Improving College Basketball

Bill Russell

Bill Russell

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2019
Messages
708
Likes
1,308
Working remotely often leaves me quite bored; consequently, I typed up some ideas to make Division 1 college basketball more equitable, efficient, and generally reasonable. Some people will hate this...
  1. Any high school player who signs a National Letter of Intent is guaranteed four years of full scholarship—provided he/she meets officially established university, program, and legal standards. NLIs can be signed at any time from the beginning of the academic year until the attending college commences classes the following fall semester.
  2. Any high school player who signs an Athletics Grant-in-Aid is guaranteed two years of full scholarship—provided he/she meets officially established university, program, and legal standards. GIAs can be signed at any time from the conclusion of the NCAA basketball season until the attending college commences classes in the fall semester. If a player’s GIA is not renewed after two years, then he/she is eligible to transfer without a year in residence.
  3. All undergraduate transfers sit for one year in residence. The only exceptions include the aforementioned GIA scenario and mutually documented run-offs.
  4. Any program exceeding an average of one annual run-off over a 10-year period will face sanctions (depending upon severity).
  5. All graduate transfers are under scholarship for two academic years and count toward any new program’s limit for that same period; the player and program decide between immediate eligibility and a year in residence.
  6. Players may not transfer between NCAA Division 1 institutions after the final week in June (most institutions' year-end).
  7. No team with a losing regular season conference record can earn an at-large bid to the NCAA Tournament.
  8. To be eligible for the NCAA Tournament, programs in Division 1 Men’s Basketball must play a minimum of three (3) true road games during the out-of-conference schedule.
  9. Conferences shall not exceed 14 members.
  10. Conferences shall not exceed 18 league games during the regular season.
  11. Conferences must play a minimum of 14 league games during the regular season.
  12. All programs in Division 1 Men’s Basketball will participate in a multi-team event (MTE) during the out-of-conference schedule.
  13. All programs in Division 1 Men’s Basketball will play 31 regular season games.
  14. Intra-conference programs cannot compete against one another as part of the OOC.
  15. Head coaches cannot leave a program while under contract unless a buyout is agreed upon between his current and future employers.
  16. Sneaker companies cannot have any affiliation beyond gear sponsorship with high school basketball events—including AAU and other recruiting showcases.
  17. All AAU and recruiting showcases must be sanctioned by the NCAA. If a player participates in a non-sanctioned event, then he/she is ineligible to play at an NCAA institution for one calendar year.
  18. No program in Division 1 Men’s Basketball shall exceed playing one (1) non-D1 opponent.
  19. The NCAA Tournament shall expand to 72 teams; the play-in rounds will take place between the 16 seeds and 15 seeds, respectively, in neutral regional locations (East; Midwest; South; West).
  20. All games in the NCAA Tournament shall be played in basketball arenas—no longer in football stadiums/domes.
  21. The National Invitation Tournament will no longer accept automatic bids from conferences’ regular season champions (those who do not go on to earn an NCAA bid).
  22. All NIT bids will be on an at-large basis.
  23. To receive an at-large NIT bid, a team must have an overall winning record.
  24. The 32-team NIT will be played in four regions prior to NYC (East; Midwest; South; West regions prior to MSG) over the course of one week (To avoid scheduling conflicts with the NCAA Tournament, the 1st and 2nd rounds will be on the Tuesday and Wednesday following Selection Sunday; quarterfinals, semifinals, and finals will be played the following Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday in MSG).
 
Last edited:
Appreciate it, Bill. Some of my own reactions:

7-12 to me are non negotiable. Obviously we're all biased, but the NCAA is simply more exciting when there is greater equity outside non p6. It actually seemed to be making a bit of a comeback the last couple of seasons, but even then some of it seemed force fed. These rules would allow for it to develop organically.

Does 14 ever happen intentionally? Are there currently any official limitations on intraconference participants in OOC tournaments?

15 is an interesting one as well. Preaching to the choir, the concept of contract extensions has always seemed comically pointless. The coaches may as well ask the fan bases if this makes them all feel better when they inked the extensions, because that's about as far as their worth goes.

Love all the stuff about the NIT. With all the advanced metrics there are in today's game- and, if 7-12 become realities- there would be plenty of ways to properly evaluate solid, but not NCAA worthy teams from smaller conferences on their NIT worth. No matter how many MEAC, or SWAC or NEC games you win, most of the times those are still teams stealing a bid from a worthy mid or high major.
 
Community Bank 3Pt Tee said:
Does 14 ever happen intentionally? Are there currently any official limitations on intraconference participants in OOC tournaments?
Click to expand...
No, but I am very cyncial when it comes to the P5. Those ass-bloods would probably answer the 18 conference game limit by playing each other in a non-conference capacity (this has happened when teams like George Mason or Davidson joined the A10, but had already scheduled league opponents ahead of their inclusion). It is important to try to think like those slimy pricks to try to get in front of their monopolistic schemes.

Community Bank 3Pt Tee said:
15 is an interesting one as well. Preaching to the choir, the concept of contract extensions has always seemed comically pointless. The coaches may as well ask the fan bases if this makes them all feel better when they inked the extensions, because that's about as far as their worth goes.
Click to expand...
With this one, I am trying to address the, "BUT! BUT! The coach can leave any time and not sit out, so players should be able to leave programs in the lurch and ditch out with no consequences!" crowd. If a coach wants to stay, fine... extend. But he is finishing that contract unless someone totally blows away his employer with a program-enhancing buyout. Contracts need to mean something--that goes for schools, coaches, players, and the whole bunch.

Community Bank 3Pt Tee said:
Love all the stuff about the NIT. With all the advanced metrics there are in today's game- and, if 7-12 become realities- there would be plenty of ways to properly evaluate solid, but not NCAA worthy teams from smaller conferences on their NIT worth. No matter how many MEAC, or SWAC or NEC games you win, most of the times those are still teams stealing a bid from a worthy mid or high major.
Click to expand...
Yes. The NIT became a joke when it started taking the regular season champions (who don't go on to the NCAA) of the lower 1/3 leagues. Guess who that benefits? You guessed it! The P5. It sets up a scenario where the fringe NCAA P5 teams can have pseudo-byes into the NIT 2nd round. That tournament could be a really fun, interesting event again if it's fast and NEVER competing head-to-head with the actual NCAA Tournament.
 
Honestly I wish they'd do away with the NIT an expand the NCAA to 96 teams. The 32 conference tournament champions have the 1st round byes, the 64 at-large play at the higher seed on a Tuesday/Wednesday elimination round .. and move to Thursday/Friday opening round. I like this for a few reasons:
- more teams with a shot at the NCAA title - face it, outside of involved fan bases (and even some of them) no one cares about the NIT
- with about 9 conferences who generally get an at-large, arguing a bubble over 73rd place is kinda stupid, vs. today with real actual snubs
- conference champs have the 2 days rest over the at-larges that had to play Tue/Wed putting more lower conference schools at a potential advantage

If you're a #65-96 team on the S curve you'd better be able to prove yourself against a school that may be #210 on the S-curve, but is something like 29-2. Those guys deserve a shot to keep winning games, and quite frankly at #96 Fuckstate U. who is 18-14, 9-9 in Big Shit Conference doesn't really deserve much room for complaining.
 
Last edited:
brownindians85 said:
Honestly I wish they'd do away with the NIT an expand the NCAA to 96 teams. The 32 conference tournament champions have the 1st round byes, the 64 at-large play at the higher seed on a Tuesday/Wednesday elimination round .. and move to Thursday/Friday opening round. I like this for a few reasons:
- more teams with a shot at the NCAA title - face it, outside of involved fan bases (and even some of them) no one cares about the NIT
- with about 9 conferences who generally get an at-large, arguing a bubble over 73rd place is kinda stupid, vs. today with real actual snubs
- conference champs have the 2 days rest over the at-larges that had to play Tue/Wed putting more lower conference schools at a potential advantage

If you're a #65-96 team on the S curve you'd better be able to prove yourself against a school that may be #210 on the S-curve, but is something like 29-2. Those guys deserve a shot to keep winning games, and quite frankly at #96 Fuckstate U. who is 18-14, 9-9 in Big Shit Conference doesn't really deserve much room for complaining.
Click to expand...
I would be fine with this, too, but with the caveat that .500 or better conference record is required for at-large consideration.
 
Select the field prior to the bigger conference tournaments. Dont allow these middling big schools a chance to add to their resume by making a semi-final run because schools that knew they were in didnt give a shit. Then everyone knows they need to win or go home.
 
I thought this was the proper thread to include this in. The D1 Council will vote next week on this coming season *not* counting against player eligibility. I don't envision everyone taking advantage of this, but even getting an extra year out of one or two of our current guys would be great. We have the biggest class I've ever seen as juniors right now, so one or two of them staying on board for 2022-23 could counter what would have been a YUUUGE drop off of players. However, the thought of 2,000+ players participating in 20+ games and not having it count against their college career seems like it could have a major trickle down effect on HS kids. I guess at this point I could be swayed in either direction on whether it's ideal or not.

 
res said:
Yes, you'd think that they could at least wait until they see what kind of season they can get in.
Click to expand...
Any time the NCAA makes a preemptive move like this, the first question one should ask himself is, "How does this benefit the P5?" Following that thread will probably get us to the nucleus of this proverbial cell.
 
I am leaning toward liking it. It could lead to a ton of up transfers to P5 but a team like ours it could be really awesome. Kyle and Shoon dont seem like they would bolt unless it was to go pro after graduating. They could decide after next year that they want to run it back and the potential to have this nucleus together for 2-3 more runs makes me tingly. The downstream effect is the high school kids that would end up in the SWAC would be forced into JUCO and D2. If guys stay, this will really benefit mid majors...thats a big IF though.
 
Bona03 said:
I am leaning toward liking it. It could lead to a ton of up transfers to P5 but a team like ours it could be really awesome. Kyle and Shoon dont seem like they would bolt unless it was to go pro after graduating. They could decide after next year that they want to run it back and the potential to have this nucleus together for 2-3 more runs makes me tingly. The downstream effect is the high school kids that would end up in the SWAC would be forced into JUCO and D2. If guys stay, this will really benefit mid majors...thats a big IF though.
Click to expand...
Just imagine the poaching. You’ll have star players graduate from schools in conferences in that 7-12 range; from there, it will be open season for the P5 to pluck-and-plug top notch, ready-made starters.

Ignoring that... WHY is this being proposed now? College hoops played a full regular season (some leagues finished their conference tournaments) in 2019-2020, and it’s looking like 27 regular season games this year. In what way does that call for an extra year of eligibility?

It’s almost as if the powers-that-be are trying to apply anticipatory action to prove how player-friendly they are (while continuing the trend of eliminating the year in residence for transfers, which will have a devastating impact on those players’ graduation rates).

I AM SICK OF EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE (except the Bonnies).
 
Ignoring that... WHY is this being proposed now? College hoops played a full regular season (some leagues finished their conference tournaments) in 2019-2020, and it’s looking like 27 regular season games this year. In what way does that call for an extra year of eligibility?

[/QUOTE]

This is the part that I dont understand, also. Unless I'm missing something, or not privy to something (both of which are definitely possible) I don't see how a season shortened by a whopping 4 games constitutes equality with spring and fall athletes affected by season cancellations. Smells like ulterior motives, incompetence, or some blend of the two.
 
I suspect the NBA is moving towards allowing HS seniors to go pro or establishing a better D-League route for top players. That will move a lot of those top guys out of the one and done system.

It also probably a preliminary announcement that will lead to the announcement that March Madness isn't happening this year. Despite what the leadership of certain other forums may say, this isn't going away any time soon.

I still wish they would limit the extra year to requiring it to be used at the institution they're at this year, especially if a guy who is playing this year tries to use it.
 
I think the NCAA is going to do everything they can to have March Madness. Basketball has been much more proactive than football and they all know they need it for $.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top