Talk:Division I (NCAA)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Sports (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sports, a WikiProject which aims to improve coverage of sport-related topics on Wikipedia. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Universities (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Universities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of universities and colleges on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 

Rewrite needed[edit]

I think that this whole page needs to be badly redone. It's not entirely clear if this is the D-1 page, or the D-1 football page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.19.153 (talk) 19:14, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Unless, of course, you actually read the page and see that there are different sections for other non-football conferences, and the page doesn't ever say anywhere that any of the conferences are exclusively football conferences. Cardsplayer4life (talk) 04:11, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

The Big East Football Conference has eight teams[edit]

The Big East Football Conference is a separate conference from the Big East Conference in the eyes of the federal government: they are registered as different non-profit corporations; thus, for accuracy, the Big East should be notated as having eight teams. 69.255.152.31 (talk) 01:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

In the FBS section, that is. 69.255.152.31 (talk) 01:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

The Football subdivision[edit]

I am not sure how to word it properly, but the reason for the subdivision is hinted at I believe but not the best. The reason for the subdivision is the fact of attendance. The NCAA prefers to have schools play in similar sized crowds. This is provided by the bylaw which states that every two years each member school needs to have 15,000 in attendence. If they do not they can not play in the Bowl subdivision but rather have to go to the championship subdivision. If anybody cares to input that in properly feel free to do so. BTW the bylaw is

20.9.7.3 Football-Attendance Requirements. [I-A] Once every two years on a rolling basis, the institution shall average at least 15,000 in actual or paid attendance for all home football games. (Revised: 4/25/02 effective 8/1/04, 4/28/05 effective 8/1/05)

The NCAA has been threatening I-A schools that do not meet attendance records with having them demoted to I-AA. Thus far, it has appeared to be a bluff. Time will tell if the NCAA is serious about it. The scholarship numbers seem to be the primary distinction between the subdivisions, as the NCAA will certainly not let a school compete in the Football Championship Subdivision (formerly I-AA) with more than 63 scholarships, but thus far has not been serious about holding teams to the attendance requirements.--RLent 07:26, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I concur with you on that but you never know. I know that last year they passed that new rule so we shall see after next years season if they decide to send down half the mac and some other schools. I think if they did that the MAC would probally just go to just 8 schools and have a second MAC for DIAA football with some other schools I suppose. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mihsfbstadium (talkcontribs) 12:13, 23 December 2006 (UTC).
I'm pretty sure scholarships are more important than attendence in determining status. For example, App State and Montana routinely outdraw I-A schools. This year, for example, App State outdrew around 35 I-A programs, including a few BCS schools. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.83.176.121 (talk) 13:56, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Number of scholarschips limit[edit]

I do not understand this section. It is not clear whether 85 limit in Division I-A is for all sports scholarchips in the school, or just in footbal. The confusion is from the fact that in other sports schools are in Division I but in footbal in Division I-A. --Jan Smolik 16:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Name of the article[edit]

I do not like the name of the article as it is not informative. There is (or was) huge number of Divisions I, with number written in variety of ways in variety of sports in various langueges (like Primera Division that translates to english as Division One). But they are still Division I. I suggest moving to the NCAA Division I as the title is more informative and actually defines what kind of Division I it is. If no objections arise, I will move the article on monday. --Jan Smolik 11:38, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

What is really needed IMO is the note/dab that many other things have a "Division I", including the NAIA, the NCCAA, and other athletic groups, not just Swedish football. Rlquall 15:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
agree, naming here is utterly terrible. needs to be NCAA Division I Mayumashu (talk) 23:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

CAA status[edit]

As of today, the CAA is still I-AAA as their football league does not begin play until 2007-08 season. When that season begins, they WILL be I-AA. Until then, they are I-AAA. At that time, A-10 will drop from from I-AA to I-AAA. --Jayron32 01:53, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:NCAA logo.svg[edit]

The image File:NCAA logo.svg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --13:43, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Service Academies[edit]

Is there a reference for the Service Academies being considered for I-AA status? And of Pentagon involvement? Considered by whom? 192.88.212.44 (talk) 21:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Service academies & NCAA player limits[edit]

I removed the text about the service academies being "effectively exempt" from NCAA player limits. I looked at the NCAA handbook and found a section that appeared to cover this but I realized that it only covered FCS. Still, I think saying the service academies are "effectively exempt" is incorrect. Financial aid isn't relevant to academy students. Although they receive a free education, they are required to serve after their education. Also, it is not possible to pay to attend the academies. Finally, even if an academy student is held to receive a "scholarship", there are other sections of the NCAA handbook that would in fact appear to exempt this. In particular, section 15.02.4.2, which exempts "Financial aid awarded solely on bases having no relationship to athletics ability". Simishag (talk) 03:52, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

counters -huh?[edit]

The explanation seems to be a circular definition - a counter "counts" - wonderful, but that doesn't help the reader. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.91.57 (talk) 04:24, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

If you follow the footnote, it leads to an external link to the NCAA bylaws. See [1]. Article 15 explains in more full detail who a "counter" is. The level of detail about which students count and which do not is probably outside of the scope of this article, but you can go ahead and read it for yourself in the link I just provided. If you'd like to read it, and add your own addition to the article, citing Article 15 of the NCAA bylaws as a reference, you are allowed to do so.. In fact, it would be quite awesome if you did. You are the reason anything at all gets done at Wikipedia. --Jayron32 04:43, 6 January 2012 (UTC)