Play Fantasy Use your Fantasy skills to win Cash Prizes. Join or start a league today. Play Now
 
Tag:NCAA
Posted on: February 21, 2012 8:00 pm
Edited on: February 21, 2012 8:47 pm
 

BCS plus-one format gains momentum

DALLAS – There are still a myriad of things to determine how the Bowl Championship Series’ postseason format ultimately will look like in 2014, but one topic seems apparent: college football’s playoff will not be larger than four teams.

“I would say obviously eight or 16 team (playoff formats) are not on the radar screen,” said a person attending the four-hour plus BCS meetings Tuesday at the Dallas-Fort Worth Grand Hyatt Hotel.

On Tuesday, the 11 conference commissioners, Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick, two BCS officials and a BCS attorney met to discuss what form college football’s postseason will look like beginning in 2014.

While sources at the meeting said a four-team plus-one format looks likely when the new BCS format starts in two years, BCS executive director Bill Hancock stressed the meetings were “very broad and analytical” and that no decisions were reached.

The group will meet Wednesday then again in Dallas next month and in Fort Lauderdale in April. However, Hancock says he would be surprised if a decision is reached before summer.

“I don’t think this will be an overnight decision,” Hancock said.

Added SEC commissioner Mike Slive: “This is a marathon, not a sprint.”

Maybe so, but when they’re done running there likely will be a four-team playoff.

Now comes the intriguing part: how will the plus-one model look like?

Will it be a seeded model (one vs. four, two vs. three); where will the semifinals be played; and how - or will - the bowl games be utilized? Will the bowl games host the semifinals and final or will the plus-one semifinals and final be awarded to the highest bidder – i.e. the Cotton Bowl or another current non-BCS bowl?

Even with a four-team format some of problems are "insurmountable" according to source in attendance Tuesday. Hancock and others spoke of not wanting to hold BCS games during the December exam period, usually between Dec. 1-21. While FCS (Division I-AA), Division II and III stage playoffs in December, FBS (Division I-A) would be doing it for the first time. The scrutiny would be enhanced on presidents at the highest level of college athletics if football cut into that exam time.

Besides wanting to avoid BCS games during the exam schedule, they also want to avoid playing BCS games around Christmas. Another challenge, Hancock said, is scheduling games around the NFL.

Presidents also want the season to end before the second week of January and closer to Jan. 1. Ohio State has flown back from a BCS championship game site immediately after the game at least once because school had started back home.

Last season's BCS title game between Alabama and LSU was played on Jan. 9 and resulted in the lowest TV ratings in BCS title game history.

Based on those preferred timelines (no exams, no Christmas and no NFL conflicts), the most likely time for a plus-one would be holding the semifinals a few days after Christmas and the final about a week later.

Any changes to the BCS format, which expires after the 2013 regular season, must be approved by the NCAA’s Presidential Oversight Committee, which must decide whether to approve the recommendation of the 11 Football Bowl Subdivision commissioners and Swarbrick.
Category: NCAAF
Tags: BCS, NCAA, plus-one
 
Posted on: December 7, 2011 7:38 pm
Edited on: December 7, 2011 7:43 pm
 

Big East: different look, but same name

NEW YORK – First things first: the Big East Conference, stretching four time zones from the East Coast to the West Coast, is not undergoing a name change.

It will remain the Big East.

It will, however, look much, much different.

On Wednesday, the league announced that Boise State, San Diego State, Houston, SMU and UCF would join the league in 2013. Boise State and San Diego State as football-only members and Houston, SMU and UCF as all-sport members.

And even with the addition of those five schools, Big East commissioner John Marinatto said the league has no plans to allow West Virginia (to the Big 12) and Syracuse and Pittsburgh (to the ACC) to leave before June 30, 2014, as required by conference by-laws.

“The additions that we're making today have no impact whatsoever in regard to our commitment and our belief that our schools that are leaving would fulfill the 27‑month requirement clause that's currently in our bylaws,” Marinatto said. “The bylaws are the bylaws are the bylaws. They represent the agreements between the conference schools. I think there's an understanding amongst all of our schools that an early departure and a violation of those bylaws would do damage to the schools that are remaining. As a result, two of our schools have indicated that they respect that process and they understand it.”

Those two schools are Syracuse and Pittsburgh. West Virginia, however, has filed a lawsuit to join the Big 12 next season. The Big East also has filed a lawsuit to make West Virginia honor the exit agreement until 2014.

West Virginia athletic director Oliver Luck told CBSSports.com Wednesday that even if the league compromised and allowed the Mountaineers to leave a year early in 2013, their plans are still to join the Big 12 next season.

“That doesn’t change,” Luck told CBSSports.com.

Syracuse athletic director Daryl Gross said his school is prepared to honor the 27-month exit agreement, but told CBSSports.com “we’re just open to seeing what happens.”

“They’re starting to put together what the new Big East will look like,” Gross said. “As they go forward to put together new multi-media deals, they’re going to need us to move out of the way. We’re waiting for that.”

Marinatto said that was not the case. So if West Virginia, Pitt and Syracuse must remain in the league through June 30, 2014, that means the Big East in 2013 would consist of at least 13 teams in football and 19 schools in basketball.

Officials at Air Force, which was a target of the Big East as a football-only member, told the Gazette Wednesday, that it would remain in the Mountain West. Navy, however, remains a viable target, but won’t make any decisions this week that would take attention away from Saturday’s Army-Navy game.

The new Big East is certainly bigger than any conference out there. It’s got a bigger footprint than even Bigfoot.

“We've envisioned the premise that we could theoretically on any given Saturday have four kickoffs that don't compete with each other,” Marinatto said. “We think, as I mentioned earlier, that's a very powerful model as we move forward in our upcoming TV negotiations.”

Those will begin in 2012. The Big East first must give ESPN the first opportunity as its currents rights holder and if they don’t reach a deal by November 2012 then the Big East could negotiate with other networks such as Fox or NBC/Comcast.

NCAA President Mark Emmert, without specially mentioning the Big East, discussed schools leaving non-automatic BCS qualifying conferences (such as Boise State, Houston, San Diego State, UCF and SMU) for an automatic qualifying BCS conference such as the Big East.

“There’s a lot of motivation’s going on (with expansion), clearly the BCS automatic qualifying position is driving a lot of this,” Emmert said at the IMG Forum at the Marriott Marquis. “Nobody wants to lose their AQ rights in the BCS and, of course, one of the ironies is the BCS is going to be refined again (in 2014).”

And if there remains BCS AQ conferences at that time, the Big East feels strongly it will remain one.

“Part of our objectives in expansion was to create the best conference we could both on the football side as well as other sports,” Marinatto said. “We recognize obviously the departure of the schools leaving the conference affected us. But we always felt confident that if we made the right moves, we would keep our BCS AQ status and we've done that.”

Posted on: December 7, 2011 6:47 pm
Edited on: December 7, 2011 6:58 pm
 

Stanford AD says "Plus-One" model inevitable

NEW YORK - On Monday, the Big 12's athletic directors took a straw poll and were in favor of a plus-one format, allowing the top four teams to play for a national title, SI.com reported.

On Wednesday, Stanford athletic director Bob Bowlsby went a step further, calling the plus-one model "inevitable" when the new BCS cycle begins in 2014.

"I happen to agree with my conference colleagues about the plus-one game," Bowlsby said Wednesday at the IMG Forum at the Marriott Marquis. "I think it's inevitable at this point."

While a panel of athletic directors mostly opposed a large playoff, similar to the one held at the FCS level, Washington athletic director Scott Woodward said he's in favor of the plus-one format and went as far to say he thinks it will eventually happen.

NCAA President Mark Emmert also said he is "confident some change (will happen) in the BCS format" in 2014, when the new cycle is implemented. He would not, however, give specifics and would not comment if he was in a favor of the "plus-one" model.

Category: NCAAF
Posted on: November 18, 2011 2:47 pm
Edited on: November 18, 2011 7:04 pm
 

NCAA will launch investigation of Penn State

Penn State was notified by NCAA President Mark Emmert that the NCAA will launch an investigation into the Nittany Lions' athletic programs in the wake of allegations of sexual abuse by former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky and charges of perjury against two senior Penn State officials.

"I am writing to notify you that the NCAA will examine Penn State's exercise of institutional control over its intercollegiate athletics programs, as well as the actions, and inactions, of relevant responsible personnel," Emmert wrote to the school. "We recognize that there are ongoing federal and state investigations and the NCAA does not intend to interfere with those probes."

Emmert set out several questions that Penn State officials must be prepared to answer as part of the probe. Responses to this NCAA inquiry are expected by Dec. 16 in order for the NCAA to determine next steps.

Here is a copy of the three-page letter sent from the NCAA to Penn State president Rodney Erickson, outlining the NCAA's concerns.

The NCAA indicated "NCAA Bylaw 10.1 identifies 10 types of unethical conduct, but specifically makes clear that the list of 10 is not limited to those delineated. Among, other things, that list captures the general principle of honesty embedded in Bylaw 10.01.1, which requires individuals to "act with honest and sportsmanship at all times so that intercollegiate athletics as a whole, their institutions and they, as individuals, shall represent the honor and dignity of fair play and the generally recognized high standards associated with wholesome competitive sports."

Penn State released a statement Friday afternoon in response.

Penn State Intercollegiate Athletics intends to fully cooperate with the NCAA during its inquiry, and understands that this is a preliminary step toward understanding what happened as well as how to prevent anything similar from happening in the future.  


We understand and believe in the importance of following both the letter and spirit of the NCAA rules and guidelines, and will continue to reiterate that to our coaches, student-athletes and athletic administrators.

The NCAA's pending investigation is just the latest fallout from the allegations against Sandusky and the alleged cover-up by Coach Joe Paterno and university officials.

On Monday, the Big Ten removed Paterno's name from the Big Ten's championship football trophy. Also, Tuesday, CBSSports.com reported bowls may shy away from selecting the Nittany Lions because they were viewed as "toxic" because of the attention the Sandusky allegations would bring.




Category: NCAAF
Tags: NCAA, Penn State
 
Posted on: August 17, 2011 12:33 pm
Edited on: August 17, 2011 1:36 pm
 

Emmert: no conference realignment summit

After NCAA president Mark Emmert read erroneous media reports that he planned to have a summit on conference realignment, he emailed several officials throughout intercollegiate athletics to clarify no meetings would take place.

CBSSports.com obtained the document Emmert sent out.

"I have been and will continue to engage individual presidents and commissioners about the reform effort that was launched last week as part of the Division I presidential retreat," Emmert wrote. "In that context, all constituents have been involved in meaningful discussion on how best to conduct our business, including conference realignments, in the best interests of student-athletes. Open and frank discussion is needed to ensure expected reforms are not derailed in any way. However, I have not proposed, nor do I have plans to propose a summit on conference realignment as recently reported by several media outlets. Such reports are simply in error."

Getting all the key players from the SEC, Big 12, Pac-12, Big Ten, ACC and Big East conferences together to discuss conference realignment would seem like a good idea for the future of college athletics. But an NCAA spokesman said that was never a consideration.

"Conference affilations are the purview of the conferences not the NCAA," said Bob Williams, the NCAA's vice president of communications.

I asked Williams if there also were legal reasons why Emmert wouldn't meet with the BCS conference commissioners.

"Antitrust is always an issue," he said.

Posted on: July 24, 2011 9:31 pm
 

Tar Heels not focusing on upcoming penalties

PINEHURST, N.C. – North Carolina is going to get hit by the NCAA – and probably hit hard – but two UNC seniors said Sunday they’re trying not to think about the upcoming penalties. 

“We really don’t think about that too much,” UNC senior center Jonathan Cooper said during the ACC's Football Kickoff. “It’s in the back of our minds, it’s on the back burner – what happens, happens. We’re just trying to work on improving.”

When the allegations came out, Cooper said he didn’t bother reading the NCAA’s 42-page report. 

“I just heard people say it was out,” Cooper said. “It was probably more information than what we already know. I don’t pay much attention to it honestly. Whatever happens, I don’t have any control.”

The NCAA’s report listed nine allegations against the Tar Heels’ program. Several players were suspended for part or all of last season because of the allegations. However, both Cooper and North Carolina senior defensive tackle Tydreke Powell don’t hold grudges against those teammates – even though the program could see significant penalties. 

“I think all of them are great guys,” Cooper said. “We all make mistakes. I’ve made mistakes in my life and I can’t say I’m any better than them. It hurts what could have been [if those players weren’t suspended], I still love the guys, they’re my teammates, they’re Tar Heels. I don’t hold anything against them.”

Powell had similar thoughts. 

“I don’t have anything against them,” Powell said. “Everyone makes mistakes. There’s no one that’s perfect in this world, I don’t hold any grudges at all.”

Powell said the Tar Heels can’t dwell on what might happen with the upcoming penalties or it will affect this year’s performance. 

“We’ve just got to throw it over our shoulders and strap up and play,” Powell said. “No matters what happens, we’ve still got to play.

“You can’t think about it [possible infractions]. If you think about it, it will wear you down. There’s nothing we can do about it. Why think about it? If you want to come out and have a great season you have to avoid thinking about it.”



Posted on: July 14, 2011 2:23 pm
Edited on: July 14, 2011 6:18 pm
 

Georgia Tech vacates 2009 ACC title

Georgia Tech has vacated its 2009 ACC Championship and was put on four years probation by the NCAA's Committee on Infractions.

CBSSports.com first reported the Yellow Jackets would vacate the 2009 ACC title.

Georgia Tech’s penalties include using ineligible student athletes during the 2009 season. Two of those student athletes involved are former wide receiver Demaryius Thomas and defensive back Morgan Burnett, a source said. Thomas was a first round pick in the 2010 NFL draft and Burnett was a third-round selection.

In 2009, Georgia Tech defeated Clemson 39-34 in the ACC championship game in Tampa, Fla., and then ended the season with a 24-14 loss to Iowa in the Orange Bowl.

The NCAA Committee on Infractions cited Georgia Tech for a lack of cooperation during an investigation, a failure to meet the conditions and obligations of membership, and preferential treatment violations.  The official punishment, according to the NCAA release, included a $100,000 fine, recruiting restrictions, vacation of records, and four years probation.

The football team, specifically, will suffer from the four years probation that will last until July 13, 2015, and the vacation of all contests won by the football team during the 2009 season after November 24, which includes their ACC title game victory over Clemson. Georgia Tech's crimes in the football program stem from a lack of action after being made aware of eligibility questions with a student-athlete.  CBSSports.com was told Thomas and Burnett were involved.

Judging by the phrasing in the report, the NCAA was most upset with Georgia Tech's attitude towards possible violations/investigations.

"The staff members provided, before the NCAA could conduct their interview, information about what would be discussed in the interview," NCAA Committee on Infractions chair Dennis Thomas said. "These actions impeded the enforcement staff investigations and hindered the Committee in getting to the truth in this case. Otherwise this case, as it pertains to the football program, would have been limited to impermissible benefits and preferential treatment violations."

The report from the NCAA goes on to state that the student-athlete in question competed in the final three contests of the 2009.  In this case, several items of clothing (valued at approximately $312) was the culprit.  A friend of a sports agency employee gave the gifts, and thus the student-athlete was ineligible for those contests.

"The championship game that they played in was vacated," Thomas said. "Most people in athletics take that very seriously as a major deterrent for playing ineligible athletes."

Despite the issues with Georgia Tech as an institution during the infractions process, no individuals were penalized as a result of non-cooperation.

"The committee felt that a show cause was not appropriate," Thomas said. "The committee reviewed the evidence and did not feel that anyone needed to be singled out in terms of an individual violation. We looked as it being more of an institutional matter."

"This case provides a cautionary tale of the conduct that member institutions should avoid while under investigation for violations of NCAA rules," the committee stated in its report.

Georgia Tech President G.P. "Bud" Peterson said the school could have done some things differently.

"Georgia Tech is committed to the integrity of its athletics program, including full cooperation and support of the NCAA," Peterson said. "Given the information we had at the time, I believe we took reasonable and appropriate steps to determine the proper course of action and acted in good faith. Looking back, there are things we could have done differently. Because of our unwavering commitment to NCAA compliance, we have already taken a number of steps to address perceived shortcomings, hopefully ensuring that our programs remain beyond reproach."

CBSSports.com's Chip Patterson and Bryan Fischer contributed to this report.


Posted on: June 17, 2011 4:24 pm
Edited on: June 17, 2011 4:45 pm
 

Schools: NCAA's APR data for coaches not fair

Charlie Strong was hired at Louisville on Dec. 9, 2009. So he obviously did not coach the Cardinals during the 2009-10 season. But don’t tell the NCAA that, because according to how the NCAA computes the Academic Progress Rate (APR) scores, Strong was just as responsible for the Cardinals’ low APR score as former coach Steve Kragthorpe.

Because Strong was at the school during the 2009-10 school year, the NCAA gives Strong and Kragthorpe equal credit for the Cardinals’ APR score that year.

UL’s 869 APR out of 1,000 was the worst APR score among the 120 Football Bowl Subdivision schools in 2009-10.

In Wednesday’s study of the APR averages of the FBS coaches by CBSSports.com, I used the data provided by the NCAA. The coaches year-by-year APR scores are available on the NCAA’s website, if you want to check it out for yourself.

At least two schools – Louisville and UCF – believe the way the NCAA calculates the APR scores for coaches is not fair and misleading. Louisville believes Strong should not be saddled with the 2009-10 score of 869 - the school expects the 2010-11 APR to be significantly better.

UCF also believes Coach George O’Leary should not be credited with the 880 from the 2003-04 year because O’Leary was hired at UCF on Dec. 8, 2003.

UCF felt strongly enough about how the NCAA calculates the coaches APR scores, the school posted a story on its website following the CBSSports.com study. UCF's story did not include O'Leary's 2003-04 880 APR score. Louisville officials prefered not to comment for this story.

Based on the NCAA’s data, Strong ranked as the coach with the worst APR in FBS. Three other coaches that had the nation’s seven-worst coaching APRs – Akron’s Rob Ianello (900), Memphis’ Larry Porter (903) and Buffalo’s Jeff Quinn (918) – also were credited for a dismal APR score even though they arrived after that football season had been completed.

I e-mailed NCAA spokesman Eric Christianson Thursday, asking for an explanation why the NCAA computes the APR’s of the coaches that way. When I receive a response, I will let you know.



 
 
 
 
The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com