- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 8,266
- Reaction Score
- 22,629
Isn't waylon?Aren't you assuming all the other schools would pay?
Isn't waylon?Aren't you assuming all the other schools would pay?
I'm trying to understand the logic behind calling a novelty conference of academic elites (a new Ivy league) "formidable" from a marketing perspective under the assumption players in other conferences will be paid. What he described is the current Ivy league vs. everyone else. What network holds the rights to their games again?
In other times, I would take a great deal of pleasure from it. But there is no point in rejoicing at damage being done to a house that you want to live in.
Mistake #2 on my part.Who said the premise was "logical"?
Why would it be formidable? If we are moving toward pay for play, this "academics focused league" would be nothing but another ivy league conference. if players are getting paid, and they refuse to participate, then this league would blow, just like the ivy league who refuses to give out scholarships like everyone else does. how marketable is that league?
Mistake #2 on my part.
Mistake #1 was taking him seriously in the first place.
the reason I bring this up is that it is not a given that Duke wants to be in the same league as UConn and Pitt if the rest of the ACC is in tatters. And if a few of the top academic schools, such as Duke, Wake, BC, Villanova, Rice, Tulane, Navy, Army and Georgetown, said they were forming a league, there would be pressure on other schools of similar caliber to join.
IF notre dame ever decided to go full, they could then add UConn to make it 17BB/16FB, but I just don't see ND going to the ACC full. Which means the only way we get added is likely if an odd number of teams leave the ACC via raid.
Lmao. Nelson, I don't even believe you believe half the you write.
There is a line that those schools are not going to cross. Northwestern or Vanderbilt doesn't take the same "student" athletes that a Mississippi State takes. They compete based on their academic prestige, but they focus on a different type of recruit.
the reason I bring this up is that it is not a given that Duke wants to be in the same league as UConn and Pitt if the rest of the ACC is in tatters. And if a few of the top academic schools, such as Duke, Wake, BC, Villanova, Rice, Tulane, Navy, Army and Georgetown, said they were forming a league, there would be pressure on other schools of similar caliber to join. I strongly suspect ND would give the same "5 game" deal they gave the ACC. Those schools can still play big time athletics, but without the cesspool that is the SEC or most of the Big 10. I think Northwestern would join a league like that. I think they are only still in the Big 10 because of the money, and if they could find another home that was reasonable, they would leave in a heartbeat. Vanderbilt is less clear.
And if a few of the top academic schools, such as Duke, Wake, BC, Villanova, Rice, Tulane, Navy, Army and Georgetown, said they were forming a league, there would be pressure on other schools of similar caliber to join.
You think Duke, Wake, BCU, Pitt, and Syracuse will add UConn, USF, Cincinnati, Louisville, Temple, Memphis and UCF?
Do you think that scenario is realistic?
So with the understanding that football drives the bus, and the assumption that the major players will be paying players in an open market, you are convinced that a league made up of Duke, Wake Forest, BC, Villanova, Rice, Tulane, Navy, Army and Georgetown is "formidable" from a marketing standpoint?
For you to be right, you would have to assume that Duke would be willing to be in a league with Temple, UCF, Memphis and USF. They could stomach one of them. 4 is out of the question.
Ok, with the understanding that markets drive the bus (and large college football markets are more valuable), you think a conference made up of Duke, Wake Forest, BC, Villanova, Rice, Tulane, Navy, Army and Georgetown is formidable from a marketing standpoint?Football doesn't drive the bus. If it did, Maryland would never have been added to the Big 10.
But this on the other hand makes perfect sense. Not sure it will work, but its a plausible strategy.
Of course is this were 100% true, then Georgetown and Navy would have been considered before Maryland right?Football doesn't drive the bus. If it did, Maryland would never have been added to the Big 10.
Of course is this were 100% true, then Georgetown and Navy would have been considered before Maryland right?
I don't know what you are even arguing. I generally don't with you.
Either you think Duke will be happy in a league with UCF, Temple, USF and Memphis, or you don't. I don't. You do. It's that simple.
I don't know what you are even arguing. I generally don't with you.
Either you think Duke will be happy in a league with UCF, Temple, USF and Memphis, or you don't. I don't. You do. It's that simple.
Why is Duke, Wake Forest, BC, Villanova, Rice, Tulane, Navy, Army and Georgetown, "formidable" from a marketing standpoint?
It's a simple question.
Against my better judgment....
Because those are national universities that are in big cities for the most part and every parent in the world would love their kid to go to. Those are national universities. Only an idiot would debate that fact.
So then about the league. IF, and it is a big IF, the ACC collapses, a few top academic programs will need to decide which direction they want to go. Affiliate with whatever is left east of the Mississippi, including city colleges that have open admission, or develop a brand. Duke and the rest may have to make a choice, and I think the could go in a direction of similar caliber institutions. I think that would not be a terrible idea, and I think an NBC or even ESPN would pay decently for that league.
Isn't waylon?
You think Duke, Wake, BCU, Pitt, and Syracuse will add UConn, USF, Cincinnati, Louisville, Temple, Memphis and UCF?
Do you think that scenario is realistic?