TexasTerror
October 24th, 2006, 12:02 PM
Interesting read from the NCAA News on the status of Div II football and the two big decisions that are coming in January...
The most important of which is a vote on a second football playoff (keep an eye on this!) which would be a playoff for programs that fund up to 36 equivalencies and the other would be for programs that fund no more than 50 percent of the maximum (that is, 0 to 18 equivalencies). Could we see something similar to this in I-AA mid-major football?
By Jerry McGee
Wingate University
The Division II membership will make two of the most important decisions in its history when it meets January 8 in Orlando. The first decision involves whether we will establish a second football playoff, and the second relates to whether we will change the voting requirement to modify financial aid limits in any sport.
As chair of the Football Task Force that made these recommendations, I have followed the reaction to these proposals with interest and, occasionally, concern. Because these topics have generated so much emotion — and, in some cases, misinformation — I believe that the membership needs to be reminded about the reasoning that led to their consideration.
Most of those who follow Division II issues know that the task force was formed in the wake of 2005 Proposal No. 28, which would have reduced the number of financial aid equivalencies in football from 36 to 24. The sponsors of that proposal, the Pennsylvania State and Rocky Mountain Athletic Conferences, said that the financial environments in their regions prevent their programs from fully funding football and that they cannot compete with programs that do provide the maximum.
The 2005 proposal failed by a vote of 46-97, a result that some observers say illustrates Division II’s lack of desire to reduce football equivalency limits.
More below...
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/!ut/p/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKLN4g3NPUESYGYxqb6kW hCjhgihqYeCDFfj_zcVKBMpDlQwCgkWD8qJzU9MblSP1jfWz9A vyA3NDSiPN8RANQz8cc!/delta/base64xml/L3dJdyEvd0ZNQUFzQUsvNElVRS82XzBfMTVL?WCM_GLOBAL_CO NTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/NCAA/NCAA+News/NCAA+News+Online/2006/Editorial/Guest+editorial+-+Proposals+support+Division+II+stability+-+10-23-06+NCAA+News
The most important of which is a vote on a second football playoff (keep an eye on this!) which would be a playoff for programs that fund up to 36 equivalencies and the other would be for programs that fund no more than 50 percent of the maximum (that is, 0 to 18 equivalencies). Could we see something similar to this in I-AA mid-major football?
By Jerry McGee
Wingate University
The Division II membership will make two of the most important decisions in its history when it meets January 8 in Orlando. The first decision involves whether we will establish a second football playoff, and the second relates to whether we will change the voting requirement to modify financial aid limits in any sport.
As chair of the Football Task Force that made these recommendations, I have followed the reaction to these proposals with interest and, occasionally, concern. Because these topics have generated so much emotion — and, in some cases, misinformation — I believe that the membership needs to be reminded about the reasoning that led to their consideration.
Most of those who follow Division II issues know that the task force was formed in the wake of 2005 Proposal No. 28, which would have reduced the number of financial aid equivalencies in football from 36 to 24. The sponsors of that proposal, the Pennsylvania State and Rocky Mountain Athletic Conferences, said that the financial environments in their regions prevent their programs from fully funding football and that they cannot compete with programs that do provide the maximum.
The 2005 proposal failed by a vote of 46-97, a result that some observers say illustrates Division II’s lack of desire to reduce football equivalency limits.
More below...
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/!ut/p/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKLN4g3NPUESYGYxqb6kW hCjhgihqYeCDFfj_zcVKBMpDlQwCgkWD8qJzU9MblSP1jfWz9A vyA3NDSiPN8RANQz8cc!/delta/base64xml/L3dJdyEvd0ZNQUFzQUsvNElVRS82XzBfMTVL?WCM_GLOBAL_CO NTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/NCAA/NCAA+News/NCAA+News+Online/2006/Editorial/Guest+editorial+-+Proposals+support+Division+II+stability+-+10-23-06+NCAA+News