Big changes for Division I-AA?

[Mr. Tiger]

I have been very interested in proposals floating around the NCAA in recent months. Here's why:
In May, the Division I Board of Directors decided to study elimination of the I-A and I-AA descriptors for football, suggesting they might be replaced by terms like "bowl-eligible" and "championship-eligible" and also eased Division I-A membership attendance requirements just as several current members in (MAC and Sun Belt) faced involuntary reclassification.

Here is my bold prediction. In 5 years, there will be no Division I-AA. Here is how I believe Division I football should look like in five years, maybe sooner.
There will be Division I BCS (Bowl Championship Series) and a Division I PCS (Playoff Championship Series). Every current Division I-A conference will be a part of the BCS system, but bowl eligibility will be determined by the ability to maintain attendance (15,000) and funding requirements (scholarship levels). Every current Division I-AA conference will be part of the PCS system under current standards and the playoff committee will be allowed to accept any team from a BCS conference that would have been bowl eligible if it wasn't for the attendance and funding requirements. So let's say Middle Tennessee State doesn't have the 15,000 in average paid attendance but won the Sun Belt. Middle Tennessee State, although in a BCS conference, would not be bowl eligible but could be selected for the PCS. And schools in the PCS that meet the 15,000 in average paid attendance and scholarship levels of the BCS would be eligible for an at large bowl bid.
What do you think? Is my prediction way off base?

[AppGuy04]

I have been very interested in proposals floating around the NCAA in recent months. Here's why:
In May, the Division I Board of Directors decided to study elimination of the I-A and I-AA descriptors for football, suggesting they might be replaced by terms like "bowl-eligible" and "championship-eligible" and also eased Division I-A membership attendance requirements just as several current members in (MAC and Sun Belt) faced involuntary reclassification.

Here is my bold prediction. In 5 years, there will be no Division I-AA. Here is how I believe Division I football should look like in five years, maybe sooner.
There will be Division I BCS (Bowl Championship Series) and a Division I PCS (Playoff Championship Series). Every current Division I-A conference will be a part of the BCS system, but bowl eligibility will be determined by the ability to maintain attendance (15,000) and funding requirements (scholarship levels). Every current Division I-AA conference will be part of the PCS system under current standards and the playoff committee will be allowed to accept any team from a BCS conference that would have been bowl eligible if it wasn't for the attendance and funding requirements. So let's say Middle Tennessee State doesn't have the 15,000 in average paid attendance but won the Sun Belt. Middle Tennessee State, although in a BCS conference, would not be bowl eligible but could be selected for the PCS. And schools in the PCS that meet the 15,000 in average paid attendance and scholarship levels of the BCS would be eligible for an at large bowl bid.
What do you think? Is my prediction way off base?

I think more likely in the near future, they will give schools the option of participating in the BCS or a playoff system

[NoCoDanny]

So then hypothetically a school could try to hold down attendance in an attempt to gain entry into the playoffs. Opens up a huge can of worms in my opinion.

[AppGuy04]

So then hypothetically a school could try to hold down attendance in an attempt to gain entry into the playoffs. Opens up a huge can of worms in my opinion.

thats why i don't think you can use attendance as a measuring block, unless the NCAA plans on controlling it themselves

[blukeys]

So then hypothetically a school could try to hold down attendance in an attempt to gain entry into the playoffs. Opens up a huge can of worms in my opinion.


I think Mr. Tiger's intent was to say an attendance policy would be neccessary for entrance into the Bowl Championship Series.

A school could always opt for the playoffs regardless of attendance.

[bandl]

Interesting theory. I imagine this thread will debate for many months to come. :nod: :eek:

A few questions that immediately came to mind upon reading your theory...

PCS
Will the # of playoff teams in the PCS be expanded so we can let the current I-A chumps play without taking away deserving bids from I-AA? I'd much rather see a 3rd place A-10 or SoCon or Gateway team than some last or second-to-last place team from the Big East or ACC.

Will auto-bids for I-AA conference winners still be in place?
Will I-AA be guaranteed a certain # of bids? If not, the PCS will be few and far between for many I-AA teams...2, 3 (and that rare 4) teams from one I-AA conference will be rare indeed.

Will the Ivy and SWAC join in the PCS?

BCS
Will the BCS be expanded to more than 4 games? And/or will it be expanded to include some sort of playoff system (at least 2 semi's and 1 final)? Oh wait...who really gives a crap about the BCS. :bang:

[AppGuy04]

Interesting theory. I imagine this thread will debate for many months to come. :nod: :eek:

A few questions that immediately came to mind upon reading your theory...

PCS
Will the # of playoff teams in the PCS be expanded so we can let the current I-A chumps play without taking away deserving bids from I-AA? I'd much rather see a 3rd place A-10 or SoCon or Gateway team some last or second-to-last place team from the Big East or ACC.

Will auto-bids for I-AA conference winners still be in place?
Will I-AA be guaranteed a certain # of bids? If not, the PCS will be few and far between for many I-AA teams...2, 3 (and that rare 4) teams from one I-AA conference will be rare indeed.

Will the Ivy and SWAC join in the PCS?

BCS
Will the BCS be expanded to more than 4 games? And/or will it be expanded to include some sort of playoff system (at least 2 semi's and 1 final)? Oh wait...who really gives a crap about the BCS. :bang:

I think if they do allow ACC etc teams into the PCS, then it will only be one team from each conference

example: The I-AA schools would keep their autobids(8 at the moment) and the other 8 would be filled by the next best team from the bigger conferences that did not make the BCS, hence winning your conference in I-AA would be the only way to make the PCS

[bandl]

I think if they do allow ACC etc teams into the PCS, then it will only be one team from each conference

example: The I-AA schools would keep their autobids(8 at the moment) and the other 8 would be filled by the next best team from the bigger conferences that did not make the BCS, hence winning your conference in I-AA would be the only way to make the PCS

That's my main concern for I-AA...playoff appearances would be few and far between for many I-AA teams.
I hope that a minimum win amount will be put in place for teams to make the PCS, such as is currently (in theory anyways) in place in I-AA. No more of the "6 wins and you get a consolation bowl prize!" that is currently in place at the I-A level. :boring:

[AppGuy04]

That's my main concern for I-AA...playoff appearances would be few and far between for many I-AA teams.
I hope that a minimum win amount will be put in place for teams to make the PCS, such as is currently (in theory anyways) in place in I-AA. No more of the "6 wins and you get a consolation bowl prize!" that is currently in place at the I-A level. :boring:

It would only make it tougher to win the NC

only the conference champs would even have a chance

[putter]

What about the scholarships? Remember that I-AA is cost-containment so all I-AA schools will have to offer 22 more scholarships if they want to compete against I-A teams in the playoffs.

[GrizFamily]

So what you are saying is that the PCS will basically become the NIT for football teams? I don't like it. It definately loses the allure of a real championship and become an also ran like the NIT.

But that doesn't mean it wont happen.

[OL FU]

Interesting theory. I imagine this thread will debate for many months to come. :nod: :eek:

A few questions that immediately came to mind upon reading your theory...

PCS
Will the # of playoff teams in the PCS be expanded so we can let the current I-A chumps play without taking away deserving bids from I-AA? I'd much rather see a 3rd place A-10 or SoCon or Gateway team than some last or second-to-last place team from the Big East or ACC.

Will auto-bids for I-AA conference winners still be in place?
Will I-AA be guaranteed a certain # of bids? If not, the PCS will be few and far between for many I-AA teams...2, 3 (and that rare 4) teams from one I-AA conference will be rare indeed.

Will the Ivy and SWAC join in the PCS?

BCS
Will the BCS be expanded to more than 4 games? And/or will it be expanded to include some sort of playoff system (at least 2 semi's and 1 final)? Oh wait...who really gives a crap about the BCS. :bang:

Nice Avatar :nod:

[Lehigh Football Nation]

To me this doesn't make sense. This year, we've seen a lessening of the requirements on attendance - mostly because MAC and Sun Belt teams have been cheating like hell to say that they've met the artificial 15,000 "requirement" for I-A membership. Now, you're relying on another one for BCS/PCS eligibility?

What you'd see (again) is rampant cheating in attendance figures to try to get in (or out) of the BCS/PCS.

I hope that the NCAA realizes that attendance "requirements" are useless and hopeless to enforce. Of course, that never stopped them before :nonono2: :nonono2: :nonono2:

[SoCon48]

I have been very interested in proposals floating around the NCAA in recent months. Here's why:
In May, the Division I Board of Directors decided to study elimination of the I-A and I-AA descriptors for football, suggesting they might be replaced by terms like "bowl-eligible" and "championship-eligible" and also eased Division I-A membership attendance requirements just as several current members in (MAC and Sun Belt) faced involuntary reclassification.

?

Changing the name is a big change?
So it's going to be what now? Division I-BE and I-CE???

[SoCon48]

I think if they do allow ACC etc teams into the PCS, then it will only be one team from each conference

example: The I-AA schools would keep their autobids(8 at the moment) and the other 8 would be filled by the next best team from the bigger conferences that did not make the BCS, hence winning your conference in I-AA would be the only way to make the PCS
Duke would be the only ACC team even remotely interested and they would likely follow the lead of the Ivies not to participate. No way Duke would play 4 extra games for free.

[Mr. Tiger]

I will try to clarify my theory.

The PCS would not be like the NIT. The PCS would still award automatic bids to PCS conferences, just more of them. I suggest 12. So that would not leave out any PCS conference champion and would include 4 more schools from power PCS conferences. ANY BCS team could opt to be included in the PCS and teams that have been in violation of the BCS attendance requirements would not be eligible for a bowl game. The way to preserve more spots in the playoffs for PCS teams would be to award more automatic bids to the power PCS conferences. A power poll could be used to determine which PCS conferences receive the second automatic bid. That means if the SoCon has a down season and its reflected in the power poll, it may receive one auto bid instead of its usual two. This year, the Southern Conference, A-10, Gateway, and Big Sky would have received two automatic bids. At-large bids usually go to those 2nd place conference teams anyway. A seven-win PCS requirement would take care of a possible 6-5 BCS team heading to the playoffs. That would leave 4 at large bids to go to the other PCS conferences' second-place teams, the power conferences third-place teams, or a BCS school that opted to be included in the PCS.

The SWAC and the IVY would be members of the PCS but since there will be more automatic bids handed out to the power conferences the chance of either league getting a playoff bid would be slim. But the door could be left open for both conferences to receive one of the 12 automatic bids if they ask the committee before the season to include them in the automatic bid process.

[AppGuy04]

Duke would be the only ACC team even remotely interested and they would likely follow the lead of the Ivies not to participate. No way Duke would play 4 extra games for free.

they play them for free now, b/c nobody goes to their games

[HensRock]

I don't like it because the BCS teams would have an unfair advantage in # of scholarships over the PCS teams. Also renaming the I-A and I-AA something else isn't going to change a damn thing. It will be business as usual unless some fundamental things change. The one glaring thing that needs to be addressed (and never has) is what to do with the non-scholarship programs. They water-down I-AA and they've been craving a championship of their own for years. Give it to them. Better yet, let them all play at Div-III like it was originally intended. I don't understand why the NCAA gives a rip if a school is Div-I for basketball, but div-III for fb. WHY DO THEY CARE HOW A SCHOOL FUNDS THEIR SPORTS PROGRAMS?????

[colgate13]

WHY DO THEY CARE HOW A SCHOOL FUNDS THEIR SPORTS PROGRAMS?????

I could see how a D III school thinks that a D III football but D I basketball school would have an unfair advantage over them.

[Mr. Tiger]

I don't like it because the BCS teams would have an unfair advantage in # of scholarships over the PCS teams. Also renaming the I-A and I-AA something else isn't going to change a damn thing. It will be business as usual unless some fundamental things change. The one glaring thing that needs to be addressed (and never has) is what to do with the non-scholarship programs. They water-down I-AA and they've been craving a championship of their own for years. Give it to them. Better yet, let them all play at Div-III like it was originally intended. I don't understand why the NCAA gives a rip if a school is Div-I for basketball, but div-III for fb. WHY DO THEY CARE HOW A SCHOOL FUNDS THEIR SPORTS PROGRAMS?????

Most of the schools that would probably opt to play in the PCS would have a tough time with an App. State. You will not have any teams in the Big 10, SEC, or ACC opting for the PCS because they want to receive a major bowl bid and they would have the attendance to do so. But teams in the MAC and Sun Belt and WAC have fewer bowl bids, no major bowl bids, some would not meet the attendance requirement and they don't have the maximum amount of D I-A scholarships. They are really just one step from being Division I-AA like Louisiana-Monroe who would get beaten by some Southland teams and has in the past including this year. So if say Western Michigan opted to be included in the PCS this year they could have been selected. Western Michigan finished 7-4 and beat S. Illinois. 34-28. App. State beat S. Illinois 38-24.

[bandl]

Most of the schools that would probably opt to play in the PCS would have a tough time with an App. State. You will not have any teams in the Big 10, SEC, or ACC opting for the PCS because they want to receive a major bowl bid and they would have the attendance to do so. But teams in the MAC and Sun Belt and WAC have fewer bowl bids, no major bowl bids, some would not meet the attendance requirement and they don't have the maximum amount of D I-A scholarships. They are really just one step from being Division I-AA like Louisiana-Monroe who would get beaten by some Southland teams and has in the past including this year. So if say Western Michigan opted to be included in the PCS this year they could have been selected. Western Michigan finished 7-4 and beat S. Illinois. 34-28. App. State beat S. Illinois 38-24.

Here's some questions...when does a school declare for the PCS or BCS? Before a season, during a season, or after a season? Is it a year to year thing (they can go back and forth between PCS and BCS as they please) or once they are in either the PCS or BCS, there are certain hurdles/criteria a team/school has to meet (or fail to meet) before they can switch?

[Umass74]

My understanding of the "Everybody in Div I" rule was that the classification of the individual school was based on the number of scholarships the school gave.

That would allow any school to move up or down based on the amount of money they wanted to invest.

If you had more that 63 scholarships,you were in the Bowl Division. So teams like Delaware and Montana could be bowl eligible just by declaring they would give between 64 and 85 scholarships.

Teams like Buffalo could stay in the MAC, but drop to 63 or less scholarships and be eligible for the playoffs.

The idea was to give the schools more flexibility. If a school needed $$$ they could go halfway, and give say, 72 scholarships and schedule a bunch of Bowl Division schools and not get their brains beat in.

[Mr. Tiger]

Here's some questions...when does a school declare for the PCS or BCS? Before a season, during a season, or after a season? Is it a year to year thing (they can go back and forth between PCS and BCS as they please) or once they are in either the PCS or BCS, there are certain hurdles/criteria a team/school has to meet (or fail to meet) before they can switch?

A school could declare for the PCS or BCS before or during the season a week before the playoff selection process. And schools could go back and forth between BCS and PCS depending on attendance and scholarship levels. This means if say Georgia Southern has BCS desires as long as GSU averages 15,000 in paid attendance and awards the minimum number of Division I BCS scholarships in a given year, Georgia Southern could declare for the BCS and be eligible for an at-large bowl bid and would not have to leave the SoCon and take part in the BCS. This proposal gives teams a postseason option as long as you meet the standards.

[bandl]

A school could declare for the PCS or BCS before or during the season a week before the playoff selection process. And schools could go back and forth between BCS and PCS depending on attendance and scholarship levels. This means if say Georgia Southern has BCS desires as long as GSU averages 15,000 in paid attendance and awards the minimum number of Division I BCS scholarships in a given year, Georgia Southern could declare for the BCS and be eligible for an at-large bowl bid and would not have to leave the SoCon and take part in the BCS. This proposal gives teams a postseason option as long as you meet the standards.
I don't like it. If that was the case, a low-level I-A team would essentially be taking away a playoff bid from a I-AA team that actually deserves a chance in the playoffs. Pardon the homerism....but a recent example is JMU in '04. They split the A-10 title but didn't receive the auto-bid...they could have been shafted and not even had a chance to play in the playoffs! :eek: Montana would not have been in the playoffs in '05. :eek:

It definitely puts the emphasis on "win your I-AA conference or you're out."

[Poly Pigskin]

I will try to clarify my theory.

The PCS would not be like the NIT. The PCS would still award automatic bids to PCS conferences, just more of them. I suggest 12. So that would not leave out any PCS conference champion and would include 4 more schools from power PCS conferences. ANY BCS team could opt to be included in the PCS and teams that have been in violation of the BCS attendance requirements would not be eligible for a bowl game. The way to preserve more spots in the playoffs for PCS teams would be to award more automatic bids to the power PCS conferences. A power poll could be used to determine which PCS conferences receive the second automatic bid. That means if the SoCon has a down season and its reflected in the power poll, it may receive one auto bid instead of its usual two. This year, the Southern Conference, A-10, Gateway, and Big Sky would have received two automatic bids. At-large bids usually go to those 2nd place conference teams anyway. A seven-win PCS requirement would take care of a possible 6-5 BCS team heading to the playoffs. That would leave 4 at large bids to go to the other PCS conferences' second-place teams, the power conferences third-place teams, or a BCS school that opted to be included in the PCS.

The SWAC and the IVY would be members of the PCS but since there will be more automatic bids handed out to the power conferences the chance of either league getting a playoff bid would be slim. But the door could be left open for both conferences to receive one of the 12 automatic bids if they ask the committee before the season to include them in the automatic bid process.

If you do that then you screw over any school not in an autobid conference by doubling bids for other conferences. It's hard enough to get in the playoffs without an autobid, why make it impossible? The only way I see this PCS thing working is to eliminate autobids and just take the 16 best teams.

[youwouldno]

What if the conference champ had chosen "BCS" (say the GSU example)? You could have a scenario where, for money and media reasons, the top schools from once "I-AA" conferences go to bowls. So the playoffs would lose their meaning... definitely like the NIT. At-large bids, by their nature, encourage less parity between conferences. Autobids, by their nature, strongly encourage parity.

I think there needs to be balance. How exactly I would structure things, I don't quite know, but the notion at the start of this thread is certainly not the answer.

[SoCon48]

they play them for free now, b/c nobody goes to their games
More than I-AA' s draw for reg season games.

[skinny_uncle]

No IA would ever take a playoff spot in this scenario. To make the IAA playoffs, you need at least 7 DI wins. Any IA with 7 wins or more is going to some bowl game.

[Poly Pigskin]

No IA would ever take a playoff spot in this scenario. To make the IAA playoffs, you need at least 7 DI wins. Any IA with 7 wins or more is going to some bowl game.

I think the idea was that if a team was bowl eligible in terms of wins, but didn't meet the attendance requirement, then they could still have a postseason by opting for the playoffs. I can't see many IA teams being bowl eligible and not averaging 15k fans though.

[vmisport]

but, this is what I gleaned from the NCAA convention minutes:
1) Vote was 6-5 in favor of a 12 game per year (starting 06 season).......since it wasn't a 2/3 decision it is being sent to 1AA school representatives for decision..don't know how that process works, also straight from the minutes:

Division I-AA Enhancements.



· Learned that the committee supports the following enhancements recommended by the Division I-AA Football Committee:



(1) Increase the travel party to 135 persons for preliminary rounds and to 150 persons for the championship game. The increase should include increases of a similar percentage for the squad size with these travel party limits.



(2) Local ground transportation expenses covered by the NCAA.



(3) Seeding eight teams in the championship bracket.



(4) Elimination of the current subdivision designations of the Division I-A and I-AA. Institutions that sponsor football should collectively be referred to as “Division I Football” and the former subdivisions would be referred to as “Bowl Division” and “Championship Division” as “Playoff Division.”

Looks like all this will be voted on at April meeting.

[SoCon48]

but, this is what I gleaned from the NCAA convention minutes:
1) Vote was 6-5 in favor of a 12 game per year (starting 06 season).......since it wasn't a 2/3 decision it is being sent to 1AA school representatives for decision..don't know how that process works, also straight from the minutes:

Division I-AA Enhancements.



· Learned that the committee supports the following enhancements recommended by the Division I-AA Football Committee:



(1) Increase the travel party to 135 persons for preliminary rounds and to 150 persons for the championship game. The increase should include increases of a similar percentage for the squad size with these travel party limits.



(2) Local ground transportation expenses covered by the NCAA.



(3) Seeding eight teams in the championship bracket.



(4) Elimination of the current subdivision designations of the Division I-A and I-AA. Institutions that sponsor football should collectively be referred to as “Division I Football” and the former subdivisions would be referred to as “Bowl Division” and “Championship Division” as “Playoff Division.”

Looks like all this will be voted on at April meeting.

Seems to me that by rights, the squad size should include all allowed scholarship players first before the rest of the increase in party size should begin. I can think of no 80 people who should be selected before the scholarship players.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

No IA would ever take a playoff spot in this scenario. To make the IAA playoffs, you need at least 7 DI wins. Any IA with 7 wins or more is going to some bowl game.

I can see it now:

PCS Playoffs 1st Round

10-1 Youngstown St. at 6-5 Bowling Green

This leads to: How would you seed these at-large teams? Is Bowling Green penalized for playing (say) Pitt, Penn State, and Akron, and they get credit for a win versus Northern Illinois? Yet a 10-1 YSU team gets "punished" for playing a D-II and also losing to Penn State?

What do you then do with championship games - most of which are played during the I-AA playoffs? Abolish them? Good luck. Even the MAC likes their Tuesday championship.

Let's get real - this will NEVER happen.

[Mr. Tiger]

Here a final complete breakdown to my proposal or prediction.

1. The NCAA must decide what to do with teams that don't meet attendance standards. I don't see the NCAA kicking anyone down to a lower division. Under my proposal Division I-A would turn into Division I BCS and Division I-AA would turn into Division I PCS. Any school in the BCS could opt to be included in the PCS before the season or during the season at least a week before the playoffs. Division I BCS schools that don't meet the attendance standards would still be a part of the BCS but not bowl eligible so that means the NCAA doesn't have to kick a program out of the classification. So that means teams like Middle Tennessee State who are drawing around 12,000 fans can remain in the BCS and if they finish with 7 wins or more could opt to be included in the PCS as one of the 4 at-large teams.

2. It would allow current Division I-AA teams with Division I-A desires to increase scholarships at any time and as long as they have the attendance they could opt to be included in the BCS and if they are bowl eligible they could accept an at-large bowl bid. This would stop teams like Louisiana-Monroe from making the fatal mistake of going Division I-A.

3. It would increase the number of automatic playoff bids to 12. Four power conferences would receive the extra bids based on a power poll. That means conferences like the Southern Conference would have two auto bids.


Everyone that made it to this year's playoffs would be in under my proposal with auto bids, except for Cal Poly, Lafayette, Nichols State, Georgia Southern. Those teams would have had to be chosen ahead of BCS schools that opt for the PCS and had 7 wins. Note: Not every BCS school with 7 wins gets invited to a bowl so these teams would more than likely expect a PCS at-large bid. These teams might have included this year: Louisiana Tech 7-4, Miami OH 7-4, Northern Illinois 7-5, and Western Michigan 7-4. No Sun Belt school because none finished above 6-5. And every other team that finished 7-4 was accepted to bowl so they wouldn't probably opt for the PCS.
Some have asked: Would every major team like App State increase scholarships before the season to BCS level to be a part of the BCS if they met the attendance requirement. The answer is No. That's because there are few bowls with at-large berths. But it does give an App State that option if it looks like a BCS conference can't fill all of their slots and a bowl wants to fill the void with a bowl-eligible PCS.

Here is the weak points. Would the PCS committee select all the BCS schools? I wouldn't. Cal Poly won their conference and played well in losses to Troy State and Montana. So here's how I would have selected. Cal Poly, Northern Illinois (because they went to MAC championship game), Georgia Southern, and Louisiana Tech. The other weak point is the scholarship level is higher for BCS schools so would it give them an advantage. But remember scholarship levels differ already in both classifications. Texas certainly has more scholarships than Louisiana Tech. And Georgia Southern has more scholarships than some I-AA schools.