The Div 1 problem

[WildcatsAndBourbon]

I don’t understand why the NCAA has allowed 300+ teams into Div 1. What’s the point? Anyone else have a strong opinion or know relative information on this topic? If a lower division school can move up after passing certain optics, why can’t the NCAA demote teams who are the basketball equivalents of grown men pissing at urinals with their underwear around their ankles?

Will these still forming mega conferences eventually break away from the NCAA altogether?

 

[The_Answer1313]

I never really gave it much thought.
I mean half the season they are all going to be playing in conferences with teams that are relatively the same strength.

And if they wanna give the winner an auto bid and a chance to know off a giant, that's fine too. I think that's what appeals in the first rd of the tournament anyways.

 

[HerrosHeroes]

Anytime something doesnt add up just factor in $$$$$$$$$$

 

[CaptainBoogerBuns]

I don’t understand why the NCAA has allowed 300+ teams into Div 1. What’s the point? Anyone else have a strong opinion or know relative information on this topic? If a lower division school can move up after passing certain optics, why can’t the NCAA demote teams who are the basketball equivalents of grown men pissing at urinals with their underwear around their ankles?

Will these still forming mega conferences eventually break away from the NCAA altogether?

You’re including schools with no football programs. I think that’s the reason for the inflation. The number is pretty large:

List of NCAA Division I non-football programs - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[WildcatsAndBourbon]

Strictly talking about basketball in this context.

 

[JonathanW]

It’s about the $ the NCAA-T creates, and they view the Cinderella potential story each year as part of reason for success.

 

[Wildcats1st]

Strictly talking about basketball in this context.

Ask St. Peter’s if it’s a problem.

 

[bthaunert]

Out of curiosity, I took a look at how many Division I teams there have been in the NCAA historically. In 1973 (when Division I was first created), I can see that there were 233 men's teams and today there are 363...a 56% increase. The NCAA Tournament has gone from 25 teams in 1973 to 68 teams now....a 172% increase.

Not sure either of those really bother me, but it's interesting data.

 

[Untouchables22]

Anytime something doesnt add up just factor in $$$$$$$$$$

This is correct….first consider only football and men’s basketball generate revenue of ALL the college sports. Then consider how insanely expensive it is to field a football team from the number of scholarships, to the stadium costs, to the nutritionist, strength coach etc support staff. Second consider that in order to field a NCAA tournament quality team you only need 6 decent players and typically 1-2 “really” good players. So if you’re a smaller school who wants to grow it’s athletic profile for the PR bump then you only have two choices if you want to make money and be sustainable and basketball is really only the only realistic choice for most schools. That coupled with the low amount of scholarships required to fund and the even lower amount of decent players to recruit in order to make the tournament and make money (1-2) is the recipe to why the amount of D-1 teams have exploded.

 

[JonathanW]

Out of curiosity, I took a look at how many Division I teams there have been in the NCAA historically. In 1973 (when Division I was first created), I can see that there were 233 men's teams and today there are 363...a 56% increase. The NCAA Tournament has gone from 25 teams in 1973 to 68 teams now....a 172% increase.

Not sure either of those really bother me, but it's interesting data.

I know that about 15-20 years ago when I first created a computerized ranking program that ranked all D-1 teams, there were about 330 of them. So sounds like (with 363) since then their have been about 1.5-2 new ones added per year.