Yet Another NCAA Football Thread

[Dave in Green]

In keeping with the concept of starting new threads instead of adding to off-topic discussion in a thread on a different subject, this is a continuation of the OT discussion in the Akron September opponent's coach in hot water? thread in the football forum:

Yeah, the NCAA is imperfect. All organizations are, just as all people are. So what's the better option, trying to improve the NCAA or ditching it and starting from scratch?

Starting from scratch would bring in a new group of individuals with a new set of conflicting agendas and a whole new set of problems.

Ditching it is the better option. It is broken beyond repair.

A new set of individuals with a new set of conflicting agendas is exactly what the ncaa needs. There are no new ideas and bringing in new people is the answer. Everyone at the ncaa headquarters should be dismissed from their jobs and the windows boarded shut because they won't listen to new ideas.

A couple of weeks ago, I spent some time with a D-1 athletic director. I ran my idea of a new division and this person told me it would never happen because the I-AA schools would never go for it. They don't want to appear second class. The real concern for all non-bcs teams is the day the bcs schools leave the ncaa. It is getting a lot of attention right now and may be closer than anyone wants to admit. The writing is on the walls at the ncaa and the Titanic is taking on water. When that happens, there is no basketball tournament. When there is no basketball tournament, there is no ncaa as it is 75%+ of their revenues. The ncaa is a dying institution. It's dying because it isn't needed.

Again Dave, we can stay on the Titanic and wait for another boat to come by or we can get on a lifeboat. Which do you want? You are welcome on my lifeboat if you wish...don't stay too long though as the Titanic is taking on water quickly.

You are funny! You just want everyone's blind trust that you have it all figured out. Just trust me on this, you say.

Sorry, I'm bombarded with that fast-talking sales stuff daily, from the robo phone calls to the junk e-mails to the silly pop-up internet ads to the "but wait, there's more" TV ads.

They all want you to hurry up and buy their stuff before the Titanic hits the iceberg and goes down, which could happen at any second, and then you lose out on the super duper extra special deal.

Broken beyond repair is a favorite slogan of all sales people to convince you that what you have isn't good enough and you need to buy what they're selling RIGHT NOW before it's too late.

I'm a little tougher sell than that, as I would expect most thoughtful people to be.

The NCAA college football ship is not going down anytime soon. It's generating a ton of cash, which means it's in play for everyone who wants to figure out an angle to get a piece of the action. It's more like the goose that laid golden eggs that people want to cut open to get all the gold faster.

The NCAA is making changes. They may not all be the right changes, and they may not be happening as fast as we'd like. But the NCAA isn't static. They understand that the gold diggers are looking for a way to smash, grab and run.

We don't even know the people who would run your hypothetical operation. Maybe they're from the Bernie Madoff school of investment. You know, the one where everyone makes money and no one loses. The one where you have to move fast before the Titanic hits the iceberg.

[johnnyzip84]

I don't think GP1's notion of a group of BCS powers effectively seceding from the NCAA is that far fetched. This sort of thing has been speculated for years. As I see it, there are 2 major hurdles that haven't been effectively addressed however.

First (and I've stated this before), I don't buy the idea that there is a clear divide of "haves" and "have nots" in D1 football. I believe D1 football operates on more of a continuum and always has. Sure there are 15 or so programs that are generally among the elite, but the other 49 needed to constitute 4, 16-team mega-conferences are a shifting, unstable bunch. And I believe the feds would eventually be drawn into resolving the inevitable disputes that would arise regarding who gets into "the club" and who doesn't.

Second, it's debatable whether the charm of the NCAA hoops tourney would be able to be captured by a 64 team super league. This is all about viewership and money, and if the charm is diminished so could the viewership. The NCAA has this (the tourney) as leverage in keeping the football schools under its umbrella. It's even questionable whether the teams in the super league would be any better than the ones left in the NCAA (in hoops).

So I'll continue to watch the power plays with great interest, but I think the seismic shift still has some thick crust to break through first before the NCAA falls into the ocean (keeping with the nautical disaster theme).

[Doug Snyder]

If I have followed the debate....it seems that the biggest complaint with the NCAA is that it is "corrupt". I think it is very silly to think closing the NCAA and letting a new group arise would assure there would be no corruption. The only way to assure that there is no corruption is to remove the money. And that ain't happening. Fixing the problem seems the most logical course of action.

[GP1]

You are funny! You just want everyone's blind trust that you have it all figured out. Just trust me on this, you say.

The NCAA college football ship is not going down anytime soon. It's generating a ton of cash, which means it's in play for everyone who wants to figure out an angle to get a piece of the action. It's more like the goose that laid golden eggs that people want to cut open to get all the gold faster.

I dont' have it figured out, but I'm confident that if we take the thinking away from the bureaucrats at the ncaa, we will have a better product in the end. Many ideas are better than one. The ncaa creates a singular idea pool full of people looking not to offend anyone because they are looking at their next job.

I agree the ncaa football ship isn't going down soon. The non-bcs ship (which we live on) is taking on water faster than the pumps can bail it out and the ncaa is in no interest to bail us out. College football is a cash cow alright..... for the bcs conferences. The cash cow for the ncaa is the MBB Tournament. If the bcs schools are smart, they leave the ncaa, start their own league with a basketball tournament CBS will be more than willing to pay an arm and a leg to broadcast, combine that with the money they will make off of a football playoff and television rights to the regular season and really break the bank.

It makes no sense for BCS level schools to stay in the ncaa. If the ncaa rules are so important to the bcs schools, all they have to do is kill a few thousand trees, copy the ncaa handbook, put a new cover on it with the new league name and hand it out to "student-athletes". The ncaa is just a set of rules and regulations...anyone can do that.

[GP1]

I don't think GP1's notion of a group of BCS powers effectively seceding from the NCAA is that far fetched. This sort of thing has been speculated for years. As I see it, there are 2 major hurdles that haven't been effectively addressed however.

First (and I've stated this before), I don't buy the idea that there is a clear divide of "haves" and "have nots" in D1 football. I believe D1 football operates on more of a continuum and always has. Sure there are 15 or so programs that are generally among the elite, but the other 49 needed to constitute 4, 16-team mega-conferences are a shifting, unstable bunch. And I believe the feds would eventually be drawn into resolving the inevitable disputes that would arise regarding who gets into "the club" and who doesn't.

Second, it's debatable whether the charm of the NCAA hoops tourney would be able to be captured by a 64 team super league. This is all about viewership and money, and if the charm is diminished so could the viewership. The NCAA has this (the tourney) as leverage in keeping the football schools under its umbrella. It's even questionable whether the teams in the super league would be any better than the ones left in the NCAA (in hoops).

So I'll continue to watch the power plays with great interest, but I think the seismic shift still has some thick crust to break through first before the NCAA falls into the ocean (keeping with the nautical disaster theme).

I think the day of a super conference separate from the ncaa isn't far off. Once the 16 team, four super conferences are complete, it's all over for the ncaa.

There are haves and have nots in D-1A college football. There is also a group of mostly non-bcs schools who would be called "the don't belongs".

The charm I see of the ncaa basketball tournament is taking a Thursday and Friday off of work to watch basketball games between teams you don't really care about and getting drunk in the process. That can be accomplished in the current manner or another way. Would watching Providence get slaughtered by Duke be any different than watching Hampton get slaughtered by Duke? Upsets would still happen, they would just be more known teams upsetting the higher seed.

[johnnyzip84]

I don't think GP1's notion of a group of BCS powers effectively seceding from the NCAA is that far fetched. This sort of thing has been speculated for years. As I see it, there are 2 major hurdles that haven't been effectively addressed however.

First (and I've stated this before), I don't buy the idea that there is a clear divide of "haves" and "have nots" in D1 football. I believe D1 football operates on more of a continuum and always has. Sure there are 15 or so programs that are generally among the elite, but the other 49 needed to constitute 4, 16-team mega-conferences are a shifting, unstable bunch. And I believe the feds would eventually be drawn into resolving the inevitable disputes that would arise regarding who gets into "the club" and who doesn't.

Second, it's debatable whether the charm of the NCAA hoops tourney would be able to be captured by a 64 team super league. This is all about viewership and money, and if the charm is diminished so could the viewership. The NCAA has this (the tourney) as leverage in keeping the football schools under its umbrella. It's even questionable whether the teams in the super league would be any better than the ones left in the NCAA (in hoops).

So I'll continue to watch the power plays with great interest, but I think the seismic shift still has some thick crust to break through first before the NCAA falls into the ocean (keeping with the nautical disaster theme).

I think the day of a super conference separate from the ncaa isn't far off. Once the 16 team, four super conferences are complete, it's all over for the ncaa.

There are haves and have nots in D-1A college football. There is also a group of mostly non-bcs schools who would be called "the don't belongs".

The charm I see of the ncaa basketball tournament is taking a Thursday and Friday off of work to watch basketball games between teams you don't really care about and getting drunk in the process. That can be accomplished in the current manner or another way. Would watching Providence get slaughtered by Duke be any different than watching Hampton get slaughtered by Duke? Upsets would still happen, they would just be more known teams upsetting the higher seed.

How is Providence getting in the 64 team, post-NCAA tourney? Isn't this going to be for football powers only? For that matter, Duke is unlikely to be selected for the football super-conference. It's the football-basketball debate that's going to hold up the shift to the 64 team super league in football. I'm not saying it won't eventually happen, but there's still a LOT to be worked out.

Do you envision separate governing bodies for hoops and football?

[GP1]

How is Providence getting in the 64 team, post-NCAA tourney? Isn't this going to be for football powers only? For that matter, Duke is unlikely to be selected for the football super-conference. It's the football-basketball debate that's going to hold up the shift to the 64 team super league in football. I'm not saying it won't eventually happen, but there's still a LOT to be worked out.

Do you envision separate governing bodies for hoops and football?

Providence was a bad school to use. A school like Northwestern would be a better analogy.

Duke will make the super conference just to have them for the bank breaking basketball tournament.

There isn't much to work out once the four 16 super conferences are complete. The break-up of the Big 12 is the key. Once that is compete, they will have all they need and them leaving the ncaa will be nothing but a formality.

[Dave in Green]

As with most discussions, there's room for both agreement and disagreement.

I agree that the college football landscape is evolving more rapidly these days, and that one day it's possible the evolving super conferences may split from the NCAA if the NCAA isn't reformed to everyone's satisfaction. If not, there will certainly be some sanctioning changes at some point simply because of the fact that nothing lasts forever.

Whether this will only be in football or might include other sports is open to question. The NCAA is not nearly as criticized for the way it handles other sports as it is for the way football is managed.

Now, the key question for UA and similar schools is whether it makes sense to remain aligned with the NCAA in the event of a super conference BCS football split. There would be pros and cons to every strategy, so it would pay UA to keep a close eye on the changing landscape, carefully study all options and be prepared to make the right call.

For example, if the NCAA were to maintain sanction of all but the BCS super conferences, it might make sense for UA to remain aligned with the NCAA. Minus the super conferences, schools like UA would be positioned to compete for an NCAA college football championship with the remaining non-BCS teams. It wouldn't have the same cachet as winning the BCS title. But few imagine UA is ever going to compete for that, anyway.

Jumping too quickly off a listing ship can be as dangerous as waiting too long and getting caught in the vortex if it goes down. If the ship can be righted, you're much better off staying with it than jumping into shark-infested waters in the middle of the night.

The key point is to be smart and not rush into something you're going to regret later.

[GP1]

For example, if the NCAA were to maintain sanction of all but the BCS super conferences, it might make sense for UA to remain aligned with the NCAA. Minus the super conferences, schools like UA would be positioned to compete for an NCAA college football championship with the remaining non-BCS teams. It wouldn't have the same cachet as winning the BCS title. But few imagine UA is ever going to compete for that, anyway.

My esteemed colleague from Green brings up an interesting point here. I remember when Marshall said the goal of their program was to compete for championships. I didn't understand that then, but now I do. I remember how good I felt when the Zips won the MAC in 2005. Remember how good we all felt last March when the Zips beat Can't for the BB tournament? As a MAC fan, winning your college league championship is about as good as it gets, with the exception of Zips soccer. If we weren't in the same league as the BCS schools, I don't think I would feel any less of a sense of pride or fulfillment.

If we were in our own level or affiliation with non-bcs teams, we could not only win our league, but play for a national championship. Imagine how much better that would feel than just winning the league. The excitement and anticipation of playoff games is really fun. Winning playoff games is even better....maybe even at The Big Dialer. It would be better than going to the Motor City Bowl.

If we limit ourselves to the never ending circle jerk of the ncaa, we can never get to the point where we are fulfilled as fans. I think we can do better than the ncaa. I think college athletics, from top to bottom, would be better without the ncaa.

[Doug Snyder]

If we limit ourselves to the never ending circle jerk of the ncaa, we can never get to the point where we are fulfilled as fans.

I was not aware that was primary goal of college athletics. If it is....you are probably right.

[GP1]

If we limit ourselves to the never ending circle jerk of the ncaa, we can never get to the point where we are fulfilled as fans.

I was not aware that was primary goal of college athletics.

Try reading it again.

[Doug Snyder]

If we limit ourselves to the never ending circle jerk of the ncaa, we can never get to the point where we are fulfilled as fans.

I was not aware that was primary goal of college athletics.

Try reading it again.

You once said to me "it is not all about you" (or something close). You know then it is NOT all about you..as a fan or otherwise.

[Dave in Green]

I've yet to see a compelling case made that the NCAA is broken beyond repair and that there is some mythical ogranization out there just waiting to be funded so they can step in and immediately make everything better.

[zen]

A seperate smaller elite BCS division = less money overall.

You need to give the illusion of inclusion to the other 60 - 100 middle sized schools, even if it's folly. Otherwise, you render them sub-division and interest sinks because of it.

Yes, those schools who do well in the non-elite championship conference will show a relatedly higher attendance, but the overall attendance levels, TV/media viewership, merchandising, and general interest drops as a whole.

Less Money = no F'n way, Jose. End of story

[GP1]

I've yet to see a compelling case made that the NCAA is broken beyond repair and that there is some mythical ogranization out there just waiting to be funded so they can step in and immediately make everything better.

How long could it possibly take to create a body to oversee a new league. With fewer teams, it would take less people. God knows, there would be fewer rules to follow. I don't see it taking long. Leagues like the USFL, etc. were created in less than a year.

[Dave in Green]

Oh sure, it's not that big a deal to start a new football league like the USFL. The hard part is getting it to work well enough to stay in business and not fold with hundreds of millions of dollars in losses.

How long did the USFL last before they pulled the plug, four years?

[GP1]

Oh sure, it's not that big a deal to start a new football league like the USFL. The hard part is getting it to work well enough to stay in business and not fold with hundreds of millions of dollars in losses.

How long did the USFL last before they pulled the plug, four years?

Had the usfl stayed as a spring league, it would still be around or the nfl would have absorbed it. Donald Trump of all people was the guy who pushed this so they could file a legal claim against the nfl.

I think if the top 50 teams in college athletics left the ncaa, they would somehow be able to compete against the remaining teams while having their own league. Within a year, the league and TV contracts could all be established. It's not that hard.

[Doug Snyder]

Oh sure, it's not that big a deal to start a new football league like the USFL. The hard part is getting it to work well enough to stay in business and not fold with hundreds of millions of dollars in losses.

How long did the USFL last before they pulled the plug, four years?

Had the usfl stayed as a spring league, it would still be around or the nfl would have absorbed it. Donald Trump of all people was the guy who pushed this so they could file a legal claim against the nfl.

I think if the top 50 teams in college athletics left the ncaa, they would somehow be able to compete against the remaining teams while having their own league. Within a year, the league and TV contracts could all be established. It's not that hard.

That sounds like apretty good business strategy. Create a league or business and place it in a positition to sue the big guy. Was actual success ever planned in this model??

[Dave in Green]

The USFL won their lawsuit against the NFL, and were awarded one dollar in damages. Under antitrust law, the award was trebled to three dollars. Since the USFL was predicated on winning a huge monetary settlement from the NFL, the strategy failed and the USFL folded.

There is no law of nature stating that new sports leagues will be inherently better than those they're trying to replace. A new college football league might be an improvement over the NCAA, or it could be worse.

[GP1]

That sounds like apretty good business strategy. Create a league or business and place it in a positition to sue the big guy. Was actual success ever planned in this model??

There is a real good 30 for 30 about the USFL. The league was doing very well. Donald Trump and his ego were the driving force to compete directly against the NFL. Had they just stayed as a spring league, the league may still be in business today.

I have a great memory about the usfl. When I was young, my father took me and my brother to see the Pittsburgh Maulers play the New Jersey Generals on Easter Sunday at Three Rivers Stadium. Hershel Walker and Doug Flutie played for the Generals at the time. There were a lot of guys who played in the USFL that went on to have Hall of Fame careers in the NFL. Reggie White, Jim Kelly and Steve Young come to mind.

[GP1]

There is no law of nature stating that new sports leagues will be inherently better than those they're trying to replace. A new college football league might be an improvement over the NCAA, or it could be worse.

It depends on who it would be worse for. For the 50-60 teams in the other league, it would be a bank breaking improvement. For the rest of us, we would have to be creative as to how me move forward. I guess the question is...How much worse could it get for us in the ncaa?