is necessarily in the works, but some influential people (ND's AD among them, publicly at least) seem to think that superconferences are coming. If a secession should happen, hockey would be prominently affected because its membership is so sharply divided between the big football schools and the others.

 

[bigmrg74]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

Rather, I think it would make a sort of a super-NAIA. The NCAA is not the sole arbiter of intercollegiate athletics even now.

I agree that it doesn't mean that a secession from the NCAA is necessarily in the works, but some influential people (ND's AD among them, publicly at least) seem to think that superconferences are coming. If a secession should happen, hockey would be prominently affected because its membership is so sharply divided between the big football schools and the others.

Yeah, but right now if you want to be a major player, you have to be NCAA. You didn't see Florida State, Illinois, Utah and North Dakota all getting into line to join the NAIA after the NCAA all told them they were hostile and abusive.

The NAIA is dying, and losing schools to the NCAA D2 level.

 

[MUhawks628]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

(ND's AD among them, publicly at least)

Swarbrick just wants it to seem like there is no option but to join one of the new "super conferences" so that the Irish nation doesn't hang him when ND joins the Big Ten.

I doubt anyone will buy that $10-$12 million in additional TV revenue is a good enough reason for forsake tradition. Just toss aside the fact that ND is switching to a 6-5-1 schedule anyways because other AD's are telling Jack to go **** himself and his non home and home game proposals .

(ND fan btw, not a hater)

But back on topic I don't think there is a chance in hell any of the D1 schools leave the NCAA. Just my opinion though.

 

[NMU8405]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

I think the NCAA needs to make a preemptive strike before this happens, and it is very likely it could. The NCAA needs to set up an NCAA title for Football. There are roughly 124 teams in 1-A football in the NCAA. To Maximize revenue and avoid this in the future, set up a 32 team post season tourney. 1-16 get byes. 17-32 play and are reseeded based on the previous round upsets. If the B.C.S. schools want to decline their invite, so be it, but the NCAA needs to set up their version of an NCAA title. So, if a school like Tulane wins it all, They get one of those fancy boring NCAA titles to put in their school and will go on the list as NCAA Champs. I feel like being NCAA Champs has more name/lasting appeal than the money and "B.C.S" Champions, and eventually I think one A.D. would realize this and accept the invite, and so falls the dominoes.

 

[RmKMTU]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

I think the NCAA needs to make a preemptive strike before this happens, and it is very likely it could. The NCAA needs to set up an NCAA title for Football. There are roughly 124 teams in 1-A football in the NCAA. To Maximize revenue and avoid this in the future, set up a 32 team post season tourney. 1-16 get byes. 17-32 play and are reseeded based on the previous round upsets. If the B.C.S. schools want to decline their invite, so be it, but the NCAA needs to set up their version of an NCAA title. So, if a school like Tulane wins it all, They get one of those fancy boring NCAA titles to put in their school and will go on the list as NCAA Champs. I feel like being NCAA Champs has more name/lasting appeal than the money and "B.C.S" Champions, and eventually I think one A.D. would realize this and accept the invite, and so falls the dominoes.

This is not possible as there was a lawsuit in the 80's that made football championships independent from the NCAA.

 

[MUhawks628]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

I think the NCAA needs to make a preemptive strike before this happens, and it is very likely it could. The NCAA needs to set up an NCAA title for Football. There are roughly 124 teams in 1-A football in the NCAA. To Maximize revenue and avoid this in the future, set up a 32 team post season tourney. 1-16 get byes. 17-32 play and are reseeded based on the previous round upsets. If the B.C.S. schools want to decline their invite, so be it, but the NCAA needs to set up their version of an NCAA title. So, if a school like Tulane wins it all, They get one of those fancy boring NCAA titles to put in their school and will go on the list as NCAA Champs. I feel like being NCAA Champs has more name/lasting appeal than the money and "B.C.S" Champions, and eventually I think one A.D. would realize this and accept the invite, and so falls the dominoes.

A 32 team tournament. Talk about the death of college football.

 

[dggoddard]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

The upcoming NCAA Basketball TV contract is worth $840 million per year. The 64 elite schools are drooling over that money as much as the football revenue.

Dumping the NCAA means that they could also drop a bunch of non-revenue sports.

The biggest advantage of NCAA membership is that they don't have to pay the players. Leaving the NCAA umbrella could complicate matters in that regard.

If I'm the NCAA, you've got to consider kicking out all 64 defectors in all sports and hoping that you can hold together the remainders. What a mess.

 

[bigmrg74]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

I think the NCAA needs to make a preemptive strike before this happens, and it is very likely it could. The NCAA needs to set up an NCAA title for Football. There are roughly 124 teams in 1-A football in the NCAA. To Maximize revenue and avoid this in the future, set up a 32 team post season tourney. 1-16 get byes. 17-32 play and are reseeded based on the previous round upsets. If the B.C.S. schools want to decline their invite, so be it, but the NCAA needs to set up their version of an NCAA title. So, if a school like Tulane wins it all, They get one of those fancy boring NCAA titles to put in their school and will go on the list as NCAA Champs. I feel like being NCAA Champs has more name/lasting appeal than the money and "B.C.S" Champions, and eventually I think one A.D. would realize this and accept the invite, and so falls the dominoes.

Not seeing how the top 16 teams would get byes while the bottom 16 teams would have to play each other and then have only 8 of them play the other 16 teams. Maybe you should just have everybody play the opening weekend of a 32 team playoff, Number one gets 32.

Personally, 16 teams would be more than enough. Really have your heart set on having Byes, go with 24, more than enough to make sure all of the top teams make it into the playoffs there.

 

[Craig P.]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

The biggest advantage of NCAA membership is that they don't have to pay the players. Leaving the NCAA umbrella could complicate matters in that regard.

I wouldn't expect any major changes in that regard. Regardless of the initials of the governing organization, the motivations would presumably still be the same, and so I would figure on the result being the same.

 

[NMU8405]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

Not seeing how the top 16 teams would get byes while the bottom 16 teams would have to play each other and then have only 8 of them play the other 16 teams. Maybe you should just have everybody play the opening weekend of a 32 team playoff, Number one gets 32.

Personally, 16 teams would be more than enough. Really have your heart set on having Byes, go with 24, more than enough to make sure all of the top teams make it into the playoffs there.

Yeah, I screwed that count up. I was distracted by playoff hockey. You knew what I meant though.

 

[M-HockeyNet]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

Part of me wants to see big teams leave the NCAA just for continued stupid crap like this that the NCAA morality police keeps imposing.

Beginning in 2011, if a player is penalized for taunting an opponent on his way to a touchdown that play will be nullified. Currently, that would be a deal-ball foul and assessed on the ensuing kickoff.

But the new rule will make it a live-ball foul, meaning if a player holds the ball out in a taunting manner as he's crossing the goal line, does some type of somersault heading into the end zone or high steps his way into the end zone, the touchdown will be called back and the penalty will be assessed from the spot of the foul.

Can't wait for that first TD to get called back and the fan outcry that will ensue.

The NCAA is trying to get a bunch of 18-23 year olds who play a very physical, emotional game to act like a bunch of unemotional robots, all while having 60,000+ fans screaming and cheering their every play. Seriously, where does it end? The stuff like this the NCAA continues to come up with every year rather than letting the kids play the freakin' game and have fun and show passion is getting ridiculous.

I don't expect to see a secession, but I wouldn't be opposed to it, either, if it means sticking the NCAA in their place.

 

[Puck Swami]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

My guess is that the NCAA will need to better adapt to the needs of big BCS schools in order to retain them under the umbrella.

 

[unofan]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

Part of me wants to see big teams leave the NCAA just for continued stupid crap like this that the NCAA morality police keeps imposing.


Can't wait for that first TD to get called back and the fan outcry that will ensue.

The NCAA is trying to get a bunch of 18-23 year olds who play a very physical, emotional game to act like a bunch of unemotional robots, all while having 60,000+ fans screaming and cheering their every play. Seriously, where does it end? The stuff like this the NCAA continues to come up with every year rather than letting the kids play the freakin' game and have fun and show passion is getting ridiculous.

I don't expect to see a secession, but I wouldn't be opposed to it, either, if it means sticking the NCAA in their place.

I've got no problem with the mechanics of it...if the penalty occured during the play, it nullifies the play. It's not a dead ball foul, why treat it as one?

That said, there's that ginormous gray area between celebration and taunting that I really hope officials call it in only the most egregious of cases.

 

[4four4]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

My guess is that the NCAA will need to better adapt to the needs of big BCS schools in order to retain them under the umbrella.

That is what I was thinking.

I wish the NFL and the NBA funded a 16 to 22 year old "junior" league to stop all the phoney "I am going to school and getting a degree" athlete. Nothing drives me more nuts seeing players who have no business in a classroom setting.

 

[joecct]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

All it takes is a quick pen to the Conference By-laws of the BC$ conferences and suddenly football is no longer a $ponsored champion$hip. Then they can do what they want while still under the NCAA umbrella.

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

Yeah, but right now if you want to be a major player, you have to be NCAA.

Um... not for nothing, but is it the NCAA that makes Ohio State, Texas, USC, et al major players, or is it vice versa?

 

[Maineiak]

Re: Sausage: What would a 64-team secession from the NCAA mean for hockey?

Part of me wants to see big teams leave the NCAA just for continued stupid crap like this that the NCAA morality police keeps imposing.


Can't wait for that first TD to get called back and the fan outcry that will ensue.

The NCAA is trying to get a bunch of 18-23 year olds who play a very physical, emotional game to act like a bunch of unemotional robots, all while having 60,000+ fans screaming and cheering their every play. Seriously, where does it end? The stuff like this the NCAA continues to come up with every year rather than letting the kids play the freakin' game and have fun and show passion is getting ridiculous.

I don't expect to see a secession, but I wouldn't be opposed to it, either, if it means sticking the NCAA in their place.

Where does this crap end? What about the lineman that you always see trailing the play, arms held high in celebration knowing the ball carrier is about to score? Are they going to call taunting on that as well? After all, the play is still live and a defensive player nearby would essentially be "taunted" by this raised arm maneuver.

To me, the best "penalty" for taunting is having the other team come right back at ya on the scoreboard. I always love the stupid little dances and shows d-lineman put on in the NFL after a routine (essentially) tackle/play. Because it's even better to see the other team come back the very next play and torch the same guy for a score.