ND gets a full conference member share of ACC Network profits, about $5-7 million.
$75m/yr is an insane amount of money for a teeny tiny school with a fan base that is dying off.
Conferences will use their size to freeze out others that refuse to join the cartel. You can try to stay independent, but we're heading toward a world where the college football championship will be between the top team in the $EC and the top team in the B1G. There will be no incentive for them to grant independents, and other P5 or G5 teams access. You're either in one of those conferences, or you're relegated to playing for a participation trophy.
UNC has a large scholarship endowment that covers 70-80% of cost plus each individual sport has it's own operating endowment for each coach to use as they see fit.
Not really, UNC needs both BB &FB to sustain the broad based AD it has long term with FB being thae largest untapped revenue on campus. So FB has to be somewhat relevant to keep the money coming in
Why would the B1G want to do that?
This is about making conferences bigger. It’s about getting the big revenue producers under a smaller number of umbrellas so they can keep more money and not share it with programs that don’t bringing their fair share.
I really can't understand how the powers that be don't understand this.
Maybe they don't care because they'll have money for now. Keep in mind, if you flood a business with money, the executives and upper management get their hands on much, if not all of it. They are making these decisions.
Perhaps not, but the salaries the schools from those conferences will be able to offer, that no one else will be able to match, will almost certainly be.
Not only that but, they will continue to change rules to use that boatload of cash against everyone else.
www.sportico.com
I don’t know why it is, but college basketball coaches seem to have their biggest runs earlier in their careers before they hit the big money. You can buy big names, but you can’t necessarily buy success.
So you’re asserting that there hasn’t been an upward trend in salaries for anything other than football for P5 schools?
So, your optimization strategy is don’t hire successful people because they may not be able to replicate their success?
On the other hand you have Ohio State (11/1)Michigan (18/1)Michigan State(10/2), Wisconsin (4/1)Arkansas(6/1) Florida ( 5/2)Arizona(4/1)some school from the west coast, ULAC…CLAU…oh yeah, UCLA ( 19/11). In part, the SEC schools, Texas, Penn State, they really didn’t put much emphasis on basketball until fairly recently. I once heard Abe Lemon talk about coaching at Texas. Now Abe was a colorful character, but he said Texas fans didn’t really know how to cheer for basketball when he got there. Basketball at a lot of the SEC and Big 12 schools, though not Kentucky and Kansas obviously, was something to fill the time between the end of football season and the start of spring football. Basketball was largely an urban/coastal sport, with most top programs in the northeast, the upper Midwest and the west coast. Not so much in the south or southwest.
Nope. Hire top coaching talent when they’re on the way up as we did with Calhoun. Ignore the facts at your own risk.
Ohio State won its NC more than 60 years ago.
Who are you talking about? Michigan won the NC in ‘89.
Yup, Michigan.
Of course they count. But my point was that programs that win multiple basketball championships - 3 or more - have all been schools with mediocre football programs.
Of course they count. But my point was that programs that win multiple basketball championships - 3 or more - have all been schools with mediocre football programs. It’s hard to excel repeatedly in both sports for some reason.