Whoomp! (There It Is)

[Spin]

NCAA board votes to allow autonomy

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11321551/ncaa-board-votes-allow-autonomy-five-power-conferences

Looks like nothng changes as far as conferences and all that, just the rich getting richer and the rest not so much. I was hoping for the professional teams to break away, but the NCAA managed to keep its cash cow in its barn.

[GP1]

I was hoping for the professional teams to break away, but the NCAA managed to keep its cash cow in its barn.

The are keeping the cash cow. The cash cow is the NCAA Basketball Tournament (source).

I always ask this question. I'll ask it again. Instead of worrying about whether or not the big five break away, why don't we and the rest of the MAClike conferences break away?

Why do we continually allow ourselves to be a victim of their decisions? The people who run the MAClike leagues and MAClike ADs have no balls.

[Captain Kangaroo]

I always ask this question. I'll ask it again. Instead of worrying about whether or not the big five break away, why don't we and the rest of the MAClike conferences break away?

Why do we continually allow ourselves to be a victim of their decisions? The people who run the MAClike leagues and MAClike ADs have no balls.

Say the non-BCS teams break away. How many of them could remain afloat without the 2 BCS cash cow games they get every year.

I seriously doubt many programs at Akron's level could survive without the $1,000,000 payday a game like @Michigan or @Penn State provides?

Now if we drew 25,000 paying fans/game for 6+ home games, that would offset the BCS windfall. But I am still waiting to see someone whom I believe can consistently fill the Info with 8k, let alone 25k.

[Kangaroo Craig]

Agreed. Money is a huge part of the equation and non-BCS, FBS schools definitely need the "money game(s)" on their schedule. The only way to take down the NCAA is if all of the non power 5 conference basketball schools walked away (unlikely). If that happened, the NCAA would still be able to host their tournament, but they would barely have enough schools to fill out the bracket, and a good number of them would be average to lousy. Additionally, a new tournament could attract some pretty good programs as well. I would think fans would want to watch it, at least in the first few years. After that, who knows?

[GP1]

Say the non-BCS teams break away. How many of them could remain afloat without the 2 BCS cash cow games they get every year.

I seriously doubt many programs at Akron's level could survive without the $1,000,000 payday a game like @Michigan or @Penn State provides?

All of them would find a way to survive. They are losing money like crazy anyhow so why not heap more on to the taxpayers? How much is baseball, tennis, softball, golf, track, etc. costing these schools and could they bridge some of the gap between the lost revenue and expenses while maintaining Title IX compliance? I bet they could find a way. Remember, college athletics are not necessary. They are a luxury schools make a decision to have. Conferences would just have to be more flexible about the requirements for non-revenue sport.

Let's drop back for a second though and think about the ATM games. They are played for the BCS schools to get a big pay day and a risk-free easy win. What has changed recently that eliminates the need for the easy early win and opens the door for the BCS schools to take more risk in scheduling early seasons games? The answer is, the BCS playoff now exists. A team can take a risk and maybe lose an early season game now and still make the playoffs. No longer will it be necessary to go undefeated or have only one loss to make the championship game. Maybe, if a team thinks it can win their conference when the day comes when conference champions automatically get in, they can eliminate one cupcake and add a legitimate team to their schedule. As the number of ATM games decrease and the number of ATM game victims remains the same, the cost of bringing a victim to your stadium becomes less because there is more desperation to schedule a game for the victims so they are willing to sell themselves at lower prices. The assumption we will get $2 million annually from these games may not pan out to be reality in the near future.

Let's take out the BCS playoff for most of the BCS teams because let's be honest, almost all of them don't have the ability to win a national championship. What have they all done though? Without going too deep into the "building process", most of them have burdened themselves with supporting a much bigger footprint of facilities, support staff, etc. and the money will have to come from somewhere. Based upon the report from yesterday, they are all also going to be burdened with additional costs for players and their families. ADs are going to have to start making decisions without winning in the forefront of their thinking and replace it with dollar signs, which is what they all want to do anyhow...they are all a bunch of shameless a-holes. In addition to their regular duties, athletic departments are going to have to have someone handling family travel, which will probably lead to 10-15 more athletic department employees sitting around their offices most of the year with their fingers in their noses. I digress....

Let's take a school like UNC for example. Their OOC schedule consists of Liberty, San Diego State, @ECU, @ND (part of the ND deal with the ACC). Would they make more money with that schedule or let's say home and home with the following schools: Wisconsin, Oklahoma State, Arizona, ND (pick other BCS schools if you would like)? They can charge much more for the tickets, advertising revenue for their conference TV network, etc. to these games than they can to Liberty and SDSU. Both schools can make much more money and say adios to the non BCS schools. At this point, the BCS schools are in a position where they need the extra money just as bad as the non-BCS schools do. If they didn't, we wouldn't see many of the changes we are seeing. BCS schools are doing what they want to do and what they NEED to do also so there are two different dynamics. The "building process" needs supported at every level and is a burden at every level. Money pays for the "building process", not wins against Liberty. A middling BCS school is better off being one game under .500 while making more money in their OOC schedule than they are winning with a win against Liberty and making a low to mid level bowl game that will cost the school more than they bring in for making the bowl game.

Welcome to the future my friends. It's all around us and it isn't smelling very good from where I sit.

[Balsy]

Can't the non power-five teams veto any decision made by the NCAA? Wouldn't that be their best option?

[GP1]

Agreed. Money is a huge part of the equation and non-BCS, FBS schools definitely need the "money game(s)" on their schedule. The only way to take down the NCAA is if all of the non power 5 conference basketball schools walked away (unlikely). If that happened, the NCAA would still be able to host their tournament, but they would barely have enough schools to fill out the bracket, and a good number of them would be average to lousy.

I learned a lot watching the coverage of the World Cup this year. One thing that stuck out to me was what a great job ESPN (owned by Disney) did of creating excitement around the tournament and driving viewership. The US played a good first game against a poor team and then proceeded to "fail up"; Meaning, they played worse and had worse results while advancing (American indifference to soccer is the only reason I can think of that would allow Americans to think the World Cup results were acceptable). All the while, ESPN/Disney created an illusion that US Soccer was on the rise and getting stronger in the tournament. At the end, the US commentators had a gushing love fest about US Soccer and, with the exception of the European guys on the ESPN panel who know better, probably had a lot of people excited about US Soccer.

What does this have to do with college basketball? If there are five power conferences with 13 teams per conference, there are 65 teams. People get excited about first round NCAA games and here is a list of some of those games: VCU vs. Stephen F. Austin, UCLA vs. Tulsa, OSU vs. Dayton, Oklahoma vs. ND St. Sorry, I had to take a break to yawn. Is it impossible to believe that television marketers couldn't create just the same amount of excitement around a tournament with only the Big 5 in it consisting of games that might include Wake Forest vs. Duke or Illinois vs. Indiana (assume there are no longer any conference tournaments)? Another thing we learn watching sports and the World Cup reinforced my belief in this is, people will watch anything as an excuse to take time off of work to get drunk if is acceptable within the work environment. If soccer provided an excuse for young people to get together, drink some been and try to get laid, then I say viva Drinking FC, which would be the name of my soccer team...Actually, I wouldn't want to appease the phony Americans who want to be like Europeans and put FC in my teams name...I would call my team the Charlotte Quarter Bouncers or the Charlotte Shot Pounders...I need to work on that name. Where am I going with all of this?....Oh, I remember..... Further, is it impossible to believe the NCAA couldn't make just as much money with this tournament as they could with the existing format? I think all of this is in the world of possibility.

I've been saying it for years and it remains a matter of concern for me...The MAClike conferences need to figure out what the heck they are going to do in the near future to survive and become less victims. If not, we are in big trouble.

[GP1]

O'Bannon Wins

[LZIp]

Its clear you aren't well versed on international soccer.

[GP1]

O'Bannon Wins

A good analysis.

[Zips Win!]

Do you really think the big 5 will come to an agreement and only schedule themselves? I find this hard to believe within the next five years.

And if they do, I predict it will last for about 5 years....

At some point 25 of the 65 teams will get tired of having a losing record every year and then will be begging to join a conference similar to the MAC.

The money will be nice for a while, but then when Purdue consistently draws 22,000 fans a game going 2-10 every year, things will change.

[GP1]

Do you really think the big 5 will come to an agreement and only schedule themselves? I find this hard to believe within the next five years.

And if they do, I predict it will last for about 5 years....

At some point 25 of the 65 teams will get tired of having a losing record every year and then will be begging to join a conference similar to the MAC.

The money will be nice for a while, but then when Purdue consistently draws 22,000 fans a game going 2-10 every year, things will change.

I do believe it and I think we are already slowly heading down that road. In the near future, BCS schools will cut back on cupcakes from two a year to one. With supply of non-BCS victims remaining the same and few opportunities to take an ATM game, the cost for bringing in a victim for a team like Purdue will go down. I also think it will be beyond 5 years from now as well like you say, but we shouldn't create any illusions that it isn't moving in this direction. In fact, we need to think about what our next move will be.

The one thing I have always said is many of these schools don't want to move in this direction. You're right, Purdue is royally screwed, but the television money is too great for them to ignore. In reality, what's the difference between 4-8 or 2-10. Fans know they suck either way. However, places like Purdue are in a position where they have to do it because they have extended their facilities footprint to the point where they will be desperate for money. The real money is not in attendance....it's in television revenue. In fact, it could become like the NFL. An NFL game is nothing more than a reason to schedule television commercials for 3.5 hours (Thank God for the RedZone Channel). That's why going to an NFL game has become so unpleasant.

Currently, most BCS level teams play an ooc schedule consisting of a guaranteed win (we have one against Howard), two non-BCS D-1A and one BCS team. I ignore the guaranteed win because everyone is going to continue to do that, which is an almost criminal way of stealing money from the public. They will trade a non-BCS D 1A school/guaranteed win for another BCS school in the near future. Some conferences have already eliminated the guaranteed win. Once they see how much money they can make in ticket sales (Many schools already have a price structure for tickets that takes quality of opponent into consideration. My Wake tickets for Gardner Webb are $48 ea., my tickets for Clemson are $59 ea.)

The big mistake college football observers make is thinking college athletics are first about competition and winning. Maybe it is for coaches/players and people who want things to be one way when they are in fact another way (and have always been that way), but they aren't the opinions that really matter for most schools. At most schools, the ADs and Presidents make the decisions. They first care about money and ways to make a lot more money. Ticket sales aren't the real money maker. If it was, the time it takes to play a game wouldn't be going up. It's about selling more commercial time and making money that way. Big time schools aren't really interested in the idiots willing to sit around for 3 hours watching a game like South Carolina vs. Wofford.

The more the general public sees BCS vs. BCS ooc competition, the more they will like it. The more they like it, the more they want it. The more they want it, the more they will be willing to pay to go watch it. More importantly, the more they want it, the more they will be willing to watch it on television. The more people want to pay to go watch it, the more they will be willing to pay to watch it. The more people watching on television, the more they can charge for advertising revenue. The more they charge for tickets, the more they make. The more advertising revenue there is, the more there is for conference television networks so the schools make more. The more advertising revenue there is, the greater the network deals will be and the more the schools make. We haven't even started to talk about secondary revenue streams like scoreboard advertising, parking, field naming rights, banner advertising, etc.

[K92]

If the P5 only play each other, there is a real problem for the blue bloods. How can they continue to play 8 home games? Fellow P5ers are probably going to demand home & homes. Perhaps i am wrong and conference have-nots will be willing to play 4 home games a year to appease the traditional powers and collect additional paychecks to invest in their basketball programs.

[Spin]

So while the rich get richer, how do the rest survive? Less scholies? Less OOC travel?

[Zipmeister]

So while the rich get richer, how do the rest survive? Less scholies?

I recommend the Adrian College solution.

Less OOC travel?

Eventually everyone will play only home games.

Akron has experimented with this in the past.

Back in the 70s a men's swim team from Pa. failed to show up for a contracted meet at the Memorial Hall pool.

A phone call to the school revealed that they (mistakenly) believed the meet was scheduled at their pool and they were there waiting for us.

Both teams agreed to swim the meet at their own pool and compare times over the phone.

Akron's time in the last relay won the meet,

Talk about excitement.

I

[GP1]

If the P5 only play each other, there is a real problem for the blue bloods. How can they continue to play 8 home games?

They won't play 8 home games. They will play each other and triple the ticket prices and advertising fees for those games and make more money. People will pay for it like they do NFL games. If people are stupid enough to pay $50 to watch tOSU demolish Florida A & M, then doesn't everyone think they would be willing to pay $150 to watch a game against Oregon? How much more could they charge for advertising for those games? I don't know, but I'd bet a lot of money it would be much more.

[Zipmeister]

They won't play 8 home games. They will play each other and triple the ticket prices and advertising fees for those games and make more money. People will pay for it like they do NFL games. If people are stupid enough to pay $50 to watch tOSU demolish Florida A & M, then doesn't everyone think they would be willing to pay $150 to watch a game against Oregon? How much more could they charge for advertising for those games? I don't know, but I'd bet a lot of money it would be much more.

The two prices you mention are within spitting distance of the price tOSU offered single game tickets to alumnus for an OOC bunny and Michigan, respectively.

[g-mann17]

They won't play 8 home games. They will play each other and triple the ticket prices and advertising fees for those games and make more money. People will pay for it like they do NFL games. If people are stupid enough to pay $50 to watch tOSU demolish Florida A & M, then doesn't everyone think they would be willing to pay $150 to watch a game against Oregon? How much more could they charge for advertising for those games? I don't know, but I'd bet a lot of money it would be much more.

Um, no.

The answer to your question is no. People show up for OSU games because they are there to party and assume a win is inevitable. This goes for all schools so I'm not picking on a single fan base. People like "undefeated". 8-4 teams right now easily becomes 6-6 or worse yet 5-7 because of playing only the P5 schools. People aren't going to pay or show up in droves for that.

People are only going to spend $150 for crap seats if its for something meaningful (IE Bowl, playoff game)

[GP1]

The answer to your question is no. People show up for OSU games because they are there to party and assume a win is inevitable. This goes for all schools so I'm not picking on a single fan base. People like "undefeated". 8-4 teams right now easily becomes 6-6 or worse yet 5-7 because of playing only the P5 schools. People aren't going to pay or show up in droves for that.

People are only going to spend $150 for crap seats if its for something meaningful (IE Bowl, playoff game)

I don't disagree that a lot of people show up for tosu games to party and see a win. They do. Many of them go because it is the one game a year they can get a ticket to so they go.

As far as people not paying $150 to watch tosu against a good team or only for a playoff game or Bowl....cough, cough.

[g-mann17]

I don't disagree that a lot of people show up for tosu games to party and see a win. They do. Many of them go because it is the one game a year they can get a ticket to so they go.

As far as people not paying $150 to watch tosu against a good team or only for a playoff game or Bowl....cough, cough.

Yeah, because Michigan isn't important or similar to a bowl game.

Nobody is paying that for 10-0 OSU vs 1-9 Indiana or more realistically 7-3 OSU vs 3-7 Illinois.

[Zips Win!]

People will pay for it like they do NFL games. If people are stupid enough to pay $50 to watch tOSU demolish Florida A & M, then doesn't everyone think they would be willing to pay $150 to watch a game against Oregon?

But tosu will not schedule teams like Oregon when they are good bec. they may lose. They will cherry pick easy wins. A below avg. Va. tech team will be as hard as it gets....

[LZIp]

But tosu will not schedule teams like Oregon when they are good bec. they may lose. They will cherry pick easy wins. A below avg. Va. tech team will be as hard as it gets....

I might suggest that you do a little more research on when scheduling is done and look at past schedules before you make another statement like that.

[GP1]

Nobody is paying that for 10-0 OSU vs 1-9 Indiana or more realistically 7-3 OSU vs 3-7 Illinois.

Nobody, or you wouldn't pay that amount? I wouldn't pay it either. Many will if it is part of a season ticket package. It all becomes one cost and we were talking about ooc play.

My Wake tickets for Gardner Webb are right around $50 ea (I have two tickets.). I'd gladly pay an extra $50-$100 ea to watch them play a real team regardless of the outcome. I pay around $700 a year for everything involved in getting tickets and a parking pass. Going from $700 to $800 isn't that big of a jump for the right competition. I'd gladly pay $250 per ticket to go watch the Zips in a bowl game if they could just freaking make one.

If we aren't already there, the future brings three types of buyers for BCS level colllege football: A corporation, a well to do person and a person willing to use credit lines to pay for the tickets (probably very similar to NFL ticket holders.), which brings me back, once again, to the "building process". One thing we have learned from the "bp" is university Presidents and ADs have no problems with saddling existing students with high student fees, frequently financed through student loans, to pay for the "bp". If Presidents and ADs are so shameful that they are willing to do that to their existing students, what would they be willing to do to their alumni or the general population? The would have no problems with forcing the general population to finance tickets. They have already done it with building initiatives. Why wouldn't they do it for tickets?

g-mann17, You are looking at college athletics through the lens of a completely sane and intelligent person. That automatically disqualifies you from working in college athletics. In order to relate to the enemy, you must think like the enemy. In order to lower your IQ to think like a MAClike athletic director, I prescribe a 24 hour Three Stooges marathon for starters and we will go from there.

[GP1]

I might suggest that you do a little more research on when scheduling is done and look at past schedules before you make another statement like that.

I'd have more respect for fans in your situation if you would just say, "Ya, our OOC schedule hasn't been the strongest and our conference is almost as bad. We haven't done very well against really good teams in recent years. It's something they need to work on."

[LZIp]

I'd have more respect for fans in your situation if you would just say, "Ya, our OOC schedule hasn't been the strongest and our conference is almost as bad. We haven't done very well against really good teams in recent years. It's something they need to work on."

3/4ths of that post would have been off topic and unnecessary given the context of the discussion. Par for the course.

I know everyone on this forum has little brother syndrome with OSU, but if bashing happens (which it does), let's at least have some factual points and not cookie cutter attempts at insults.