The reasoning behind the name change was to correct the misconception that I-AA football teams aren't Division I. The nomenclature was designed to help corrent this misconception. The names "Football Championship Subdivision" and "Football Bowl Subdivision" are meant to point out that the former I-A and I-AA are both Subdivisions of Division I and are are only used for Football. One of which plays its postseason in a Bowl system, and the other which plays its postseason as a Championship Playoff. That is the true reasoning behind the name change. All the teams in the FCS are Division I teams and only play in a lower division for football.
Sub-divisions? What?
- Thread starter Flynn4Heisman
- Start date
Solidly explained. All football should be a "chamionship" division anyway - but that's a different debate.
I don't think I like the change,but pantherjoe's explanation is helpful as they are both division I (rep to him). I don't know when this change was decided though. Does anyone here know?
The NCAA has a history of doing stupid things like this. Remember when they changed the name of the basketball regionals from simple (East, South, Midwest, West) to utterly moroninc (the cities hosting the regional) ?
Drake and others like them are FCS non-scholarship. And its worth pointing out that those teams are eligable for the FCS playoffs, although their conferences do not get auto bids and I cant remember a time a nonscholly team has ever made it.
The rule was officially enacted starting with the first week of the FCS playoffs last year.
Also I must point out that most FCS fans arent happy with the new naming. We were all for the name change and loved the idea behind it (it annoys me when people call us D2), but we think they couldve come up with a better name than FCS and FBS. Personally I was for calling it the BCS and PCS (Bowl Championship Subdivision and Playoff Championship Subdivision). I think that with the Bowl Championship Series already being called the BCS it wouldve made sense just to call everyone in the former I-A BCS as it woulda been easier to remember. That also makes the similar sounding PCS easier to remember.
The rule was officially enacted starting with the first week of the FCS playoffs last year.
Also I must point out that most FCS fans arent happy with the new naming. We were all for the name change and loved the idea behind it (it annoys me when people call us D2), but we think they couldve come up with a better name than FCS and FBS. Personally I was for calling it the BCS and PCS (Bowl Championship Subdivision and Playoff Championship Subdivision). I think that with the Bowl Championship Series already being called the BCS it wouldve made sense just to call everyone in the former I-A BCS as it woulda been easier to remember. That also makes the similar sounding PCS easier to remember.
OK...so who here was under the misconception that Division I-AA teams weren't Division I? I mean, for me the I part of the designation I-AA made it pretty clear that I-AA was part of Division I. After all these years, was this really that big of a problem??? If there was any doubt about it, it should have been cleared up during March Madness, where the 300+ Division I teams play in the same tournament.
Sorry...I'm not buyin' the NCAA's little explanation. This is either some kind of marketing ploy which the NCAA thinks will help bring in better TV deals for the FCS teams, or some ploy to improve the prestige of the FCS teams and their playoffs. With the proliferation of all the Bowl games over the past decade, where over 1/2 of the I-A teams are participating in bowl games (which now start in Mid December), I would guess that the I-AA playoffs have been marginalized, and the NCAA is trying to do something to rectify that problem.
Misconception??? Give me a break... :skeptical:
Sorry...I'm not buyin' the NCAA's little explanation. This is either some kind of marketing ploy which the NCAA thinks will help bring in better TV deals for the FCS teams, or some ploy to improve the prestige of the FCS teams and their playoffs. With the proliferation of all the Bowl games over the past decade, where over 1/2 of the I-A teams are participating in bowl games (which now start in Mid December), I would guess that the I-AA playoffs have been marginalized, and the NCAA is trying to do something to rectify that problem.
Misconception??? Give me a break... :skeptical:
Last edited:
Think what you want but thats absolutely what it was about. This was something that the presidents and athletic directors at I-AA schools lobbyed for for a long time. While most of the die hards (like the people on this board) would know that I-AA was DI, it is a common misconseption among casual fans. Schools are identified with football and basketball and especially for those schools that dont have solid basketball teams it can be a problem.
I'm a die hard UNI fan, and a fan of FCS football in general, I know what Im talking about.
I'm a die hard UNI fan, and a fan of FCS football in general, I know what Im talking about.
And exactly what is the problem if "casual" fans don't know the difference between I-A, I-AA, II, III etc. ? Was there some kind of survey done that proved out this misconception?
As is often reported here, there are casual fans all across the country who don't know the difference between the Iowa State University of Science and Technology Cyclones and the University of Iowa Hawkeyes. Not everybody is a 100-watt bulb...there are alot of 15- and 20-watters out there...
Comeon Jb, save that passion for something that matters.
I'll confess to being one who didn't know how 1-AA fit into the scheme of things while first getting into following college sports. Having very limited tv access and a Dad that doesn't follow sports unless his kids are playing gave me a slow start.
How's this for horrible - in high school we had audibles both by the QB and on the line, well before the my first start the seniors decide to switch up the standard "hot" words for the audibles. They decide to go with Big 10 schools for "real" audibles and any other college for "fake" audibles. I knew UI was in the Big 10, but that was about it - I pretended I understood and managed to wing my way through a very confusing game.
Luckily we switched back the next week. Anyway long story short I can see how its confusing for casual fans ... and I'm guessing casual fans are a major market share - gotta follow the coin!
The reason why there was even a I-A and a I-AA in the first place goes to corporate greed (the kind that university presidents and ADs like to roll around in). Back in the late '70s or early '80s there was only Division I, II, and III. Then the larger universities from the larger conferences got together and decided that the "lower tier" schools were preventing them from making even more large sums of $$$, so they decided to split D I into D I-A and D I-AA. Instead of doing it right and renaming all of the divisions into I, II, III, and IV, the NCAA decided it would be "politically correct" and keep those schools as D I schools, just with an AA attached to it. Yet at the same time they're not allowed to compete with the I-A schools, can't get the same kind of money, and aren't even allowed to be voted in the same polls as big brother.
That being said, I think everyone loves the I-A teams (unless you happened to go to a I-AA school), but there's quite a bit of envy about the I-AA format, where a true champion is crowned every year instead of allowing computers to determine our champion year in and year out.
That being said, I think everyone loves the I-A teams (unless you happened to go to a I-AA school), but there's quite a bit of envy about the I-AA format, where a true champion is crowned every year instead of allowing computers to determine our champion year in and year out.
I disagree. I-AA schools are still Division I in every other sport, so calling it D2 football I think doesnt make sense.
This isn't correct anymore:
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3008022
I don't think there's any point in allowing this, especially since they can't take part in the BCS ranking, but it is what it is. Do others think allowing D1AA teams to be voted into the top 25 is as stupid as I do when they only play 1 D1A team a year?
