Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 966 | The Boneyard
.-.

Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

CTFAN4LIFE said:
Meritocracy is usually a good thing.
Expand ...
Maybe. But I would argue that in a sports league it is better if everyone starts at the same place. The NFL salary cap prevents the Chiefs from stockpiling the best players so “organization excellence” is what permits them to be dominant. A great front office, scouting system, Coach are what allow them to be great, not outspending the NY Jets.

Florida State already has advantages over the rest of the ACC. Giving them more of the pie isnt meritocracy. It’s more like protectionism.
 
freescooter said:
Maybe. But I would argue that in a sports league it is better if everyone starts at the same place. The NFL salary cap prevents the Chiefs from stockpiling the best players so “organization excellence” is what permits them to be dominant. A great front office, scouting system, Coach are what allow them to be great, not outspending the NY Jets.

Florida State already has advantages over the rest of the ACC. Giving them more of the pie isnt meritocracy. It’s more like protectionism.
Expand ...
Seems like apples and oranges in terms of the NFL vs CFB...The NFL salary cap is primarily set up so that NFL owners know what their expenses will be. And, it was collectively bargained. And, it fits into the league's system of making parity along with their scheduling system, etc.

Disagree on your last point - protectionism is giving everyone the same amount. And, without an overall spending cap there are other ways ACC schools other than FSU can invest in their programs to the point of being competitive.
 
.-.
CTFAN4LIFE said:
Seems like apples and oranges in terms of the NFL vs CFB...The NFL salary cap is primarily set up so that NFL owners know what their expenses will be. And, it was collectively bargained. And, it fits into the league's system of making parity along with their scheduling system, etc.

Disagree on your last point - protectionism is giving everyone the same amount. And, without an overall spending cap there are other ways ACC schools other than FSU can invest in their programs to the point of being competitive.
Expand ...
FSU wants to be protected from the likes of Wake Forest having equal resources.
 
freescooter said:
FSU wants to be protected from the likes of Wake Forest having equal resources.
Expand ...
Yes, I get that but to me protectionism promotes spreading resources out evenly to protect all as opposed to a more Darwinistic approach of letting each eat what they kill.
 
Could everyone get the same base amount and then unequal distributions are based on the sport and the results? 1st place gets more than second, second gets more than third, etc. and football has a bigger pool to disburse than hoops. Nobody deserves more because of who they once were. Make money the old fashioned way, Earn it! The older guys in the group will remember that commercial.
 
Fairfield_1st said:
Could everyone get the same base amount and then unequal distributions are based on the sport and the results? 1st place gets more than second, second gets more than third, etc. and football has a bigger pool to disburse than hoops. Nobody deserves more because of who they once were. Make money the old fashioned way, Earn it! The older guys in the group will remember that commercial.
Expand ...
FSU would never agree to that. FSU wants much more because its brand is worth much more regardless of how crappy a season it might have. Heck I don't think any program will agree to a system where it might make less than bcu.

CR is nothing like Smith Barney.
 
.-.
The foundational question about the future path of major college athletics is which professional league models they follow.

In regards to player control...the NCAA, conferences, and institutions have been 'forced' to mimic the NBA with nearly unlimited player power in regards to player movement. Is that something the powers that be can quell or continue unfettered?

In regards to economic matters...should the college system continue to foster an adversarial system of haves and have-nots like the MLB...or...a cooperative approach that promotes to (at least some) semblance of parity like the NFL.
 
GampelGladiator said:
The foundational question about the future path of major college athletics is which professional league models they follow.

In regards to player control...the NCAA, conferences, and institutions have been 'forced' to mimic the NBA with nearly unlimited player power in regards to player movement. Is that something the powers that be can quell or continue unfettered?

In regards to economic matters...should the college system continue to foster an adversarial system of haves and have-nots like the MLB...or...a cooperative approach that promotes to (at least some) semblance of parity like the NFL.
Expand ...
The NCAA is pretty much toothless in the new world of NIL, because states have set regulations for their schools. Led by States, of Tennessee, Nebraska, Virginia, and New York they challenged the NCAA rules for NIL.
The NCAA had started an investigation into Tennessee's use of NIL. The NCAA lost the case and was told they couldn't set standards different then the states, and the states had put in their rules the NCAA could not start an investigation about NIL in any schools in ther states.
So Pandora's box is open and the NCAA is toothless.
 
.-.
Rutgers better reign in the spending. They will get a bump in revenue from the new CFP deal that started this year. And they will get a bump once their loan from the B1G Conference is paid off. But still, that won’t be enough to cover the entire gap between revenue and expenses.
 
Rufus said:
Rutgers better reign in the spending. They will get a bump in revenue from the new CFP deal that started this year. And they will get a bump once their loan from the B1G Conference is paid off. But still, that won’t be enough to cover the entire gap between revenue and expenses.
Expand ...
As of 2021 there was $40 million left on the loan. It is scheduled to be paid in full in 2026.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
58
Guests online
10,319
Total visitors
10,377
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
165,940
Messages
4,461,099
Members
10,332
Latest member
Sir Oolick


Top Bottom