The Big Five Conferences are going to break away
- Thread starter Kevin Caliendo
- Start date
- Status
whaler11
Head Happy Hour Coach
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 44,353
- Reaction Score
- 68,192
Pudge half those states don't even have a school trying to compete, what the hell do they care? Nothing changes for South Dakota or North Dakota. Ohio senators will go again Ohio State for the benefit of MAC schools? Seriously can I get some of what you take?
whaler11
Head Happy Hour Coach
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 44,353
- Reaction Score
- 68,192
Exactly the idea that Congress is going to 'fix' this is insane.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 6,370
- Reaction Score
- 16,540
With a few public utterances, Orrin Hatch changed the public discussion. I love how some of you claim to know politics ... and you haven't a clue.
This CR is a cesspool of the most pessimistic woe-is-us Joe Bftstlyks types. I understand why UConn is on the outside today & accept it. But, I truly don't think you are just going to have the 65 inside Universities excluding all others. That's the TV structure today ... But if you know the history of Cartels ... They never work in the long run. That's the second course of Econ.
This CR is a cesspool of the most pessimistic woe-is-us Joe Bftstlyks types. I understand why UConn is on the outside today & accept it. But, I truly don't think you are just going to have the 65 inside Universities excluding all others. That's the TV structure today ... But if you know the history of Cartels ... They never work in the long run. That's the second course of Econ.
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2012
- Messages
- 6,259
- Reaction Score
- 29,524
There is a huge difference between fixing this and preventing it from happening. If the big 5 broke away and actually excluded public universities such as UConn from joining, the government would be forced to step in. That still doesn't mean the UConn will join, but parameters would be set that at least it would be possible.
Besides, I still don't see how this is a bad thing for UConn. If there is a Division 4, UConn will surely be included. And please stop allowing Frank the Tanks assertion that every school north, south, east, and west of the University of Central Florida has more value than UConn feed into our own insecurities. Remember one key fact: our frustration is manifested by the fact that we all know UConn belongs in the power 5. Jay Bilas tweeted today that
JayBilas Jay Bilas
According to WSJ, since 1992-93, roughly 20% of Division 1 have won 92% of all NCAA championships. Parity
Healthy or not, UConn is part of that 20%, while many teams of the sec, acc, big ten, pact 12 are not. UConn belongs. Remember that.
CTMike
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 11,387
- Reaction Score
- 40,641
What exactly has winning gotten us to this point except this blind faith we'll end up fine? We have already been demoted! We are a "have not" right now. I WANT to be positive, I WANT to believe we'll be ok - I just haven't seen ANY evidence we are heading in that direction. Just keep hoping that I log on to the BY one day and find out we've won the lottery?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,988
- Reaction Score
- 21,296
They are non-profit entities because there are no shareholders who take out the profits. The fact that they turn a profit (for those who do), and it is then used to fund other non-profit activities (a university), should not keep it as a matter of theory from being taxed as a non-profit.
To make the case they should be taxed, you have to argue that in fact they are separate from their universities, and all the profit is taken out in terms of higher than conscionable salaries.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 6,370
- Reaction Score
- 16,540
We all know that this is about POWER and CONTROL. The Swoffords/Bowlsbys/Slives want to get beyond the unwashed ... but it is MORE than just Football. And as much as you want to dismiss the MAC (for the Ohio senators) or the USF/UCF (for the Florida senators) ... you are talking massive constituencies; no Statewide politician wants that kind of leakage in support. This started with a snide discussion of Paying Athletes and, as I wrote earlier, that is a slippery slope into all of College Sports.
You're saying it doesn't effect Vermont? It sure does. North Dakota? It sure does. (both care about Hockey intensely) What has always bothered me since 2003 has been these punky little Tradition-pompous voices like those at Boston College that think they can stop the world ... and EXCLUDE others. Protect their market. That essentially is the Cartel aim. But, the reality is that BC has a small small intense fanbase of 20,000 and a few that show up beyond ... and NOT a very regional pull at all. In the last 8 years, we have seen a vibrant Boise rise with pretty intense fans. And there is evidence that you can have some of these UNWASHED rise to beyond the levels of many of the P5. In Television appeal particularly.
I care about UConn hoop. Intensely. I don't trust CBB to the Swoffords and the Slives. But, in Economics, there comes opportunity when anyone likes this tries to raise these exclusivity fences.
You're saying it doesn't effect Vermont? It sure does. North Dakota? It sure does. (both care about Hockey intensely) What has always bothered me since 2003 has been these punky little Tradition-pompous voices like those at Boston College that think they can stop the world ... and EXCLUDE others. Protect their market. That essentially is the Cartel aim. But, the reality is that BC has a small small intense fanbase of 20,000 and a few that show up beyond ... and NOT a very regional pull at all. In the last 8 years, we have seen a vibrant Boise rise with pretty intense fans. And there is evidence that you can have some of these UNWASHED rise to beyond the levels of many of the P5. In Television appeal particularly.
I care about UConn hoop. Intensely. I don't trust CBB to the Swoffords and the Slives. But, in Economics, there comes opportunity when anyone likes this tries to raise these exclusivity fences.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 7,181
- Reaction Score
- 8,747
@nelsonmuntz
I do not have the information in front of me; but, I also believe that once reason why current student athletes are not paid is so that the universities can legally classify them as ‘amateurs,’ which basically translates into unpaid internships. This way, the university is no obliged to provide health insurance, retirement, worker’s compensation, and event potentially allow athletes to unionize.
The problem today is that major college athletics take in a massive amount of money, pay coaches a ‘pro’ level salary, and build palaces to house these programs, which dwarfs the ‘value’ of a college scholarship.
Thus, the O’Bannon lawsuit.
I do not have the information in front of me; but, I also believe that once reason why current student athletes are not paid is so that the universities can legally classify them as ‘amateurs,’ which basically translates into unpaid internships. This way, the university is no obliged to provide health insurance, retirement, worker’s compensation, and event potentially allow athletes to unionize.
The problem today is that major college athletics take in a massive amount of money, pay coaches a ‘pro’ level salary, and build palaces to house these programs, which dwarfs the ‘value’ of a college scholarship.
Thus, the O’Bannon lawsuit.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 8,885
- Reaction Score
- 18,180
After page 1 I was questioning the sanity of marinating any longer in this cesspool of negativity thread so I skipped to the end and found this post. We need to remember these blowhards are trying to manipulate perception and the more people buy in the more juice you give them even without secession.
Husky25
Dink & Dunk beat the Greatest Show on Turf.
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2012
- Messages
- 19,010
- Reaction Score
- 20,223
A hater of what? A rival who's former athletic director stated publically that he and one of the largest sports and entertainment media outlets conspired to prevent the natural growth and order of an institution less than 100 miles to the southeast? You understand that this is a UConn message Board, yes? The hatred of rivals should be expected, especially if you support the rival.
BC has a large endowment, absolutely, but that does not necessarily impact the athletic department. Fr. Leahy's handling of Jim O'Brien, DeFilipo's ultimatum to Jagozinski, the hiring of Spaziani and the tail end of Skinner's tenure set the revenue generating sports back by at least a decade. Skinner didn't even successfully recruit a 1st year freshman before his final season. Fan support has eroded at BC due in no small part to the success of the 4 major pro sports. The master athletic plan may be BC chasing position #5 and could very well be throwing good money after bad, especially in the near term.
BC has the same problem as UConn: Underexposure. I listen to WEEI on NESN and during every drive time commute (living and working East of The River allows me to tune into 103.7 out of Providence pretty well). Mikey Adams is a Connecticut guy with a focus on the pros, and Salk & Holley don't mention college really at all. Now the Meterparel is no longer on the D&C show, BC has lost almost 100% of its advocacy on Boston highest rated sports network. Further 103.7 broadcasts Providence Friars Basketball, not BC (Granted the signal originates in Providence). I've given you the perspective of coverage from down here, but my friends and family in the Boston area tell me that BC does not resonate inside 128 let alone the rest of the Northeast.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2013
- Messages
- 129
- Reaction Score
- 24
Underexposure is exactly right. Boston is one of the biggest metro areas in the US and BC controls none of it. BC can spend every bit of their endowment on the nicest facilities in the world but unless someone pays attention to them, its all for naught. The best use of their money would be getting some slice of the media attention in Boston. Its obvious that Boston loves sports (Bruins, Pats, Celtics) BC is supposed to be the "home" team but nobody pays attention
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 693
- Reaction Score
- 1,561
In my view, competing institutions/conferences entering into (collusive) agreements to exclude all others from a first tier of college athletics to protect their own position is about a lot more than college football. While college athletics may not be core to a university's mission, it's pretty obvious that success at the highest tier of college athletics has a significant impact on areas that are core, including:greater interest/demand by more and higher quality student applicants; higher-rated incoming freshman classes and, over time, greater academic prestige. UConn could be Exhibit A in making this point. In the last 25 years, I would argue that UConn has made up significant ground in the areas of academic ranking & prestige on similarly situated schools in the ACC in large part due to the success and popularity of its athletic teams competing at the highest level. I find it hard to imagine that agreements entered into by the competing P5 conferences to exclude all other academic institutions from this avenue of upward mobility (while protecting four schools in North Carolina) would withstand scrutiny in the courts or in Congress.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 4,629
- Reaction Score
- 12,965
And I would take this arguement one step further. This scheme of biforcation is not good for the overall market of college athletics. Over time I think it shrinks regional and national interest as the excluded look elsewhere. College athletics is unique because of its inclussion and diversity. 60 or 70 programs with a few that dominate dilutes that unique aspect. NFL Light, not thanks, I'll watch the real thing tomorrow.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2012
- Messages
- 8,988
- Reaction Score
- 26,857
A few observations:
- Frank may be a lawyer but he's just wrong if he thinks the purpose of antitrust law is to defend free markets. No, its motivating purpose is to prevent cooperation among competitors in a way that disadvantages other competitors or consumers. There would be an antitrust case. So far no one has been incentivized to bring one, as offending the power conferences would have blowback, but if the P5 succeed in concentrating 90% of the revenue among themselves, the other schools would have every incentive to sue. Antitrust law is confused and incoherent, so any case is a 50-50 crapshoot.
- What is motivating this? A desire to pay athletes? I doubt it. They have never wanted to share money with athletes in the past, nor with anyone else not a revenue producer. Nor is it about football money. The P5 are already getting 90% of the football money. They cannot get more football money by breaking away. It's presumably a mix of (a) basketball money which is now shared among 356 schools but the $1 bn tourney money could as easily be split among 100, adding $7 mn per year to the major schools; and (b) power to direct their own destiny without having to placate smaller schools. If it's about basketball money, presumably that bodes well for UConn being included, also the new Big East and some others.
- I have to believe money woes are the major driver of everything. The higher education bubble is now dependent on spiraling student loan debt for continued growth and awareness is growing that the return on that debt is poor. The federal government has reached the limits of its ability to grow spending, and entitlements will increasingly pressure higher education and research spending. The universities are facing declining revenue and don't want to cut spending. They are searching for revenue. But this is going to pit college against college. There will be a great loss of collegiality in higher education as this plays out.
- I think the concerns several have voiced about college sports losing public interest are valid. If 65 schools break away and many schools are left out and it is a clear money grab, and the players get paid so it is semi-professional, there will be pushback in many ways, not just antitrust lawsuits. The public will be less enamored of mercenary ventures with rigged playing fields. The pro sports will be more inclined to compete, for instance by establishing developmental leagues to take players. Currently there is a law preventing the NFL from scheduling games in competition with college games. What if those are repealed? What if the NBA expands the developmental league and competes for high school players? Colleges have relied heavily on public and alumni goodwill to carve out this privileged position in athletics, but the more they become mercenary and conniving institutions the less goodwill they'll have.
- Continued evolution of the TV market with a shift toward Internet distribution and marriage of TV and computing may make these lucrative TV contracts ESPN and Fox have given the conferences money losers for the networks. Economic woes will also pressure cable subscriber bases and fees. The schools that are left out have a chance to build a low-cost Internet alternative that provides a free or low-cost sports viewing alternative to the $50+ per month cable subscriptions that are driving P5 revenue. Although the outsiders will have far less money, they may have greater visibility, I could see a scenario where 50% of the country drops to $7/month TV and 50% pays the expensive cable, and the major colleges lose fans while the second-class ones gain them. This is another channel of pushback against the P5. They won't want to see new competitors rise up.
So I think the P5 will realize they don't want to get too greedy and risk killing the golden goose, and will accommodate schools like UConn. This doesn't mean we'll have as much money as they will, but I think we'll have an opportunity to compete athletically.
- Frank may be a lawyer but he's just wrong if he thinks the purpose of antitrust law is to defend free markets. No, its motivating purpose is to prevent cooperation among competitors in a way that disadvantages other competitors or consumers. There would be an antitrust case. So far no one has been incentivized to bring one, as offending the power conferences would have blowback, but if the P5 succeed in concentrating 90% of the revenue among themselves, the other schools would have every incentive to sue. Antitrust law is confused and incoherent, so any case is a 50-50 crapshoot.
- What is motivating this? A desire to pay athletes? I doubt it. They have never wanted to share money with athletes in the past, nor with anyone else not a revenue producer. Nor is it about football money. The P5 are already getting 90% of the football money. They cannot get more football money by breaking away. It's presumably a mix of (a) basketball money which is now shared among 356 schools but the $1 bn tourney money could as easily be split among 100, adding $7 mn per year to the major schools; and (b) power to direct their own destiny without having to placate smaller schools. If it's about basketball money, presumably that bodes well for UConn being included, also the new Big East and some others.
- I have to believe money woes are the major driver of everything. The higher education bubble is now dependent on spiraling student loan debt for continued growth and awareness is growing that the return on that debt is poor. The federal government has reached the limits of its ability to grow spending, and entitlements will increasingly pressure higher education and research spending. The universities are facing declining revenue and don't want to cut spending. They are searching for revenue. But this is going to pit college against college. There will be a great loss of collegiality in higher education as this plays out.
- I think the concerns several have voiced about college sports losing public interest are valid. If 65 schools break away and many schools are left out and it is a clear money grab, and the players get paid so it is semi-professional, there will be pushback in many ways, not just antitrust lawsuits. The public will be less enamored of mercenary ventures with rigged playing fields. The pro sports will be more inclined to compete, for instance by establishing developmental leagues to take players. Currently there is a law preventing the NFL from scheduling games in competition with college games. What if those are repealed? What if the NBA expands the developmental league and competes for high school players? Colleges have relied heavily on public and alumni goodwill to carve out this privileged position in athletics, but the more they become mercenary and conniving institutions the less goodwill they'll have.
- Continued evolution of the TV market with a shift toward Internet distribution and marriage of TV and computing may make these lucrative TV contracts ESPN and Fox have given the conferences money losers for the networks. Economic woes will also pressure cable subscriber bases and fees. The schools that are left out have a chance to build a low-cost Internet alternative that provides a free or low-cost sports viewing alternative to the $50+ per month cable subscriptions that are driving P5 revenue. Although the outsiders will have far less money, they may have greater visibility, I could see a scenario where 50% of the country drops to $7/month TV and 50% pays the expensive cable, and the major colleges lose fans while the second-class ones gain them. This is another channel of pushback against the P5. They won't want to see new competitors rise up.
So I think the P5 will realize they don't want to get too greedy and risk killing the golden goose, and will accommodate schools like UConn. This doesn't mean we'll have as much money as they will, but I think we'll have an opportunity to compete athletically.
junglehusky
Molotov Cocktail of Ugliness
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 7,156
- Reaction Score
- 15,475
Orrin Hatch grumbled a few times and Utah got in the Pac 12. BYU will maneuver their way into the super-FBS or join the B12 if they need to. Hatch will not need to do anything further for anybody else (you don't think he'll stick out his neck for Utah State do you)? Also... in the 2012 election he failed to get 60% of the delegates at the Utah GOP convention which resulted in him having to run a primary for the first time since the 70s. He doesn't have quite the power he used to.
Besides, the super-FBS, the Swoffords, the Bowlsbys, the school presidents know how to count votes too. They might be called to a hearing again but they'll figure out how to get the thing done if that's what the presidents want. And I don't buy the idea that the Big Ten schools are so high and mighty they'll stay in the regular FBS or de-emphasize sports rather than pay a few thousand bucks stipend.
junglehusky
Molotov Cocktail of Ugliness
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 7,156
- Reaction Score
- 15,475
Ya know, I also have a hard time buying the line that people won't watch college sports if it's semi-pro. You're telling me that fans and alumni of Alabama, Texas, USC, etc will stop going to games and watching on TV if the players are earning, say, 10,000 a year? Not a chance. The people who would be turned off by this are the humanities professors who write letters to the editor about universities over-emphasizing sports, they're already not watching.
Husky25
Dink & Dunk beat the Greatest Show on Turf.
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2012
- Messages
- 19,010
- Reaction Score
- 20,223
How about the Red Sox?
.-.
whaler11
Head Happy Hour Coach
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 44,353
- Reaction Score
- 68,192
Pudge I don't hear much out of Orrin Hatch about Utah State. Nobody cares about the MAC or the 4th-7th schools in Florida. Nobody is losing any support because while they have alumni that alumin doesn't care.
UCFBfan
Kings of New England!
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2012
- Messages
- 6,350
- Reaction Score
- 15,042
The other people will be the fans of the other 60 somewhat universities who will now be relegated. I can say that my interest will take a massive nose dive should this occur and UConn ends up on the outside. Hopefully this isn't for all sports so I'd have bball to at least follow still.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
whaler11
Head Happy Hour Coach
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 44,353
- Reaction Score
- 68,192
Pudge I don't hear much out of Orrin Hatch about Utah State. Nobody cares about the MAC or the 4th-7th schools in Florida. Nobody is losing any support because while they have alumni they don't care.
I've watched nothing but bad things happen since 2003 and no politician has stopped the bleeding. I'll believe they have a positive effect on UConn when I see one.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2013
- Messages
- 129
- Reaction Score
- 24
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2013
- Messages
- 129
- Reaction Score
- 24
Yes. Alabama is already thought to be cheating anyways (perception) and they are more popular than ever. Hell, there was a article published that due to Alabamas recent success, they are attracting more out of state applicants and being more selective than they have in the past.
Winning takes care of a lot of hang ups. I guarantee that if you pay players $1 or $100,000, as long as your teaming is winning, there won't be any hangups.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 37,303
- Reaction Score
- 39,587
You can pay whatever you choose to pay. Just don't expect anyone else to pay your other bills.
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 13,911
- Reaction Score
- 25,927
Again, nobody said "all of a sudden." We're talking about a gradual loss of support among the "feeder system" that programs rely on. If programs become less a part of the school and more independent and like semi-pro/minor league teams, over time that fundamental association is severed and students don't care that much, and Alumni don't care that much either. it won't happen in a week or a year. it is a gradual thing that happens over time.
How about stating which school you support, either as a student, alum, or a fan of ...? what say you?
This is the year without a Santa Clause. Im Respectful, sincere, and support U Conn's inclusion into the P5. I also support B.C. and don't see any reason why they have to be mutually exclusive. Plenty of threads and topics to read for everyone.
Sorry to burst your bubble but private schools can use the money any way they like. B.C. has resources and putting them to good use come this fall. Soar to glory!
Husky25
Dink & Dunk beat the Greatest Show on Turf.
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2012
- Messages
- 19,010
- Reaction Score
- 20,223
How noble of you. However you must understand that with what has come out publicly from B.C., Coach Calhoun's comments, DeFilipo's comments (and retraction), UConn's performance vs. B.C. in basketball, and the manner in which UConn hung with them in their only true meeting in D1A football. A comment like that is akin to saying you are a diehard fan of both the Red Sox and the Yankees.
I have a close relative who graduated from Boston College, and my favorite D1a football teams rank in this order...
1. UConn
2. Michigan (were a favorite prior to 2000, allegiances die hard...unless they are playing UConn.)
3. Whoever is playing Boston College (Unless that team is Notre Dame, Miami, or Ohio State, in which case, I turn the channel and route for a body bag game as scores crawl across the ticker.)
I support the inclusion of U Conn into the p5 and have made that point very clear in past conversations here. I also happen to support B.C. and I don't feel the two have to be mutually exclusive. I refuse to be drawn into a Pi**!** contest over the superiority of one institution, both have a lot to offer. I do enjoy exchanging conversation with others who offer an opinion or a point of view that is based on mutual respect for each school. Yes Im aware it can be hostile at times, but the nice U Conn fans that I have spoken with make it a worthwhile venture. I even collected my own BY trophy.
.-.
- Status