Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="RioDog, post: 4316383, member: 1138"] Posted on this in the Swarbrick "Collegiate Athletics in Name Only" thread. It applies hear: "I can't see how such a sea change won't result in the destruction of athletics for the schools that choose to go that route. Does anyone believe that a de-facto pro team with naming rights sold to a university is going to hold the same allure to fans as a team of student-athletes from the ole' Alma Mater? As thin as the veil of amateur student athlete status is, especially in college football, it's still the reason I watch college athletics and not pro leagues. Does that make me a romantic fool? Maybe, but I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in that. I'd also be willing to bet that those who feel like I do represent a financially significant proportion of the total fan base, especially in those states with NFL franchises. Why waste your limited resources supporting a farm league team when you have the real McCoy? "Those who tie sports to the university in name only" will become sad ghosts of their former selves, farm teams for the League. Farm leagues are fun in baseball and futebol, but they don't make the kind of money that the 'Bamas and ND's of the world are looking for. The culture of the sport will be destroyed and the goose that laid the golden egg along with it. JS is as smart guy, and there could many reasons for him to say the things he did in the interview. I'm also a smart guy, and old enough and successful enough to trust my intuition when it's barking at me. Could it be wishful thinking that doesn't want to see the end of what, for me, is the most entertaining level of the most entertaining team sport ever conceived? Maybe. And there is a sea change coming to college athletics; I just think that Swarbrick's vision of it is wrong, and I'll believe it when I see it." [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,674

Messages: 4,406,127

Members: 10,223

Latest member: Stronga12