The next trainwreck after this CR will be the super leagues breaking off from the ncaa. It seems to be a question of when, not if. That being the case, why wouldnt they want as many of the top flight hoops programs as possible, because the billion dollar ncaa tourney money would have to be renegotiated. They say football rules the roost now because of the dollars, but if you are going to split the ncaa tourney money 60 something ways vs the 300+ ways they split it now, now you are talking some serious increase in BB money. If teams like Uconn, Memphis, Butler, Gonzaga etc are continually showing up in final fours wouldnt the BCS group have a hard time pulling away all that money from CBS? I would think it would behoove them to pull in as many good combo programs as possible, and I would think we would be example #1.
From what I understand
- Thread starter king conn
- Start date
- Status
Fifty schools are not going to automatically suck just because someone makes an announcement. The group breaks, immediately they have to go to the negotiating table. You bring what you have to the table at that moment.
RS9999X
There's no Dark Side .....it's all Dark.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 5,626
- Reaction Score
- 562
First they will increase the pay to players and then the largest markets will look at a 65,000 seat requirement and 60,000 attendance and a minimum ticket revenue model.
Sent from my Lumia 920 via Windows 8. Now bite me Apple Droids.
Sent from my Lumia 920 via Windows 8. Now bite me Apple Droids.
Dann
#4hunnid
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9,901
- Reaction Score
- 7,180
they are not going to suck right away no, but 5 to 10 years down the road every good recruit will go to the new league with the 60-80 super teams. they will have big $ stipends and those schools will be making major tv money, they will crush the ncaa. d1 bball in the ncaa compared to the breakaway league will be like d1 vs d2 right now. not even close.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 35,466
- Reaction Score
- 31,347
And I won't bother following any of them. I'm pretty sure we won't get into a top 64 (maybe top 80) non-ncaa league. It will be a football only thing.
You of course are making a big assumption about pay. And you missed my point about the tv money, that will be determined long before 5 to 10 years down the road. That was the whole point of my post, they I think would need to show they have all the big guns from the beginning.
Dann
#4hunnid
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9,901
- Reaction Score
- 7,180
when we upgraded football we screamed to the USA that we wanted to be one of these teams. the super league break away thing didn't just emerge as a rumor last year on a message board, its been talked about by high ranking people as far back as atleast the early 90's. we knew what we were getting into and we chose to chase the dream vs hang out with the c7.
what assumption about pay? schools and leagues right now that uconn isn't in are trying to give players pay 2moro, this is well documented in the media. you can't go a day without some college football media head talking about the issue on tv or in a blog. its coming and we either will join and be big time or get left out.
You are taking this all over the place, nowhere near what Ive been posting. My post has nothing to do with commitment to football, what was said in the early 90's or talking heads. Obviously if we had the bcs football champion we wouldnt be in this position. If it helps you understand it any better take uconn out of the equation. Lets say Memphis played football for 10 years, plays currently in a BCS league, made it to the Fiesta Bowl a few years ago and has won 3 national championships in BB. Dont you think the super leagues would want a program like that to take to the table to negotiate the ncaa tourney contract?
Dann
#4hunnid
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9,901
- Reaction Score
- 7,180
no because if memphis isn't worth it to a league fball wise then the bball aspect doesn't matter. the split is a 100% guarantee. there is a 50/50 chance of a split. the other 50% is that the powerful ppl in the bcs get the ncaa to create a standing above the current d1. like a d0, d1, d2, d3 setup. the big boys dont want to share anything with smaller schools. in this type of split the big boys in there new league would redo the ncaa tney ways and come home with the $ but they will still always be fball first.
if the b12 was in dier need of a team look at it this way, they could add houston instead and know fball wise uh would become a solid player. then houston with all the $ they make and the rise of the ath dept they have could go out and hire the memphis coach and become a good bball program. thats how the big boys think, the bball side of it is the opposite way they think and model this break away or step up in a new league. just how it is becuase of $.
Im just going to conclude you are confused and think you are responding to another post....
Dann
#4hunnid
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9,901
- Reaction Score
- 7,180
i guess i am. my bad
Fishy
Elite Premium Poster
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 18,115
- Reaction Score
- 131,838
To make a long answer short - no.
If your scenario ever came to pass and your super leagues did indeed break from the NCAA, the inclusion or exclusion of your hypothetical team wouldn't even be a rounding error in any negotiation. You can see evidence of that now - we're in purgatory already and we're not even on the doorstep of any super conference breaking from the NCAA.
Mr. Wonderful
Whistleblower
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 2,747
- Reaction Score
- 8,317
I think the football schools would gladly give up every penny of basketball revenue from a contract standpoint on day 1 of the split. The football dough is stacked in such large piles that breaking away is a loss-leader for them, as they can and will erode the smaller piles of basketball revenue over time.
A billion dollars is far from a rounding point. And we are not on the doorstep because the CR is far from over. Thats my point. I think our purgatory will end believe it or not because of BB. Right now yes, they are all concentrating on the best football programs. Eventually when they are close to rounding it out and begin to address a break from the ncaa and the BB money available, we will be a shu-in at that point. And thats if we havnt been chosen before.
You guys have to get it out of your minds that the BB money will remain the same. One of the reasons these BCS schools are going to break away is to keep as much of that billion dollar contract as they can for themselves. If they are going to do something so drastic as to end the ncaa as we know it, then you know it must be very, very important and worth alot to them.
Mr. Wonderful
Whistleblower
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 2,747
- Reaction Score
- 8,317
Taken in context, I believe your premise relies on the difference in value between adding UConn and not adding UConn, which does not equal the total value of the NCAA's basketball contract, which is the billion dollar value in your quote.
As an aside, the NCAA administration keeps an exorbitant amount of that billion dollars for itself. Quite a few schools object to how much.
Fishy
Elite Premium Poster
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 18,115
- Reaction Score
- 131,838
Basketball will not end our time in athletic Siberia. If the time comes where the conferences break off of the NCAA, if we're still on the outside, we'll stay out - we wouldn't add a dime to their bottom line at that point.
What will end our banishment is someone taking something from someone else and they need us to become whole again.
What will end our banishment is someone taking something from someone else and they need us to become whole again.
Thats fine, but understand the BB will play a role in us enabling them to feel whole again. Whether you want to acknowledge it or not. Unless Coach P suddenly turns into Nick Saben absolutely nobody is picking us up for football reasons only.
The whole "breaking off the NCAA" mantra is the most oft-repeated and overstated narrative borne out of realignment discussion in the past three years. It's really not the foregone conclusion that people are making it out to be.
There's really not the incentive people think for it to happen. People forget that these conferences ARE the NCAA. The NCAA is a membership organization that is controlled almost purely by the NCAA presidents. At the Division I level, it's the Division I presidents that vote and FBS presidents have a weighted vote in their favor on all voting issues. These major conferences already largely control the NCAA governance.
As far as the revenue: it's way overblown. The power leagues have already split from the NCAA. It's called the BCS. If you recall, the BCS is completely, totally and utterly independent from the NCAA. The money is split how they want and with whom they want. The only thing the NCAA approves is the number of games played within the season, how many bowl games are approved and how the programs are operated. Beyond that, these schools already control the revenue and where it goes. And interestingly, they voluntarily funnel some money to FCS schools despite the fact they have never been under any obligation to do so by the NCAA structure as a whole.
While it's certainly possible they could elect to have their own autonomy, it isn't likely. If they do, it will be for football only and they'll remain part of the organization for all other sports. The money from the NCAA Tournament is more than they'd receive by breaking off and doing their own thing for basketball. That's too big a piece of pie to leave on the table. More likely though, they'll do what they've been talking about at the last three years of meetings: creating a third sub-division in football.
The only real incentive at this point, to breaking off, is having a playoff where they don't have to automatically include the other FBS leagues. But when the difference between the haves and have-nots become large enough, there has already been a proposal within the NCAA to create a third-subdivision. This will allow the power leagues to have a playoff that includes their own 8 teams and share the revenue in a capacity that more closely mirrors the NCAA Tournament. If the third subdivision does happen, and again the power leagues have already been discussing this with the other leagues, then it will eliminate the last real reason they have for leaving the NCAA structure.
I won't make the mistake of saying it "won't" happen. But I do have a good, educated hunch it isn't what they're planning. And I do know it doesn't make as much sense to do so as people talk about on message boards. I'll be surprised if they go that route. If they do, it will simply be a separate football organization that still allows for scheduling of NCAA schools.
There's really not the incentive people think for it to happen. People forget that these conferences ARE the NCAA. The NCAA is a membership organization that is controlled almost purely by the NCAA presidents. At the Division I level, it's the Division I presidents that vote and FBS presidents have a weighted vote in their favor on all voting issues. These major conferences already largely control the NCAA governance.
As far as the revenue: it's way overblown. The power leagues have already split from the NCAA. It's called the BCS. If you recall, the BCS is completely, totally and utterly independent from the NCAA. The money is split how they want and with whom they want. The only thing the NCAA approves is the number of games played within the season, how many bowl games are approved and how the programs are operated. Beyond that, these schools already control the revenue and where it goes. And interestingly, they voluntarily funnel some money to FCS schools despite the fact they have never been under any obligation to do so by the NCAA structure as a whole.
While it's certainly possible they could elect to have their own autonomy, it isn't likely. If they do, it will be for football only and they'll remain part of the organization for all other sports. The money from the NCAA Tournament is more than they'd receive by breaking off and doing their own thing for basketball. That's too big a piece of pie to leave on the table. More likely though, they'll do what they've been talking about at the last three years of meetings: creating a third sub-division in football.
The only real incentive at this point, to breaking off, is having a playoff where they don't have to automatically include the other FBS leagues. But when the difference between the haves and have-nots become large enough, there has already been a proposal within the NCAA to create a third-subdivision. This will allow the power leagues to have a playoff that includes their own 8 teams and share the revenue in a capacity that more closely mirrors the NCAA Tournament. If the third subdivision does happen, and again the power leagues have already been discussing this with the other leagues, then it will eliminate the last real reason they have for leaving the NCAA structure.
I won't make the mistake of saying it "won't" happen. But I do have a good, educated hunch it isn't what they're planning. And I do know it doesn't make as much sense to do so as people talk about on message boards. I'll be surprised if they go that route. If they do, it will simply be a separate football organization that still allows for scheduling of NCAA schools.
nelsonmuntz
Point Center
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 44,170
- Reaction Score
- 33,030
When you collude with your competitors to fix price, you risk not only civil penalties but criminal too. How many of these presidents are willing to risk jail time to carve out a few million more for their football program?
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2012
- Messages
- 8,622
- Reaction Score
- 25,064
Fishy, I don't know why you are so wedded to the most negative possible view. The NCAA tournament brings $1 bn which if preserved with a split by the top 100 programs would bring $10 mn per year -- that is not small compared to the football income, it would be fully 25%+ of revenue for most BCS programs. Add in regular season revenue which somebody just posted exceed $14 mn/yr for 15 programs, and are commonly $3-10 mn/yr+ for top programs including UConn. Basketball can easily be a $15 mn/yr sport, versus football a $30-50 mn sport.
Moreover as the model moves toward cable subscriptions for dedicated networks/channels, it becomes crucial to have year-round inventory to prevent people canceling subscriptions as soon as football season ends. Basketball becomes an essential part of the model.
Your model for "ending our banishment" refutes your first paragraph: how can a program that doesn't add a dime to the bottom line make a conference whole? If that were the case they wouldn't add UConn, they would accept a smaller conference. For the same reason the B12 has so far been OK with staying at 10 teams, the ACC could accept shrinkage to 10 teams rather than dilution with a team that "doesn't add a dime."
The reality is UConn is a valuable property, but not so valuable that it is a must-add at this stage of realignment. If a basketball split does occur so that basketball revenue starts to figure in the calculations, odds are high UConn becomes the target of bidders.
Of course, if we build up our football program, we could be the target of bidders even without a basketball BCS.
These major conferences already largely control the NCAA governance.
Not the basketball money. Thats what we are talking here.
As far as the revenue: it's way overblown. The power leagues have already split from the NCAA. It's called the BCS. If you recall, the BCS is completely, totally and utterly independent from the NCAA. The money is split how they want and with whom they want. The only thing the NCAA approves is the number of games played within the season, how many bowl games are approved and how the programs are operated. Beyond that, these schools already control the revenue and where it goes. And interestingly, they voluntarily funnel some money to FCS schools despite the fact they have never been under any obligation to do so by the NCAA structure as a whole.
While it's certainly possible they could elect to have their own autonomy, it isn't likely. If they do, it will be for football only and they'll remain part of the organization for all other sports. The money from the NCAA Tournament is more than they'd receive by breaking off and doing their own thing for basketball. That's too big a piece of pie to leave on the table. More likely though, they'll do what they've been talking about at the last three years of meetings: creating a third sub-division in football.
First you say the revenue is overblown, then you say they dont want to leave that big a pie on the table. Bottom line, they have shown they are the greediest form of executives. And with these types, enough is never enough. Once their attention turns from the football and sqeezing every last penny out of that, they will look somewhere else to make more money. It is that pie that you bring up.
I won't make the mistake of saying it "won't" happen. But I do have a good, educated hunch it isn't what they're planning. And I do know it doesn't make as much sense to do so as people talk about on message boards. I'll be surprised if they go that route. If they do, it will simply be a separate football organization that still allows for scheduling of NCAA schools.[/quote]
You can find this talk in plenty of places other than message boards. In fact, thats why it is being discussed on message boards.
Not the basketball money. Thats what we are talking here.
As far as the revenue: it's way overblown. The power leagues have already split from the NCAA. It's called the BCS. If you recall, the BCS is completely, totally and utterly independent from the NCAA. The money is split how they want and with whom they want. The only thing the NCAA approves is the number of games played within the season, how many bowl games are approved and how the programs are operated. Beyond that, these schools already control the revenue and where it goes. And interestingly, they voluntarily funnel some money to FCS schools despite the fact they have never been under any obligation to do so by the NCAA structure as a whole.
While it's certainly possible they could elect to have their own autonomy, it isn't likely. If they do, it will be for football only and they'll remain part of the organization for all other sports. The money from the NCAA Tournament is more than they'd receive by breaking off and doing their own thing for basketball. That's too big a piece of pie to leave on the table. More likely though, they'll do what they've been talking about at the last three years of meetings: creating a third sub-division in football.
First you say the revenue is overblown, then you say they dont want to leave that big a pie on the table. Bottom line, they have shown they are the greediest form of executives. And with these types, enough is never enough. Once their attention turns from the football and sqeezing every last penny out of that, they will look somewhere else to make more money. It is that pie that you bring up.
I won't make the mistake of saying it "won't" happen. But I do have a good, educated hunch it isn't what they're planning. And I do know it doesn't make as much sense to do so as people talk about on message boards. I'll be surprised if they go that route. If they do, it will simply be a separate football organization that still allows for scheduling of NCAA schools.[/quote]
You can find this talk in plenty of places other than message boards. In fact, thats why it is being discussed on message boards.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 29,356
- Reaction Score
- 46,661
The basketball money is significant. The $400 million that is shared now is spread among 450 D1 schools. The rest of the $350 million pays not only for championships for D1, but also D2 and D3.
That being said, you can't tell me some of the luster wouldn't be lost from the tourney when 300+ schools are excluded from it. Gone then are the VCU and Butlers. Gone, totally gone. No George Masons (ouch!). The tourney itself would then be reduced to 64 games--and many of those games would be totally boring .500 teams.
The contract for a tourney run by football schools might actually bring a lot LESS than the current tourney.
That being said, you can't tell me some of the luster wouldn't be lost from the tourney when 300+ schools are excluded from it. Gone then are the VCU and Butlers. Gone, totally gone. No George Masons (ouch!). The tourney itself would then be reduced to 64 games--and many of those games would be totally boring .500 teams.
The contract for a tourney run by football schools might actually bring a lot LESS than the current tourney.
But the tv ratings consistently show the further the underdogs go, the lower the ratings are. And the contracts are based on the ratings.
The more big dogs they can bring to the table, the higher the number.
- Status