CBS Sports’ Gary Parrish and Matt Norlander surveyed nearly 100 coaches for the annual Candid Coaches series. They surveyed everyone from the head of the elite program his coach to an assistant at a small Division 1 school. In exchange for complete anonymity, these coaches offered unfiltered honesty on many topics.
Our candid coach poll questions from Monday are: NCAA tournament It may face tweaks and mods in the coming years. The only reason the controversial topic remains controversial is due to the existence of the NCAA Division I Transformation Committee, which was formed in 2021 to help modernize college athletics.
Among the courses of action the Commission has been mandated, the greatest extent is to redefine what it means to be a Division I institution and/or to transform Division I into university resources, spending budgets and conferences. To decide whether to sort into subgroups based on affiliation. and other determined factors. College basketball is the biggest elephant in the room. The sport’s team roster is bloated again, increasing to 363 for the 2022-23 season, up five from a year ago. No American sport has more teams under one umbrella than DI college basketball. 726 men’s and women’s combined. Twenty-five years ago, Division I basketball schools were down to nearly 60 of his.
when do you stop? Is it already too big, or can this sport support so many teams? Should the Reform Commission split the first division into two, possibly three, subdivisions? is a candid coach poll question.
How big should a Division I basketball be?
| keep current size | 53.7% |
| 15-20% cut | 26.3% |
| About 40% reduction | 12.6% |
| 50% or more cut | 7.4% |
outstanding quotes
Keep 363/DI the same size
• “It’s the only sport that all colleges participate in. Every DI team has men’s and women’s basketball. It’s more fun in my opinion if you qualify as a DI.”
• “We are torn between keeping things as they are or cutting 75-80 teams. I think it’s the burden of going back to St. Peter’s this year or UMBC a few years back. Important to basketball brands.
• “Leave the current number of DI teams in place, but mandate a baseline for investment in the sports they sponsor. will not be.”
• “I think what makes college basketball great is that all the teams are in the same category. If Washington football played for Colgate, it’s a different perception. It never happens in football. Well, it happens in basketball, and college basketball is better than college football.
• “If you want to cut, cut by 10%. But I like models like this. St. Peter’s. That’s great. Some teams in the lower major divisions were bottom feeders.” And they’ve been bottom feeders consistently.I’m cutting those teams, but I don’t want to see the midfield of the majors leave.”
15-20% cut
• “I think the NCAA needs to seriously consider the financial health of many DI schools, both in athletic departments and college admissions/endowments. My opinion on this topic is too deep. , let me just say this: I have coached at DI, D-II and D-III levels now in my career and in my opinion far outperforms some of the low DI programs I have seen. There are many D-II and D-III programs that outperform in. We’re talking across the board – management, organization, game day structure, scheduling, contracts, etc. You can keep going.Lose fat is the game I think it’s good for
• “I’m not sure how much needs to be relegated to another category, but I’m sure there are things that just don’t belong because of budget differences. It used to make sense, but now it doesn’t. There are simply not enough reasons why some schools should be grouped with others.NCAA college basketball is like no other when it comes to basketball in the international space. That’s why student-athletes have come together. With all the uncertainty around the NIL and the Transfer Portal, we’re definitely at a crossroads for what the future holds for NCAA college basketball at all levels.”
About 40% reduction (about 150 teams)
• “I would say cut the bottom third. I hate coaching in a bad game, let alone when you have to actually play. I’m sure they like it because I can update it., but I think it’s a complete waste of everyone’s time to have a 40 point blast with a large team and a KenPom team of 250+ people. increase.”
• “I love midfield basketball in the majors. Good programs are really good, but the bottom tiers of those leagues aren’t taking basketball seriously and when it comes to Selection Sunday, the midfield is bad. ”
• “My number is about 250 teams to make it as good as possible. “We don’t really fund it. I spoke with one coach on the phone and they can’t afford a roll of toilet paper in the changing room.” What are we doing here? It’s going to take away some of the places you just need.” I think the money will improve the quality of the players.”
• “I think Division I can be divided into three subgroups: 1A. [Power Six], have scholarships and take advantage of autonomy. 1B looks like college with some NIL. 1C is backed by the Ivy League, the Patriot League, and their presidents who seek to preserve the traditional academic model. ”
50% or more cut
• “Two divisions: Top 150-175 and Other. Must meet certain criteria related to wins, money spent and commitment to stay in the top division.”
• “I’m a bit contradictory. Considering that half the teams in college basketball have to be left out and basically every mid-major-plus to high-major program placed at the highest level and played against each other, I’m Part of me thinks.. at night, it creates a better basketball schedule and environment. and Cinderella to take away from a potential NCAA Tournament.
• “Football, as I speak, is in a position where they have already separated themselves. Look at the bottom 100 and say this can’t be DI. , resources, everything. How are we going to compete with a school that can give players an extra $50,000 a year?”
USATSI
Takeaway
Division I basketball doesn’t need more teams. Let’s start there. Whether you think you need to reduce your inventory or not, you’ve exceeded your inventory in the last 10-15 years.
Does product size help? We argue that the regular season is not where the sport needs as much juice, competitiveness and relevance as possible. It’s just a filler. empty calories. The worse basketball overall is, the more watered down the NCAA Tournament résumé.As I recently wrote in my Pre-Preseason 2022-23 Preview: Lock the door. No more school.
I think the ideal number of DIs is probably around 300 teams. At that size, you can get everything you need from your schedule (including game purchases) and keep the NCAA and NIT tournaments in their current form without changing anything.
The question is, will the Transformation Commission reshape DI basketball as we know it? It’s realistic to predict that Division I will reshape over the next five years. I think that is How the NCAA Tournament impacts its eligibility criteria. This is how he operates from a small meeting involving dancing to having X fewer teams.
A workaround disguised as a policy change.
Barriers to entry for some teams and conferences may change and may become even more difficult.
The big picture question is how such a reorganization will play out, and what kind of new division I’ll be. , is the biggest problem of all.)
Will all of these teams stay in DI in their official status, with the major caveat that they have two or three tiers? All of these tiers count when building your NCAA Tournament resume. Will moving some teams down the classification cause them to statistically stop qualifying as DI in NET and other metrics? If not, what’s the point?
This kind of NCAA cartography has a big impact. Emotions are hurt, sports are easy to cut, and the Onevid League’s sports division could face devastating times.
I don’t think any school will be kicked out of Division I. I think 120-200 schools could be automatically promoted to the highest level. What is it called, who knows?
“It’s a legitimate issue that has to be addressed at some point,” one coach told me. “Of course it’s going to come back to the money and there’s everything there. There’s also talk of reducing the number of sports you have to sponsor in order to be in Division I. That’s probably excluding some people. Let’s go.”
Another potentially transformative issue is how to handle meeting structures. The (shrinking) WCC’s Gonzaga is an exception to the idea that all meetings can be put in another bucket (and should stay in that league). There are good major mid-sized basketball leagues like Missouri Valley and He SoCon that have proven to be around for a long time. These leagues, and the many teams within them, cannot be downgraded below the likes of the A-10, Mountain West, and American.
There is no ideal or simple way to draw the line and declare, “These leagues are top tier, these are mid tier, these are bottom tier.” Division I basketball has a tenacity that keeps many meetings in flux. CAA ranked him 14th in KenPom last season. 22nd place four years ago, 2 years behind 12th place. Similar ranking bounces apply to the Ivy League, MAAC, Big West, and more.
This is a big problem and a sensitive one. No one wants to be demoted. If anything, I’m surprised more coaches didn’t vote to keep the DI the same size. This 53.7% is a good number, but consider the opposite. His 46.3% of surveyed coaches believe there are too many teams in DI basketball. The coaching community is on the verge of splitting on this issue.
It takes a battle to keep DI basketball bigger than ever, but it’s a premature effort to really take stock of the situation and assess the value of this sport with 363 teams in 49 states. The Transformation Commission doesn’t have much of a duty other than to redefine what it means to be in Division I.
If this leads to possible relegation/promotion of tiers within the DI configuration, I think the idea has benefits and advantages, much like European football. I doubt college sports leaders would have the courage to be so bold.
