The end of the NCAA

[CNS]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/andy_staples/02/16/conference-realignment/index.html?eref=sihp

I like the way this guy thinks

[nicname]

This is a football related thread really. 

[ksucrcoop]

This is a horrible article. Plus it is a complete knock-off (a bad one at that) of what ESPN already did back in August...

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4375901

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/andy_staples/02/16/conference-realignment/index.html?eref=sihp

I like the way this guy thinks

Haverhill is not going to like this.

[CNS]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/andy_staples/02/16/conference-realignment/index.html?eref=sihp

I like the way this guy thinks

Haverhill is not going to like this.

Might be good for the little fella.  ISU could rule the NCAA once these other teams moved to a different organization.

Haver, just picture this.  ISU, NCAA champs. 

[felix rex]

Tough time getting past this part (creepy Match.com bio pic doesn't help):

I hear a telltale thwap-thwap-thwap, and I suddenly find myself standing in front of an open drawer in my kitchen.

[sonofdaxjones]

The guy has a couple of good points.   But I think he's completely misguided on the legal/political piece.

If those 64 attempted to leave the NCAA and start their Uber athletic association . . . I personally believe there would be a mountain of litigation, and massive piles of political interference.    There's a whole bunch of schools with their lawyers, and their politicians in their hip pocket that will fight that to the bitter end.   There's no way a BYU, Iowa State,  Boise State, or a Fresno State lets that happen without filing lawsuit after lawsuit, the entire MAC would file suit . . . it would be endless.   

     

[AzCat]

They'd probably try but the NCAA is more than a little like the UN: membership is entirely voluntary and essentially worthless; the few big money members pay the bills while a horde of ankle-biters try their best to make life more difficult for their betters.  If it came down to the pissant / small money / ankle biter crowd verus the money programs in the courts and smokey political backrooms I'd take the latter in a heartbeat. 

[Ghost of Stan Parrish]

They'd probably try but the NCAA is more than a little like the UN: membership is entirely voluntary and essentially worthless; the few big money members pay the bills while a horde of ankle-biters try their best to make life more difficult for their betters.  If it came down to the pissant / small money / ankle biter crowd verus the money programs in the courts and smokey political backrooms I'd take the latter in a heartbeat. 

You people are deluding yourselves about which side of the have/have-not split the Kansas State University would ultimately be on...

[Pete]

They'd probably try but the NCAA is more than a little like the UN: membership is entirely voluntary and essentially worthless; the few big money members pay the bills while a horde of ankle-biters try their best to make life more difficult for their betters.  If it came down to the pissant / small money / ankle biter crowd verus the money programs in the courts and smokey political backrooms I'd take the latter in a heartbeat. 

You people are deluding yourselves about which side of the have/have-not split the Kansas State University would ultimately be on...

I completely agree.  I believe it is an "when," not "if" when it comes to the notion that we'll end up in a crap conference.

[sonofdaxjones]

Based purely on the formula that this guys is talking about using . . . K-State is firmly in the Top 64.

But that won't be the formula . . . thing is, IMO the super conferences will be more inclusionairy than exclusionairy.

People aren't lending enough credence to the political climate that's casting a wary eye toward both the NCAA and BCS.   Attempts to be exclusionary are going to be met with piles of litigation and political interference IMO.   

That being said, I believe K-State will be fine from a BCS or BCS type participation conference . . . . TV and exposure could very well be an issue.

[CNS]

Thinking about jumping ship from the NCAA, think of all the structure a new affiliation would have to create.  Most rules about amateur athletes, payments, recruiting methods, eligibility, transfers, etc are set by the NCAA, I assume.

All that is up for redefinition if the super conferences form and leave the NCAA.  Could create major changes in how things are done. 

[AzCat]

Thinking about jumping ship from the NCAA, think of all the structure a new affiliation would have to create.  Most rules about amateur athletes, payments, recruiting methods, eligibility, transfers, etc are set by the NCAA, I assume.

All that is up for redefinition if the super conferences form and leave the NCAA.  Could create major changes in how things are done. 

Think of: no rules!   

[CNS]

Thinking about jumping ship from the NCAA, think of all the structure a new affiliation would have to create.  Most rules about amateur athletes, payments, recruiting methods, eligibility, transfers, etc are set by the NCAA, I assume.

All that is up for redefinition if the super conferences form and leave the NCAA.  Could create major changes in how things are done. 

Think of: no rules!   

A new establishment may allow what is now deemed slimy.  Could create spectacular sports.  Could also guarantee that those left out would immediately get worse.  Lots of programs would be crippled.