15K Actual Approved

[Buddy1972]

Buried at the bottom of yesterday's NCAA release regarding Recruiting Reform was the following:

"In other action, the Board of Directors approved legislation related to Division I membership requirements. Specifically, the Board approved an amendment regarding penalties for institutions that do not meet Division I-A membership requirements in a given year.
Under this measure, institutions would first be subject to a "notice of failure." Any further failure to meet membership requirements within 10 years will result in an institution being placed in restricted membership."

This refers to NCAA Bylaw 20.9.6.3, Football Attendance Requirements [I-A], which states "The institution shall annually average at least 15,000 in actual attendance for all home football games." 20.9.6.3.2 addresses audit procedures.

[nadB]

Buried at the bottom of yesterday's NCAA release regarding Recruiting Reform was the following:

"In other action, the Board of Directors approved legislation related to Division I membership requirements. Specifically, the Board approved an amendment regarding penalties for institutions that do not meet Division I-A membership requirements in a given year.
Under this measure, institutions would first be subject to a "notice of failure." Any further failure to meet membership requirements within 10 years will result in an institution being placed in restricted membership."

This refers to NCAA Bylaw 20.9.6.3, Football Attendance Requirements [I-A], which states "The institution shall annually average at least 15,000 in actual attendance for all home football games." 20.9.6.3.2 addresses audit procedures.

The board also approved a measure that penalizes schools for failing to meet Division I-A football requirements. The first time a school dropped below the standard, it would receive a notification letter. A second violation during the next 10 years would make that school ineligible for postseason bowl play for at least two years.

So, what they are saying is the first time actual attendance for all home games does not average 15,000 in a given year, a "warning notice" is given. Then, any time within 10 years after the "warning notice", if the average attendance for all home games does not average 15,000 in a given year, they cannot participate in a bowl game for at least the next 2 years. But, they can stay 1-A, even if they never get the 15,000 average home attendance. Am I reading this right ??

[nadB]

So, what they are saying is the first time actual attendance for all home games does not average 15,000 in a given year, a "warning notice" is given. Then, any time within 10 years after the "warning notice", if the average attendance for all home games does not average 15,000 in a given year, they cannot participate in a bowl game for at least the next 2 years. But, they can stay 1-A, even if they never get the 15,000 average home attendance. Am I reading this right ??

But, then again, from the Orlando Sentinel,
".
.
.
However, the board moved more carefully on the rules for membership in I-A football, letting stand rules that went into effect Aug. 1 that require schools to offer at least 200 scholarships in its overall athletic program, schedule at least four home games against I-A opponents and average at least 15,000 in actual attendance in order to become or remain at that level.

The Board did leave plenty of wiggle room by attaching no real penalty for the first violation and said the rules also were under review and could be changed at a later date.

"We will spend this next year examining those standards and make sure they don't create legal liabilities," Hemenway said.

Failure to meet any of the standards would result in a school receiving a notice of non-compliance.

A second failure would put the school on restricted status and make it ineligible for a post-season bowl game. A third failure would result in a reclassification to a lower division.

Most of the discussion at the meeting was about the attendance issue, especially about how weather could impact the average.

"In course of the year-long review, that is one of the things that will be looked at," Hemenway said.

The rules are of particular interest to Florida Atlantic and Florida International. Both are starting the two-year transition from I-AA to I-A this season.

Attendance is the toughest standard for both schools to meet. FAU averaged 6,909 last year and FIU 7,073.

"Our plan hasn't changed," FAU Athletic Director Craig Angelos said. "We need to improve attendance to promote the program, meet the NCAA standards and drive revenue."

Ted Hutton writes for the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, a Tribune Publishing "

This article indicates a school might be kicked out of Div 1-A after the third failure to meet the 15K min average home attendance ?? I think a lot of folks are really confused (about this) at this point in time ??

[Buddy1972]

The press release is pretty generic; however, more detail is provided in the report: http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/gove..._up_report.htm

The board approved proposal No. 2002-93, as amended. Proposal 2002-93 changes Bylaw 20.9.6.5 to read Noncompliance with Division I-A Criteria and adds 20.9.6.5.1, Restricted Membership. It's not clear to me how much of Proposal 2002-93 has actually been amended. Prior to the amendment, 20.9.6.5.1 referenced only a one-year restricted membership category --- with the amendment, restricted membership status is deferred until a second occurence over a 10 year period after issuance of a "notice of failure." Prior to the amendment, 20.9.6.5.1 addressed loss of Division I-A status, but in very general terms. I know it's sad, but I look forward to seeing the exact wording when released.

It's somewhat comforting that a motion was approved "...that calls for the Board of Directors to conduct a comprehensive review of Division I-A membership standards over the course of the next year."

It appears as though the Board of Directors softened the criteria for restricted membership status and I would not be surprised if 20.9.6.5 is further amended after the aforementioned comprehensive review.

[nadB]

Many Thanks for clarifying this issue, Buddy1972.

I guess we can assume that:

1) No school will be kicked out of Div I-A after next season, no matter what.
2) The rules are gonna change, and nobody knows what will finally shake out.

jmho

[aubunique]

Good summary, Nad!

[Buddy1972]

Wish we had FriscoDawg's take on this.

[PawDawg]

Yeah, where has he been? I'm no Frisco but,

My take.......I've said all along that the NCAA would have to change the attendance rule or the number of 1A opponents to go bowling rule. When they passed the attendance rule they didn't factor in the fact that the patsies wouldn't be able to meet the attendance rule. That forces them to play the mid-majors (I hate that term) and there simply aren't enough of them to go around. I don't think that concerns most of the upper level BCS teams but the lower level BCS teams like Miss. St., Vandy, Baylor or whoever happens to be horrible at the time don't want to be forced to play a team that will likely beat them on their home field. Also, the mid-level BCS teams who need that 6th or 7th win to go bowling want a gimmie. If the Belch goes 1A who would they have left? Well as long as Bicknell is our coach............

Bottom line is that the BCS elite didn't think this one through the first time.