FCS Rules in 2010-11 Legislative Cycle

[TexasTerror]

We'll probably see these two new rules start impacting FCS institutions in 2011...

1) No hotel accommodations prior to home contests...


The cabinet forwarded two recommendations related to its review of Bylaws 17 and 31 to reduce costs related to administration of championships and playing and practice seasons. The cabinet supports prohibiting institutions from providing accommodations to their student-athletes on the night before home contests in FCS football.

2) Increased number of participants in practice prior to the first date of class...


Cabinet members sponsored legislation for the 2010-11 legislative cycle to increase the number of student-athletes allowed to practice before an institution’s first day of class to 95 in FCS football starting in 2011. Currently, FCS football teams may have a maximum of 90 participants.

http://ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/ncaa+news/ncaa+news+online/2010/division+i/championships+cabinet+approves+format+change+for+w omens+soccer_06_18_10_ncaa_news

[4th and What?]

1) No hotel accommodations prior to home contests...


2) Increased number of participants in practice prior to the first date of class...



What's the negative side to having hotel accommodations for home teams? I can see why you would minimize players partying the night before, ensuring a good amount of sleep, and everyone on time and such, but these don't seem like bad things to me.

And why maximize the number of participants prior to the first day class? These both seem silly, but I guess I am probably missing something.

[gt_bison]

What's the negative side to having hotel accommodations for home teams? I can see why you would minimize players partying the night before, ensuring a good amount of sleep, and everyone on time and such, but these don't seem like bad things to me.


It's a haves vs. have-nots issue. The richer programs can afford it, which may give them a bit of an advantage.

[txst80]

****, we do the hotel before a home game routine. It seemed like it worked. Too many gorgeous girls in San Marcos for a guy to get decent sleep on a Friday night...

[lionsrking2]

It's a haves vs. have-nots issue. The richer programs can afford it, which may give them a bit of an advantage.

Understood, but I personally don't see the competitive advantage. If one of the "haves" wants to spend money to put their team in a hotel the night before a home game, more power to them. If anything, it's money that could be spent on recruiting or other areas where there actually could be a competitive advantage. It's more like a "sounds good, feels good" rule to me that will have very little impact one way or the other.

[gt_bison]

Understood, but I personally don't see the competitive advantage. If one of the "haves" wants to spend money to put their team in a hotel the night before a home game, more power to them. If anything, it's money that could be spent on recruiting or other areas where there actually could be a competitive advantage. It's more like a "sounds good, feels good" rule to me that will have very little impact one way or the other.

I'm not exactly sure what the advantage is, either. I wonder if it's an advantage in recruiting at all.

[TexasTerror]

I think the NCAA is getting hammered on letting spending get out of control, that this is something that they see as having no true impact on collegiate athletics and something that they can proudly boast about as a way to cut spending...???

That sound about right?

[WMTribe90]

Typical NCAA BS, ignore the real problems related to college athletics and run-away spending and take on non-issue to the detriment of the student athletes.

Getting a good night sleep on a college campus on a Friday night is no sure thing. Plenty of ways to cost costs that wouldn't negatively impact the well being/ performance of the student athletes.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

The cabinet forwarded two recommendations related to its review of Bylaws 17 and 31 to reduce costs related to administration of championships and playing and practice seasons. The cabinet supports prohibiting institutions from providing accommodations to their student-athletes on the night before home contests in FCS football.

Let me get this straight. The NCAA is willing to let Nebraska leave for the Big Ten and wreck generations of rivalry over hundreds of millions of dollars, and then ding schools like Lafayette, Lehigh, Montana, Montana State for something that amounts to such an insignificant amount of spending?

This means for big rivalry games like Lehigh/Lafayette, Harvard/Yale, Cat/Griz, the Dakota Marker, etc. instead of the teams getting put up in a hotel thanks to the athletic department they are more likely to stay on campus in the middle of the drinking and nuttiness that ensues.

Way to go, NCAA. You've made a rule that will make for worse FCS football games, putting your student-athletes more at risk, and you won't save money. Brilliant! xrolleyesx

[Jackman]

I doubt this was crammed down by the NCAA upon FCS. Someone or more likely multiple someones in FCS suggested it. More and more conferences are proposing similar rules in other sports, like setting a minimum distance that a road team must be from its opponent in order to be allowed to book a hotel (instead of making it a day trip). If they can get rules like that passed at the NCAA level, then they don't have to worry about being at a competitive disadvantage. I don't have a problem with it.

[LeadBolt]

It's nice to know these are the most pressing issues facing the NCAA and that my imagination was overactive in thinking up others....

[bjtheflamesfan]

I know that LU would have the team stay at an extended stay the night before our home games because it is literally just outside the stadium. Gather the team together, have the last practice, get the team together at the hotel (what goes on is beyond me since I dont work with them) and then after the game its back to their normal places of residence whether on or off campus

[Franks Tanks]

Let me get this straight. The NCAA is willing to let Nebraska leave for the Big Ten and wreck generations of rivalry over hundreds of millions of dollars, and then ding schools like Lafayette, Lehigh, Montana, Montana State for something that amounts to such an insignificant amount of spending?

This means for big rivalry games like Lehigh/Lafayette, Harvard/Yale, Cat/Griz, the Dakota Marker, etc. instead of the teams getting put up in a hotel thanks to the athletic department they are more likely to stay on campus in the middle of the drinking and nuttiness that ensues.

Way to go, NCAA. You've made a rule that will make for worse FCS football games, putting your student-athletes more at risk, and you won't save money. Brilliant! xrolleyesx

Yes-- this is stupid. Try getting sleep in a dorm or frat house the night before the Lafayette-Lehigh game! I dont see what this accomplishes.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

http://lehighfootballnation.blogspot.com/2010/06/ncaa-wields-hammer-down-on-rivalry.html

The recommendation on preventing hotel rooms for home games is so stupid, it's hard to see an upside to it.

[DFW HOYA]

http://lehighfootballnation.blogspot.com/2010/06/ncaa-wields-hammer-down-on-rivalry.html

The recommendation on preventing hotel rooms for home games is so stupid, it's hard to see an upside to it.

The chief argument is cost containment, and secondarily the fact that most other sports teams don't have it anyway (e.g., the tennis team doesn't get a stay at the Marriott before a match). A school could be looking at upwards of $25,000 for the team and coaches over a 5-6 game home schedule.

[Uncle Buck]

The chief argument is cost containment, and secondarily the fact that most other sports teams don't have it anyway (e.g., the tennis team doesn't get a stay at the Marriott before a match). A school could be looking at upwards of $25,000 for the team and coaches over a 5-6 game home schedule.

That should be up to the school to decide how it spends its money. If they don't want to foot the bill for tennis, then that's for them to decide, not the NCAA. It really is a dumb rule. What's next? You can only replace uniforms every five years at the FCS level because it'll take the basketball team that amount of time to run up the equivalent? Just a dumb waste of energy by the NCAA.

[gt_bison]

That should be up to the school to decide how it spends its money. If they don't want to foot the bill for tennis, then that's for them to decide, not the NCAA. It really is a dumb rule. What's next? You can only replace uniforms every five years at the FCS level because it'll take the basketball team that amount of time to run up the equivalent? Just a dumb waste of energy by the NCAA.

While it seems the rule has only been adopted for FCS in this cycle, it has also been discussed at the FBS level. It may be harder to pass there, but it wouldn't surprise me if it came in eventually for FBS as well. I would not call this the NCAA picking on FCS, as some in this thread seem to be trying to turn it into.

[joecooll6]

NCAA rules are usually voted on and passed by the member institutions. Enough FCS schools wanted this rule for it to pass. The NCAA only exists because the member institutions give it power. I doubt, and don't think they have the power to, force a rule on anyone without the schools supporting it.

It actually does cost small schools quite a bit of their budget to do it.

[WestCoastAggie]

Yes-- this is stupid. Try getting sleep in a dorm or frat house the night before the Lafayette-Lehigh game! I dont see what this accomplishes.

Or the friday night of Homecoming Week in Greensboro.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

While it seems the rule has only been adopted for FCS in this cycle, it has also been discussed at the FBS level. It may be harder to pass there, but it wouldn't surprise me if it came in eventually for FBS as well. I would not call this the NCAA picking on FCS, as some in this thread seem to be trying to turn it into.

If it's a problem anywhere - and I'm not convinced it is - it's in FBS. So why only apply it to FCS football? That's like saying the NCAA is so cheesed off at USC that they're going to punish Lehigh and NDSU.

[gt_bison]

If it's a problem anywhere - and I'm not convinced it is - it's in FBS. So why only apply it to FCS football? That's like saying the NCAA is so cheesed off at USC that they're going to punish Lehigh and NDSU.

Again, the NCAA is not imposing these rules. They are voted on by the presidents. I believe only FCS presidents and conferences get to vote on FCS legislation like this, so apparently enough of them think it's a problem that they want to do something about it. Who knows, maybe it will be repealed in a couple of years if it's a big problem for rivalry weeks and homecoming weeks.

[WMTribe90]

No one is forcing schools to put their team up in a hotel for home games. Those schools that want to should be allowed to do it. It may be a competitive advantage, but its primarily a player well-being issue. After all the work that goes into a season, players deserve to be well rested and not dead tired (dangerous) because the neighbors threw a party till 4 in the morning. Heck, my freshman dorm at WM didn't have AC and was right across the street from one of the bars. Try sleeping when you dorm room is 80 degrees and when you open your window it sounds like your on the back porch of the bar.

If the NCAA and member institutions were serious about coast containment the should look at things like coaches salaries, over-the-top facilities and recruiting budgets (primarily at the FBS level). Things that give a competitve advantage, cost way more than hotel rooms, but don't directly hurt the athletes if they are cut. Of course the NCAA is too spineless to take on meaningful reform.

[TexasTerror]

While I think the NCAA is viewing it as a cost-containment move - regardless if it comes from the school's pockets or that of an athletic foundation or other fundraising avenues...

My personal opinion is that it takes away from the student-athlete experience (something the NCAA plugs proudly) and you do not put home teams in a hotel for other sports. From a Title IX and equal opportunity for all sports standpoint, it's just ridiculous.

You can say that being in the dorms is a distraction, but isn't going to classes and studying also a distraction? You can say that is about team bonding, but let's be honest - other teams/programs bond without being housed at hotels the night before games at home.

[WMTribe90]

I hardly think staying in a hotel five nights out of the school year robs student-athletes of a true college experience. If the NCAA was so worried about giving student athletes a true college experience, they would crack down on academic fraud and sham majors at FBS football factories.

Your comment comparing staying in a dorm and going to classes is ridiculous. WM has one of the highest football graduation rates in the country and the student athletes, including football players, are fully integrated into the student body at-large. The fact the program chooses to give the players a good night sleep before home games is irrelevant by comparison.

Title IX is also a non issue. A school can be fully compliant with Title IX and still house their football team off campus for home games. That's their right and their business. I find it hard to see how anyone could support this kind of big brother micro-management. It is counter to student athlete well being and does little to contain costs in the grand scheme of things.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

You can say that being in the dorms is a distraction, but isn't going to classes and studying also a distraction? You can say that is about team bonding, but let's be honest - other teams/programs bond without being housed at hotels the night before games at home.

If you were on campus during a Lehigh/Lafayette week you'd feel differently. It can be a real zoo on campus at times.

And comparing a football rivalry weekend to one in, say, lacrosse isn't a fair comparison. Nothing brings alumni, faculty and campus - and excess - together more than a big rivalry game like this. If the Lehigh/Lafayette women's lacrosse rivalry grew to such a point that there was a week of parties and tailgating before the game I would happily allow the women's lacrosse teams to spend the night in a hotel. It's more about the craziness on campus and shielding the teams from the worst of it rather than giving the football team a special "privilege".

[TexasTerror]

The fact the program chooses to give the players a good night sleep before home games is irrelevant by comparison.

Why is the football team entitled to receiving a good night sleep before home games? What about the basketball program(s)? Soccer? Baseball? I just do not understand the differences...


It is counter to student athlete well being and does little to contain costs in the grand scheme of things.

How is putting student-athletes in the same dorm, apartment they sleep in every night counter to student-athlete well-being?

[The Moody1]

A Mickey Mouse rule for this Mickey Mouse division.

[WMTribe90]

Why is the football team entitled to receiving a good night sleep before home games? What about the basketball program(s)? Soccer? Baseball? I just do not understand the differences...



How is putting student-athletes in the same dorm, apartment they sleep in every night counter to student-athlete well-being?

I would have no problem with school's putting up other teams in hotels for home games if they have a Saturday contest. Those other sports you mention play a lot of mid-week games, where it's far easier to get a good night sleep, etc. in the dorm. Point is, this is a decision that should be left to the individual schools, as the situation at each school is different. What is not needed is a one-size fits all solution to what is essentially a non-existent problem.

Playing a physical and dangerous sport on a poor night's sleep is counter to the student athlete's well being. Too much effort and expense goes into preparing a team to compete in just 11 games a year, to cut a corner at the last minute that could prevent the team from performing at its best. There are better ways to cut significant costs that would not directly effect the athletes in a negative way.