More ammo for O'bannon vs NCAA?

[whaler11]

Can you shows us where schools profit off sports?

Because schools are ALL losing a ton of money off sports.

I want to see where you come up with that.

Texas and Michigan are losing a buttload of money on sports. UConn is too.

College sports are mainly a taxpayer supported enterprise.

This is just so silly. Big schools don't make money on sports BECAUSE THEY CHOOSE NOT TO.

Ohio State's athletic department has more employees than the White House.

Connecticut, Boston College and Rutgers play in different leagues, with teams in Miami, Lincoln and Dallas.

The highest paid state employee in Connecticut coaches women's basketball.

It's idiotic for UConn to play a school in Tampa in sports no one watches. A volleyball team in the Northeast should never need anything beyond a 3 hour bus ride.

Recruit players that can do the school work and suddenly you don't need an academic staff of a dozen.

Nobody needs an SID for football and another SID for basketball.

Nobody needs to win awards for their media guide.

Nobody needs a Heisman campaign in Times Square.

Nobody needs to send the friggin band to the women's big east basketball tournament to play in front of 275 people.

So cut the crap about school's not making money. It's a choice.

 

[upstater]

This is just so silly. Big schools don't make money on sports BECAUSE THEY CHOOSE NOT TO.

Ohio State's athletic department has more employees than the White House.

Connecticut, Boston College and Rutgers play in different leagues, with teams in Miami, Lincoln and Dallas.

The highest paid state employee in Connecticut coaches women's basketball.

It's idiotic for UConn to play a school in Tampa in sports no one watches. A volleyball team in the Northeast should never need anything beyond a 3 hour bus ride.

Recruit players that can do the school work and suddenly you don't need an academic staff of a dozen.

Nobody needs an SID for football and another SID for basketball.

Nobody needs to win awards for their media guide.

So cut the crap about school's not making money. It's a choice.

What in the world?

Have you read the thread? I just posted a list of things they could do to reform. Look at the posts.

Bottom line: THEY LOSE MONEY.

Are there savings everywhere? Of course. Mack Brown makes $5.5m. But where is the organization that will enforce regional conferences? And if that organization even existed at all, what would that mean for the revenue stream?

 

[whaler11]

UConn, Rutgers, Temple, Syracuse, Boston College, Temple, Penn State, Maryland and Pitt could play in a football league and you might need a flight to a conference game once a season.

 

[whaler11]

What in the world?

Have you read the thread? I just posted a list of things they could do to reform. Look at the posts.

Bottom line: THEY LOSE MONEY.

Are there savings everywhere? Of course. Mack Brown makes $5.5m. But where is the organization that will enforce regional conferences? And if that organization even existed at all, what would that mean for the revenue stream?

Obviously the schools need to choose to reform no one can dictate it. Doesn't change the actual bottom line. They lose money because of their choices. They aren't victims, they have full control.

 

[upstater]

Obviously the schools need to choose to reform no one can dictate it. Doesn't change the actual bottom line. They lose money because of their choices. They aren't victims, they have full control.

Who said they were victims? I said they lose money. Look at Rutgers. They spent a ton and lost money. Not spending a ton and losing money would have hurt them badly in their effort to lose less money. That's the logic right there. Lose now, or lose more later.

 

[whaler11]

Who said they were victims? I said they lose money. Look at Rutgers. They spent a ton and lost money. Not spending a ton and losing money would have hurt them badly in their effort to lose less money. That's the logic right there. Lose now, or lose more later.

So you agree it's a choice.

 

[upstater]

So you agree it's a choice.

The choice is between trying to join a big money conference and eventually dropping out of D1.

Those are the choices.

Some colleges have already made the choice to drop out. Like NYU and U. Chicago.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

None of that discounts any of the information GopherHawk posted. Minnesota is legit.

I mean, this is a sports message board right?

Minnesota hasn't won damn near anything in half a century.

I didn't mean to discount Minnesota's academics, enrollment or endowment.

I meant to discredit their basketball and football programs.

 

[whaler11]

The choice is between trying to join a big money conference and eventually dropping out of D1.

Those are the choices.

Some colleges have already made the choice to drop out. Like NYU and U. Chicago.

Is there a reason why you can't have conferences that make geographic sense? Is there a reason why if your basketball and football conferences can't make geographic sense that means your non-revenue sports need the same model?

Is there a reason in the world UConn should play Houston and SMU in baseball or softball or soccer or field hockey? Boston College playing baseball in the ACC may be the single stupidest thing that has come out of conference realignment.

 

[whaler11]

The choice is between trying to join a big money conference and eventually dropping out of D1.

Those are the choices.

Some colleges have already made the choice to drop out. Like NYU and U. Chicago.

Except for the vast majority of teams not being in a big money conference and being in D-1 this is extremely accurate.

 

[huskymedic]

Is there a reason why you can't have conferences that make geographic sense? Is there a reason why if your basketball and football conferences can't make geographic sense that means your non-revenue sports need the same model?

Is there a reason in the world UConn should play Houston and SMU in baseball or softball or soccer or field hockey? Boston College playing baseball in the ACC may be the single stupidest thing that has come out of conference realignment.

Baseball/softball actually makes more sense than say soccer, lax or field hockey since bb/sb are normally three game series over a weekend as opposed to a singular event. You play your local OOC games mid-week and conference games on weekends. Talent down south isn't too shabby either.

 

[whaler11]

Baseball/softball actually makes more sense than say soccer, lax or field hockey since bb/sb are normally three game series over a weekend as opposed to a singular event. You play your local OOC games mid-week and conference games on weekends. Talent down south isn't too shabby either.

Part of the reason why it's especially stupid. Boston College wins an ACC baseball game once a year if they need it or not. The games don't matter - it doesn't matter who is good, who is bad... if you feel the need to have a team there is no reason why spending money to fly to New Orleans makes any more sense than driving to Fairfield to play Sacred Heart.

Losing money to play games nobody watches really brings into question if these people actually have an intelligence at all.

 

[huskymedic]

Part of the reason why it's especially stupid. Boston College wins an ACC baseball game once a year if they need it or not. The games don't matter - it doesn't matter who is good, who is bad... if you feel the need to have a team there is no reason why spending money to fly to New Orleans makes any more sense than driving to Fairfield to play Sacred Heart.

Losing money to play games nobody watches really brings into question if these people actually have an intelligence at all.

I get your conference geography argument but until some kind of conference Armageddon occurs - you won't see it. It's never going to be just basketball and football, these other sports just have to operate smartly.

BTW - Have you seen some of the baseball attendance figures from the schools down south.

http://www.collegebaseballdaily.com...ance-leaders-march-25th/?cb=05505882550496608

Check out this other thread. It's the point you are making Whaler.

http://the-boneyard.com/threads/conference-realignment-realities-move-or-eliminate.39525/

 

[upstater]

Is there a reason why you can't have conferences that make geographic sense? Is there a reason why if your basketball and football conferences can't make geographic sense that means your non-revenue sports need the same model?

Is there a reason in the world UConn should play Houston and SMU in baseball or softball or soccer or field hockey? Boston College playing baseball in the ACC may be the single stupidest thing that has come out of conference realignment.

The reason you can't have geographic conferences is that the SEC and B12 gave the finger to the NCAA, and for some bizarre reason, the presidents of the other universities decided to go along with them. Once the NCAA was castrated, greed took over. Monopolistic practices. Presidents seem to be afraid of alumni and boosters and politicians and voters, and they don't think sports are important enough to get into a fight over. That's why the President of Virginia went along with ACC craziness but she drew the line at an online school run by amateurs when Virginia has the best digital instruction implementation in the entire world.

 

[whaler11]

The reason you can't have geographic conferences is that the SEC and B12 gave the finger to the NCAA, and for some bizarre reason, the presidents of the other universities decided to go along with them. Once the NCAA was castrated, greed took over. Monopolistic practices. Presidents seem to be afraid of alumni and boosters and politicians and voters, and they don't think sports are important enough to get into a fight over. That's why the President of Virginia went along with ACC craziness but she drew the line at an online school run by amateurs when Virginia has the best digital instruction implementation in the entire world.

So like I said they choose not to. Let me know when you actually disagree.

 

[TRest]

Come say that after you have 7 football National Titles.

I'm saying it now. Yale probably has more, and just as recent.

 

[upstater]

So like I said they choose not to. Let me know when you actually disagree.

I don't disagree, but it is the reality. We might as well talk about Peter Pan and fantasyland.

Even if you reduced coach's pay to $500k and saved several million, you'd still have the problem of the stadiums. Here we are and people are clamoring to expand the Rent and replace Gampel. I guess luxury boxes are what it takes. They've also expanded into hockey now. Another huge chunk of change.

 

[whaler11]

I don't disagree, but it is the reality. We might as well talk about Peter Pan and fantasyland.

Even if you reduced coach's pay to $500k and saved several million, you'd still have the problem of the stadiums. Here we are and people are clamoring to expand the Rent and replace Gampel. I guess luxury boxes are what it takes. They've also expanded into hockey now. Another huge chunk of change.

It's not really fantasyland. If the athletes earn the right to get paid they have to revisit the model. It may actually force an examination of how they compete.

I honestly think in the long run schools will maximize their revenue by playing in conferences that make geographic sense. Hockey East is a great league - a major reason is proximity.

Boston College is a perfect example. Their programs were better when they played Syracuse and UConn. College sports are built on rivalries and rivalries generally exist because of proximity.

On paper it may seem great for Syracuse to play North Carolina. In practice there is a lot more people interested in seeing Syracuse play Connecticut.

You can still generate TV revenue because everyone wants to watch Auburn play Alabama. The only time there is any national interest in Mississippi is when they play Mississippi State. Missouri is more compelling playing Kansas than Florida.

It's going to take a while but in the end I believe college sports will retrench regionally. NC State playing UNC twice a year will draw more people nationally than the two schools playing Syracuse and Pittsburgh.

 

[CAHUSKY]

It's going to take a while but in the end I believe college sports will retrench regionally. NC State playing UNC twice a year will draw more people nationally than the two schools playing Syracuse and Pittsburgh.

I totally agree. It may be 50 years but the current rush to huge national conferences is assine. Eventually it will be a handful of big conferences broken into regional conferences that bring back rivalries and some sense of sanity.

 

[UPitt]

I mean, this is a sports message board right?

Minnesota hasn't won damn near anything in half a century.

I didn't mean to discount Minnesota's academics, enrollment or endowment.

I meant to discredit their basketball and football programs.

This is a sports message board about conference realignment. Academics, enrollment, endowment, alumni, fanbase, stadium size, AAU status, and football tradition have all impacted realignment greatly over the past few years (Ville being the possible exception). Therefore, these things need to be discussed when comparing Universities in the context of conference expansion.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

This is a sports message board about conference realignment. Academics, enrollment, endowment, alumni, fanbase, stadium size, AAU status, and football tradition have all impacted realignment greatly over the past few years (Ville being the possible exception). Therefore, these things need to be discussed when comparing Universities in the context of conference expansion.

Oh great a fan of anther team that wants to brag about national titles won 80 years ago.

This is our message board, we've won national titles recently. We certainly don't take a back seat to Minnesota or.Pitt when it comes to athletics.

Just because you guys are in a better league doesn't mean squat when it comes to what happens on the field.

I like discussions about realignment, but please the condescending attitude is BS.

 

[GopherHawk]

This is a sports message board about conference realignment. Academics, enrollment, endowment, alumni, fanbase, stadium size, AAU status, and football tradition have all impacted realignment greatly over the past few years (Ville being the possible exception). Therefore, these things need to be discussed when comparing Universities in the context of conference expansion.

You are correct. I think many posters here get it and many don't. With regards to the B1G, it is not UCONN's athletics that is holding em back. It is the profile of the school. If you continue to think of the B1G as an athletic conference you will never understand it. The B1G is a group of peer research universities that also play big time sports. The people in charge are from the academic side.

With regards to U of MN. We have 17 NCAA championships which is more than UCONN. We also have 7 football championships. You may ask why hasn't the school done much in basketball or football in the past 45 years and it is easy.

The administration did not support athletics. They didn't feel they needed to. The only hire that would have worked was Lou Holtz. He had ND as an out in his contract and I am sure he could see that the Admin didn't really support the Athletics department much. This isn't about money support as it is cultural. I can't remember where I read it, but one of the B1G presidents likened Sports to Advertising for the school. Which is very true. Think of U of Mich or tOSU. Would they be in the conscience of American students if it wasn't for the publicity they get for their sports programs? No. It is because of the publicity they get that top students from all over the US want to go to U of Mich or Wisky or tOSU. Do you think Happy Valley would have become as large of school if it was not for football? The winning in the 60's, 70's and 80's made Penn St a house hold name on the East Coast. It made kids want to go there before they started looking at rankings.

I think posters here understand the reality that the right coach can take a mediocre program to the top if the school makes it possible. The future is bright at Mn because the support is now there and people really believe Pitino and Kill are the right coaches at the right time.

 

[UPitt]

Oh great a fan of anther team that wants to brag about national titles won 80 years ago.

This is our message board, we've won national titles recently. We certainly don't take a back seat to Minnesota or.Pitt when it comes to athletics.

Just because you guys are in a better league doesn't mean squat when it comes to what happens on the field.

I like discussions about realignment, but please the condescending attitude is BS.

I said nothing of the sort. All I said was that if you want to have a discussion about conference realignment, you should discuss all of the factors and some of them are not sports related.

With the exception of Utah, TCU, and Louisville, conference realignment has had little to do with on the field success. TCU and Utah put themselves in position by winning big games, but they also had location (Texas is big market, Utah is new market) and football history (LT made TCU popular) in there favor. Louisville grabbed the last spot in the ACC based on recent football success, but also provides new markets and a few other things.

Every other team involved in conference realignment was chosen for reasons other than recent athletic success. Many of the teams listed below had poor success on the field prior to switching conferences.
Colorado - location, new markets
Nebraska - football tradition, large national following, new markets, academics (AAU at the time)
Pitt - location, new markets, academics (AAU)
Cuse - location, new markets, adademics (was previously AAU)
TAMU - location, new markets, football tradition
Mizzou - location, new markets, academics
ND - new markets, football tradition
WVU - new markets, football tradition, available to leave that year, lack of academics (academics denied WVU to B1G and ACC)

 

[whaler11]

I like Jerry Kill but he's not taking Minnesota past 6-6, 7-5 in a good year.

 

[Richmondhsky]

You are correct. I think many posters here get it and many don't. With regards to the B1G, it is not UCONN's athletics that is holding em back. It is the profile of the school. If you continue to think of the B1G as an athletic conference you will never understand it. The B1G is a group of peer research universities that also play big time sports. The people in charge are from the academic side.

With regards to U of MN. We have 17 NCAA championships which is more than UCONN. We also have 7 football championships. You may ask why hasn't the school done much in basketball or football in the past 45 years and it is easy.

The administration did not support athletics. They didn't feel they needed to. The only hire that would have worked was Lou Holtz. He had ND as an out in his contract and I am sure he could see that the Admin didn't really support the Athletics department much. This isn't about money support as it is cultural. I can't remember where I read it, but one of the B1G presidents likened Sports to Advertising for the school. Which is very true. Think of U of Mich or tOSU. Would they be in the conscience of American students if it wasn't for the publicity they get for their sports programs? No. It is because of the publicity they get that top students from all over the US want to go to U of Mich or Wisky or tOSU. Do you think Happy Valley would have become as large of school if it was not for football? The winning in the 60's, 70's and 80's made Penn St a house hold name on the East Coast. It made kids want to go there before they started looking at rankings.

I think posters here understand the reality that the right coach can take a mediocre program to the top if the school makes it possible. The future is bright at Mn because the support is now there and people really believe Pitino and Kill are the right coaches at the right time.

While I don't agree with much of what you had previously posted, this one has some merit. In our reality, athletics is a marketing event for potential students, tax payers and legislators. Prior to the 99 championship, the infrastucture was crumbling...$1b from the state / tax payers solved that problem. Reported that applications went up as have the pedigree of those applicants. We obviously have gained from the numerous NC's since then. Would the state have invested such a sum without those accomplishments? Doubtful at best.
Upstater said it best, other schools benefit in the form of endownment whereas we benefit from tax payers. Hopefully the current AD and President can even that out.
Finally, there is NO relevant comparision athletically between the two schools other than conference affilitation. I do hope you can turn it around...I know your AD Norwood quite well and he is a talented guy so I hope he continues to be creative as he was at VCU and by his success UM is successful.