Skip to content

Jim Delany joins others in discussing structural change for the NCAA

Jim Delany AP

Mike Slive and Bob Bowlsby, commissioners of the SEC and Big 12, respectively, kicked off their media days with some strong words directed toward the NCAA. More specifically, they called into question the structure in which college athletics’ governing body operates.

With a growing belief — realistic or not — that there could eventually be some kind of an additional split within the NCAA’s FBS ranks, one of the most powerful individuals in college athletics has chimed in on the subject.

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said during media day that he feels a change in the structure of major college athletics is conceivable, adding that he’s “very optimistic” changes will be made within the next year. What those changes are, however, remain to be seen.

I’m very optimistic we’ll get [change],” Delany said. “And I think we may get it within a year. The conference commissioners I’ve spoken with throughout the range of Division I are open for that discussion. It’s necessary and it’s a traditional organization and it needs to innovate as we all do, and I’m pretty optimistic that we’ll do that.”

Delany also outlined a four-point plan that he feels addresses concerns in all of college athletics, not just within the NCAA. Included in that plan was an additional stipend to cover the full cost of  attendance — perhaps somewhere between the $3,000 and $6,000 range.

“I believe in change and reform and restructuring,” Delany said. “But as we restructure the NCAA, let’s just think about restructuring the NCAA. Let’s think about the outcomes that we want that will serve the athletes in the Big Ten and other places and years to come.”

Permalink 12 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Big Ten Conference, Illinois Fighting Illini, Indiana Hoosiers, Michigan State Spartans, Michigan Wolverines, Minnesota Golden Gophers, Nebraska Cornhuskers, Northwestern Wildcats, Ohio State Buckeyes, Penn State Nittany Lions, Purdue Boilermakers, Rumor Mill, Top Posts, Wisconsin Badgers
12 Responses to “Jim Delany joins others in discussing structural change for the NCAA”
  1. alligatorsnapper says: Jul 24, 2013 8:46 PM

    If Slive, Bowlsby, and Delany represent the majority of the university presidents’ views in their respective conferences, and that is indicative of similar thought in the PAC and ACC, then I would expect the NCAA to be making some changes in the next year or so as Delany indicates.

    Perhaps one of the biggest things the NCAA could change is what southernpatriots has advocated now for decades…reduce the huge book of regulations to something much less and manageable, eliminating all the huge amount of petty rules and regulations.

  2. amosalanzostagg says: Jul 24, 2013 10:45 PM

    Super conferences form the Super Division I

    Four super conferences of 16 teams each and play in from the mid majors

    ACC is at 15 (with ND), one slot available

    B1G is at 14, two slots available

    SEC is at 14, two slots available

    PAC-12 at 12. four slots available

    Nine Slots

    WV and Connecticut to the B1G

    Texas, BYU, Kansas and KSU to the PAC-12

    OU and OSU to the SEC

    Who goes to the ACC? Navy? Army? Cincinatti?

    Enjoy college football now, these are the good old days.


  3. 69jaredallen69 says: Jul 25, 2013 12:27 AM

    Lol B1G wouldn’t touch those 2 schools

  4. deadeye says: Jul 25, 2013 7:57 AM

    One of the first things that will happen with a new division will be so-called FCAS (full cost of attendance scholarships). Delany and Slive support this idea. It will essentially amount to a stipend, and most likely be given to all student athletes, not just football and basketball players.

    This will raise the cost dramatically of being a part of the new, highest level division. The conference least able to absorb these new costs is the ACC. Listen to Swofford as he outlines his conference’s position on FCAS and it becomes apparent that at least a few ACC universities cannot afford this new cost structure. The BIG12 is on-board with this idea, and all ten members are ready to take the plunge.

    If these changes cause one of the 5 power conferences to either go away or drop down a level, it will be the ACC instead of the BIG12.

  5. mediocrebob says: Jul 25, 2013 9:51 AM

    Jim Delany is no Einstein.

  6. mediocrebob says: Jul 25, 2013 9:52 AM

    Why wouldn’t big ten touch those schools? They just took Rutgers and Maryland?

  7. scoocha says: Jul 25, 2013 1:04 PM

    ^^^You’re comparing the academics of WV to Rutgers and Maryland? Are you crazy? WV has a solid sports program and great fans but it’s academics are some of the worst in the nation.

  8. ricomay789 says: Jul 25, 2013 1:11 PM

    If B10 does not want UConn, B12 might (with BYU or South Florida).

  9. mediocrebob says: Jul 25, 2013 2:10 PM

    So you’re saying the B1G added Maryland and Rutgers for their academics?

    Let me clear it up for you. The move was strictly for $$$$$. They did it to grow their brand to the east coast.

  10. donovandancy says: Jul 25, 2013 3:09 PM

    So basically, to stem off the inevitable loss of control in playoff participation, they want an additional tier of football with “only the best conferences”. Essentially, its trying to workaround the threatened litigation houston and utah and other schools have tried to if they don’t have equal access to the post season. The Big 10, and SEC want to make sure that when the playoff inevitably expands, it will still ensure those two conferences get easier access for overrepresentation in the postseason.

    If the NCAA doesn’t comply, it will be interesting to see if SLive and Delaney sulk in a corner.
    If the NCAA does it will be interesting to see if Houston and Utah return to their governmental intervention suits.

  11. tmb333 says: Jul 25, 2013 6:39 PM

    What makes anyone really think the NCAA will be involved. If the NCAA won’t play, these leagues will form their own football governing association and will remain in the NCAA in all other sports.

  12. amosalanzostagg says: Jul 25, 2013 7:19 PM


    You don’t get to pick if you’re a member of the NCAA in certain sports and independent in others. You have to be a member in good standing in the NCAA in total, both men and women’s sports.

    TV money is driving this, big time. ESPN and Fox Sports are going to spend BILLIONS over the next five years to have product for their respective networks. TV wise, UConn and WV will solidify the East Coast for the B1G in direct competition with the ACC with Notre Dame. Notre Dame makes the ACC viable. That is what re-alignment is all about. TV market and money

    Donovandancy, Utah is part of the PAC-12, why would they sue the NCAA since they are already at the table? The super conferences will allow mid majors to play in, so no lawsuit.

    BYU has chosen to be independent because like Texas and Notre Dame, they already have their own TV network based on their church, so Utah would not be filing against the NCAA.

    Houston is a mid major with absolutely NO political clout what so ever. Texas and Texas A&M are the big dogs in that state with Baylor and Texas Tech on the inside.

    Like it or not, right now there are four super conferences. The SEC, B1G, PAC-12 and the ACC. The Big 12 is DMW, all contingent on what Texas decides to do. Right now, I’d wager that Texas is positioning themselves to go to the PAC-12 with three other teams. BYU being one of those three teams. All that has to be determined is how much money Deloss with make in the move. It is not about the Big 12, it is and has always been about Texas and the money Texas can make, and Deloss is about the Texas brand, and the Texas brand only. OU can’t go west because the PAC-12 doesn’t want OSU which would have to piggy back with OU because of the Oklahoma legislature. You don’t think OU and OSU would not go to the SEC in a New York minute if given the chance?

    There are very few quality programs that will make the cut for the remaining super conference slots and the Big 12, outside of the University of Texas and Oklahoma, simply doesn’t have the quality (meaning TV access) that the sports networks and super conferences are looking for.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!