GP1

More Shows how far this idea has really gotten. Many converences (athletic directors) want to give the ncaa one more chance. Basically, change or else. The BCS conferences are setting this up so they won't look like such a bunch of a-holes after they start their own division. They are going to get a divorce from the ncaa because of irreconcilable differences.

What is the ratio of (attendance : empty seats) in each arena? I guess my question is, did CSU pay for 5,000 empty seats? Enjoy the JAR everyone.

I don't think it is out of control. I think it is an interesting change probably brought forward by design technologies that allow manufacturers to do things like this now. Technology provide change and we are seeing that in uniforms now. And everyone laughed at the Buffalo Bills years ago when they sported CFL type uniforms. Seems sort of tame now. At the end of the day, I don't care if the Zips are dressed like the guards in the 1974 version of The Longest Yard as long as they win.

You are making the assumption the athletic directors who run the conferences will care about winning and losing. They are past that now. They only care about money at this point. The one thing I would like to point out to everyone is that when we use words like "conference" we are talking about a group of schools whose athletic directors run the conference. The ADs sit on the committees and make recommendations to the Presidents, who basically let the athletic directors do whatever they want. Likewise for the ncaa. The ncaa is a member organization, whose committees are staffed largely by athletic directors. Athletic directors come in two types: 1. AD at a large school who is focused entirely on raising money to support the "building process" and his salary. 2. AD at non BCS school who wants to be the AD at a large school and won't piss anyone off at a large school so he can keep himself/herself in line for a future big job, so they go along with everything the BCS ADs want. At the end of the day, these organizations are going to have to make a decision about the future of college football. With the athletic directors running these organization, and in many cases the universities they work for, does anyone really think they aren't going to side with taking the money? It's really about what athletic directors want, and not the "ncaa" or "conferences". Let's not over complicate what is really going on and who really runs things.

I'm surprised they didn't market it as a 2 for 1 deal. Breakfast and lunch at the same game.

I'll address the AD portion of this statement first. My answer is, they would do it tomorrow because they are only thinking about the dollars, which is a perfect situation for a group of people with almost no moral compass. This decision goes beyond wins and losses. My guess is there were a lot of BCS ADs who loved the fact that the AD in the story spoke up. It reminds me of an old saying my architect friends tell me, "Never be the first to try something new and never be the last." The flood gates were opened this week. Athletic Directors see the future of college football the way NFL owners see their league. The NFL is about TV dollars and advertising. How bad is it for the Raiders or Browns owners that their teams suck year after year? In the grand scheme of things, it isn't a big deal because of the money they make outside of attendance and various other game day revenues. Source. Athletic Directors have known for decades now the goose that laid the golden egg is sitting in every living room around the country...the television. They don't want that money, they need it at this point. Why?.... ....Universities now have to pay for the "building process". Everything is real now and real money has to be spent to support what schools have done to build up their athletic departments. Soaking non-student athletes with higher student fees to support athletic departments will not be tolerated much longer. The money has become more important than winning or losing. As far as the coaches, they won't like it, but they will have nothing to say about it. If they don't like it, they can always quit coaching college football and go coach high school football, or be miserable coaching in the NFL (extremely limited job opportunities), or make a fraction of what they were making coaching broadcasting games, or any number of jobs that pay a fraction of what they were making coaching. The athletic directors know this and they won't give a hoot about what the coaches think about anything. When the coaches agree to only make $1 million per year maximum coaching (much higher paying job than they could get anywhere else), I might get a slight feeling of sorrow for their losing.

The Premiere League thing will never work because there is no advantage in having the likes of Duke, Indiana, Minnesota, etc. bounce up and down out of a division. Actually, the only advantage I see is if a team like Tulsa gets bumped up and we can all bet on the over/under of their return to the lower league. As far as the basketball tournament, let's be clear. We shouldn't talk about the ncaa as if it is something separate from the schools. It is a member organization. If it wants to exist, it needs to play ball with the BCS level teams or they really go on their own. The ncaa basketball tournament is a fundraising endeavor for the ncaa and the BCS schools would be better off to leave the ncaa and have their own tournament; thus, keeping the money for themselves. The BCS schools would be in a better position to fund Title IX if they left the ncaa. I could see schools like Akron really struggling to keep up with Title IX and having to make cuts. In fact, I could see an Athletic Department with only Football, MBB, WBB, Volleyball and Track & Field. Not certain how that would be a bad thing either.

I agree completely and this is whey I so badly want MAClike conference away from the BCS mess. If we stay at the level we are now, it is a pretense to believe we can compete at that level. It has been an ongoing wheel-spinning endeavor for us and for just about every school in a MAClike conference. We need to get away from it asap and let those schools (Kansas, Indiana, Purdue, Duke, etc) kill themselves for money. I for one am sick of trying to do it without any results. The issue JZ84 brings up is interesting. The top schools staying in the ncaa is the last method in which those schools can suck the non-BCS schools dry. They stay in the ncaa, establish their own set of rules for themselves and mooch money from the non BCS schools to run their governing organization. Knowing this, does anyone really want them around the ncaa if they break free?

I don't think I would credit the coach at California PA for Smart's success.

Article I told you guys years ago this was going to happen. The BCS schools have used up the non-BCS schools. They don't need them for a football league or a basketball tournament or anything else for that matter. Everyone can stop pretending now. One would have thought Staples cut and pasted from my posts on this board. The BCS schools have opened up the doors for one major mistake...although they haven't made it yet. The pollution of their league with CUSA and whatever the Big East is called now (You know your league is bad when a guy posting on a MAC board calls it "whatever the Big East is called now") would be a huge idea. Any thoughts from those who thought this would never happen?

There were two schools between VCU and Akron. According to this logic, the coach at California PA could claim credit as well.

One?

As a former sales manager, regional sales manager who managed sales managers and now a business owner, there is an interesting point to be made here about selling a product and capturing money. If any of us were selling beer, would we rather be the Budweiser brands sales representative or the sales rep for Miller brands (this isn't a discussion on what tastes good)? With 40% market share in the US, Budweiser brands are pretty easy sale and that's where the game is easy for a rep to play. Lots of people drink Budweiser brands so bars stock lots of it because it moves. Because they stock it, they need to move it in order to not tie up cash so they push it. Basically, the more you sell, the more you sell because the momentum is so great. If you take a Budweiser sales rep and make him a Miller sales rep, will he have the ability to get the Miller market share up to 40%? The answer is....Hell no. He can make a small dent for a short period of time, but one person can't change a market by himself. What does any of this have to do with Tressel? While at OSU, he was the Budweiser sales rep. Raising money was easy when you are wearing a uniform people respond to. Take Tressel and put him at Akron selling Miller, he doesn't have quite the pull he once did. A lot of forces start to work against you. There should have been a short term, measurable impact and we aren't seeing it in terms of dollars. Americans are funny...we forget very quickly.

Please, please, please stop making sense. We are talking about the "building process" here and there is no room for that.

Good article and thanks for posting. The ncaa will no longer allow their name to be used. However, member institutions will still continue to be allowed to sign contracts with game companies. Conclusion, the ncaa will still continue to make a ton of money off of these games because the ncaa is a member organization and the members will still be making money. One can only put lipstick on a pig for so long.

Article It's one thing for former player to enter into a lawsuit against the ncaa. It's a whole different game when current players do. Current players give a better face to the inequities between who is making money from college athletics and who isn't. The problem for the ncaa and their lead pimps...athletic directors and head coaches...is there can now be a PR campaign showing how someone like Nick Saban or Urban Meyer lives vs. the players they coach. Or, the executives at the game companies that sell the video games and the abject poverty that some of the guys playing college athletics come from. It puts a better face on this case than Ed Obannon (sp?) does because he is well into his adulthood and has done well in life. If the members of the ncaa lose this lawsuit and take a bath paying former and current players for past revenue, it's their own damn fault. They could have done something about this years ago. Instead, they passed regulations about whether or not a school can supply salmon for bagels.

Interesting to me that the Ohio Attorney General is as involved as he is. I stand by what I said a couple of years ago. This is a short sighted move. In addition, the involvement of the Attorney General may make it a short sighted move for every Ohio public university hiring a coach. Unless, all the other coaches are on to this game and watching for it in contracts with schools.

Getting dumped on home portion of a 2 for 1 deal with a bcs team is common for non-BCS D1 teams. Since it happens to so many of us, we can fill those spots, and future spots, with non-BCS D1 teams. I'm still looking forward to the day when the BCS schools go on their merry way so we can have discussions about football and not scheduling.

Two things here. First, fans don't care about the money. They care about winning. 99% of the fans who attend games have no idea what the annual operating budget of their Athletic Department is. I'm OK with an ATM game as long as it is one game a year and early in the season so fans forget after a couple of wins. The reason for scheduling ATM games is the Big Dialer can't produce $1 million in revenue for a single game. The Athletic Department couldn't support itself without outside help from these types of games, student fees, the taxpayers, etc. They are a necessary evil.

I don't know if I would use the word "behind". I would use the words, "in the same category as". LAL is exactly the type of team we should be playing because they are in a league that is MAClike and they play quality football. I'm not sure what NIU, Toledo, Can't and Ball State did last year that puts them above LAL. NIU beat Army and Kansas (horrid programs)....lost to a 4-8 Iowa then were humbled in a BCS game they could have easily lost by 50 proving every pundit right who said they didn't belong in the game. Since this topic is about scheduling, I'll get back to that. I can't control what other people like. If someone is impressed by bottom dwelling Big Ten teams and they want to see those bad teams play because of tradition or all of the things that don't really matter, then so be it. I prefer to watch Zips teams schedule relevant teams in conferences similar to ours. It's better for the program in the long run because it establishes winning as a priority. Lastly, how on Earth would a IAA team like James Madison beat a LAL team that almost beat Florida. Your bunghole is going to hurt for days from pulling that leap of logic out of it....

Options could be, but not limited to: 1. Money 2. Easy win 3. Each had an open date that needed filled and playing each other was the only option Teams play for all sorts of reasons. Caring doesn't have to be one of them.

I have a request for GoZips.com. Please establish hyperlinks over the opponents names on your website that will allow a fan, if they want, to jump to that team's website. Thank you.

LA Lafayette isn't interesting? I would assume that anyone who doesn't think they are interesting doesn't know anything about good college football and they are more interested in the idea of playing a BCS team than watching good football. LAL is the most interesting team on the schedule. It's the one game I have circled on my calendar that I might make a trip back to Ohio to watch a game. When the Zips get things turned around, this is exactly the team that will give fans wet dreams when they think about watching the Zips win against good teams. How many nine win, conference champions and bowl champions are coming to the Big Dialer next year? LAL 2012 Schedule and Results

I agree completely. I don't see how Iowa State brings anything more than a Tulsa, East Carolina, Fresno State, San Jose State, etc. Pitt on the other hand is in close proximity so it may make sense for them, but they aren't going to schedule us every year. Fans at MAClike conferences have to give up on the idea that a few scattered wins against BCS bottom feeder teams like Duke, Indiana, Iowa State, etc. are signs that MAClike schools are on the cusp of something great. Something great meaning if they just build a bigger stadium, new practice facility, better scheduling, etc. they will be just like those teams/conferences. The sooner we stop that line of thinking, the sooner we can get our programs moving in a successful direction away from the BCS insanity we can't keep up with. BCS schools are nothing but an anchor around the necks of non BCS teams. We can do so much better if we would just let ourselves break the chains.

I don't know exactly what he means, but I think 1-1 means non BCS team. If that is the case, many of them would make the 1-1 trade. Our current schedule has an example of that.