people tend to interchange the different facets of the NCAA (admin side vs. member side) to where the line separating the 2 is so blurred or non-existent anymore. I guess that was a reason I decided to take the time to study the NCAA DI, DII, and DIII Manuals so I could better understand the true picture of the NCAA dynamics. Or I was glutting for punishment since the topic is a more complex one than people realize. At least I doubt very man people know the NCAA's structure is very similar to how the Senate or House is structured in Congress with its committees and to some degree subcommittees where most of the "work" tends to take place. WRT your idea, it does have the potential to work. Some details may need to be hashed out first particularly when you factor in the role and influence Title IX will have going forward. I bring that up because people have suggested that football should be treated separately from the other NCAA sports and that it shouldn't even be subject to Title IX just because of the numbers required to sponsor the sport. They may have a valid point, but it may not matter legally because the male athletes, who play the sport, are receiving an extra benefit that wouldn't be available to the women athletes. Even if the schools decided to establish an association for each specific sport, the sport would still be subject to Title IX requirements. In terms of monitoring the schools to ensure they are in compliance of said requirements, who would handle that oversight responsibility? Currently it is being handled by the NCAA (admin) in conjunction with the Department of Education and the schools (self-monitoring/self-reporting). My underlying point is if a school is a member of multiple association, then which association has the final authority in these types of decisions/issues? How would these different associations work together when it comes to the oversight? FWIW the power conferences currently don't want to share their power (and money) with the G5s. What could be interesting to see play out is how the G5s will react if/when the ACC and/or Big XII finding themselves exiled to that group as it is renamed the G7s. Will they have some serious bridge repair because their behavior and decisions as a power conference strained any relationships they had with the other conferences? Will the G5s have a large humble pie with their names on it waiting for them at the dinner table? I do wonder if things would have turned out different if the DI schools had decided back in the 70s to not create 2 subdivisions in football, but instead create a brand new division level. If they had gone that route, then in theory the NCAA (HQ) could have had better control over the postseason for all 4 division levels. I don't think it would have mattered if the postseason was bowl games or a playoff because the champion could be recognized as the NCAA champion based on the 1 champion per sport per division level bylaw.