|
Post by ay2013 on Aug 9, 2014 13:33:42 GMT -5
better yet, I wish the other schools would walk away immediately and form a new collegiate structure, might as well control your own destiny for non BCS schools - being in the NCAA will forever be waiting for the table scraps from the BCS - I'd love to see an edict from the non-BCS schools that beginning in 2015-2016 there will be no scheduling of any games with BCS schools. Let the Pac-12 go east of the rockies for all their non-conference games - screw 'em. Sure, there would be a heck of a lot of risk and short-term fall-out, but it would be the best way to promote the bulk of non-BCS schools IMO long-term and just further illustrate that the BCS is isolated as a semi-pro adjunct of those universities. The fact is football (revenue) drives the NCAA, not the other way around, and the Big 5 are the top football schools so they are in charge. If the Big 5 form their own football league (and they will if they don't get their way), the NCAA will be irrelevant for football, and also much poorer. Think NAIA. actually basketball revenue drives the NCAA. Football revenues (which are largely made by conferences/schools and the media markets) pretty much go to the conferences and the teams. The NCAA doesn't really profit from football revenues. NCAA's big cash cow is the exclusive rights to the NCAA basketball tournament. What the NCAA really doesn't want is for the power 5 conferences to have their own post season tournament for basketball.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Aug 9, 2014 13:39:27 GMT -5
I do understand that. But you keep ignoring that having the big money leave the NCAA (or just D1) isn't "in the interests of the majority" either. These schools will walk from D1 if the smaller schools try to block this. better yet, I wish the other schools would walk away immediately and form a new collegiate structure, might as well control your own destiny for non BCS schools - being in the NCAA will forever be waiting for the table scraps from the BCS - I'd love to see an edict from the non-BCS schools that beginning in 2015-2016 there will be no scheduling of any games with BCS schools. Let the Pac-12 go east of the rockies for all their non-conference games - screw 'em. Sure, there would be a heck of a lot of risk and short-term fall-out, but it would be the best way to promote the bulk of non-BCS schools IMO long-term and just further illustrate that the BCS is isolated as a semi-pro adjunct of those universities. It wouldn't really work. Named programs in the non power 5 conferences for football and basketball will still schedule preseason matches with the power conferences because the media payouts pays for their athletics programs.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Aug 9, 2014 13:45:57 GMT -5
better yet, I wish the other schools would walk away immediately and form a new collegiate structure, might as well control your own destiny for non BCS schools - being in the NCAA will forever be waiting for the table scraps from the BCS - I'd love to see an edict from the non-BCS schools that beginning in 2015-2016 there will be no scheduling of any games with BCS schools. Let the Pac-12 go east of the rockies for all their non-conference games - screw 'em. Sure, there would be a heck of a lot of risk and short-term fall-out, but it would be the best way to promote the bulk of non-BCS schools IMO long-term and just further illustrate that the BCS is isolated as a semi-pro adjunct of those universities. It wouldn't really work. Named programs in the non power 5 conferences for football and basketball will still schedule preseason matches with the power conferences because the media payouts pays for their athletics programs. uhhh, not if the non-BCS form an alliance not to schedule them, that's the whole point- control your own destiny than rely on the BCS table scraps - not that it is likely to happen. better off forming their own destiny than be controlled and subservient to the BCS - but doubt there is the leadership among the sub-class to attempt that. at the rate this is going, they'll be relegated to relative obscurity, so why not make a bold move? don't act like the non-BCS schools are there for you to control, ooopss, I guess that has been working and progressing that way so keep it up, right!
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Aug 9, 2014 13:53:35 GMT -5
better yet, I wish the other schools would walk away immediately and form a new collegiate structure, might as well control your own destiny for non BCS schools - being in the NCAA will forever be waiting for the table scraps from the BCS - I'd love to see an edict from the non-BCS schools that beginning in 2015-2016 there will be no scheduling of any games with BCS schools. Let the Pac-12 go east of the rockies for all their non-conference games - screw 'em. Sure, there would be a heck of a lot of risk and short-term fall-out, but it would be the best way to promote the bulk of non-BCS schools IMO long-term and just further illustrate that the BCS is isolated as a semi-pro adjunct of those universities. The fact is football (revenue) drives the NCAA, not the other way around, and the Big 5 are the top football schools so they are in charge. If the Big 5 form their own football league (and they will if they don't get their way), the NCAA will be irrelevant for football, and also much poorer. Think NAIA. all the more reason for the non-BCS to walk away NOW, and be bold. every argument against what I am saying plays into the BCS schools power. ultimately the non-BCS should control their own destiny. You never know, a new institution free of the BCS might create a model consistent and with long-term stability and with a sustainable financial model not based on football I hear these arguments against like, 'you won't get the 'payouts' for playing the BCS games' - all of these arguments just solidify that long-term non-BCS schools are in an untenable position, so why not be bold and confront the issue NOW, especially while the PR for BCS is not too favorable and the perception of BCS has some major problems. If enough Presidents of non-BCS took a stand, there are 250 or so universities that wield collectively some weight, sure not the weight re-inforced by the profession model (the BCS-media 'complex'). The question is will a couple of savvy non-BCS PResidents and commissioners take a stand and use a pulpit to confront their long-term problem.
|
|
|
Post by elevationvb on Aug 9, 2014 13:57:21 GMT -5
The fact is football (revenue) drives the NCAA, not the other way around, and the Big 5 are the top football schools so they are in charge. If the Big 5 form their own football league (and they will if they don't get their way), the NCAA will be irrelevant for football, and also much poorer. Think NAIA. all the more reason for the non-BCS to walk away NOW, and be bold. every argument against what I am saying plays into the BCS schools power. ultimately the non-BCS should control their own destiny. You never know, a new institution free of the BCS might create a model consistent and with long-term stability and with a sustainable financial model not based on football I hear these arguments against like, 'you won't get the 'payouts' for playing the BCS games' - all of these arguments just solidify that long-term non-BCS schools are in an untenable position, so why not be bold and confront the issue NOW, especially while the PR for BCS is not too favorable and the perception of BCS has some major problems. If enough Presidents of non-BCS took a stand, there are 250 or so universities that wield collectively some weight, sure not the weight re-inforced by the profession model (the BCS-media 'complex'). The question is will a couple of savvy non-BCS PResidents and commissioners take a stand and use a pulpit to confront their long-term problem. Sorry, but you are living in never, never land if you think the smaller D1 schools are going to pass up on $1,000,000 pay days to play a power 5 team.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Aug 9, 2014 13:59:21 GMT -5
all the more reason for the non-BCS to walk away NOW, and be bold. every argument against what I am saying plays into the BCS schools power. ultimately the non-BCS should control their own destiny. You never know, a new institution free of the BCS might create a model consistent and with long-term stability and with a sustainable financial model not based on football I hear these arguments against like, 'you won't get the 'payouts' for playing the BCS games' - all of these arguments just solidify that long-term non-BCS schools are in an untenable position, so why not be bold and confront the issue NOW, especially while the PR for BCS is not too favorable and the perception of BCS has some major problems. If enough Presidents of non-BCS took a stand, there are 250 or so universities that wield collectively some weight, sure not the weight re-inforced by the profession model (the BCS-media 'complex'). The question is will a couple of savvy non-BCS PResidents and commissioners take a stand and use a pulpit to confront their long-term problem. Sorry, but you are living in never, never land if you think the smaller D1 schools are going to pass up on $1,000,000 pay days to play a power 5 team.
then they are only hurting themselves long-run. and please provide an example of a 1 mil payday?? don't think so!! it's time for the non-BCS schools to give the middle finger to the BCS, because the BCS has essentially given the middle finger to the them
|
|
|
Post by mclvbdad on Aug 9, 2014 14:02:32 GMT -5
The fact is football (revenue) drives the NCAA, not the other way around, and the Big 5 are the top football schools so they are in charge. If the Big 5 form their own football league (and they will if they don't get their way), the NCAA will be irrelevant for football, and also much poorer. Think NAIA. all the more reason for the non-BCS to walk away NOW, and be bold. every argument against what I am saying plays into the BCS schools power. ultimately the non-BCS should control their own destiny. You never know, a new institution free of the BCS might create a model consistent and with long-term stability and with a sustainable financial model not based on football I hear these arguments against like, 'you won't get the 'payouts' for playing the BCS games' - all of these arguments just solidify that long-term non-BCS schools are in an untenable position, so why not be bold and confront the issue NOW, especially while the PR for BCS is not too favorable and the perception of BCS has some major problems. If enough Presidents of non-BCS took a stand, there are 250 or so universities that wield collectively some weight, sure not the weight re-inforced by the profession model (the BCS-media 'complex'). The question is will a couple of savvy non-BCS PResidents and commissioners take a stand and use a pulpit to confront their long-term problem. Let the non power 5 walk away. Good riddance. Then all our strength of schedules will go up and we won't have to split our revenue. Starting to sound like a lot of whining brats...
|
|
|
Post by StuffU on Aug 9, 2014 14:03:41 GMT -5
all the more reason for the non-BCS to walk away NOW, and be bold. every argument against what I am saying plays into the BCS schools power. ultimately the non-BCS should control their own destiny. You never know, a new institution free of the BCS might create a model consistent and with long-term stability and with a sustainable financial model not based on football I hear these arguments against like, 'you won't get the 'payouts' for playing the BCS games' - all of these arguments just solidify that long-term non-BCS schools are in an untenable position, so why not be bold and confront the issue NOW, especially while the PR for BCS is not too favorable and the perception of BCS has some major problems. If enough Presidents of non-BCS took a stand, there are 250 or so universities that wield collectively some weight, sure not the weight re-inforced by the profession model (the BCS-media 'complex'). The question is will a couple of savvy non-BCS PResidents and commissioners take a stand and use a pulpit to confront their long-term problem. Sorry, but you are living in never, never land if you think the smaller D1 schools are going to pass up on $1,000,000 pay days to play a power 5 team.
He's already said, "it's not likely to happen". But from a strategic standpoint, if the non-BCS schools are satisfied as second tier without ever really having the financial resources to compete in any sport for a National Championship, then why are they in existence? The non-BCS schools could take the whole model back to old school college athletics where they compete on an even financial plane (or relatively even) and have a realistic shot at a National Championship. They don't NEED the BCS schools, they simply believe they do because they have bought into the unsustainable business model. Leave the BCS to semi pro status and reinforce the true idea of student athletes and pride of playing for and achieving for your university by going to a retro model of true collegiate athletics.
|
|
|
Post by StuffU on Aug 9, 2014 14:06:17 GMT -5
all the more reason for the non-BCS to walk away NOW, and be bold. every argument against what I am saying plays into the BCS schools power. ultimately the non-BCS should control their own destiny. You never know, a new institution free of the BCS might create a model consistent and with long-term stability and with a sustainable financial model not based on football I hear these arguments against like, 'you won't get the 'payouts' for playing the BCS games' - all of these arguments just solidify that long-term non-BCS schools are in an untenable position, so why not be bold and confront the issue NOW, especially while the PR for BCS is not too favorable and the perception of BCS has some major problems. If enough Presidents of non-BCS took a stand, there are 250 or so universities that wield collectively some weight, sure not the weight re-inforced by the profession model (the BCS-media 'complex'). The question is will a couple of savvy non-BCS PResidents and commissioners take a stand and use a pulpit to confront their long-term problem. Let the non power 5 walk away. Good riddance. Then all our strength of schedules will go up and we won't have to split our revenue. Starting to sound like a lot of whining brats... LOL. If the non BCS walks away, the bottom half of the power 5 will soon become the "non-BCS" group and dealing with similar problems. There will always be a top and a bottom. And the top will always do as much as they can to maintain control, money, and advantage over the bottom. Be careful, you may soon be the whiny brat.
|
|
|
Post by elevationvb on Aug 9, 2014 14:07:40 GMT -5
Sorry, but you are living in never, never land if you think the smaller D1 schools are going to pass up on $1,000,000 pay days to play a power 5 team.
He's already said, "it's not likely to happen". But from a strategic standpoint, if the non-BCS schools are satisfied as second tier without ever really having the financial resources to compete in any sport for a National Championship, then why are they in existence? The non-BCS schools could take the whole model back to old school college athletics where they compete on an even financial plane (or relatively even) and have a realistic shot at a National Championship. They don't NEED the BCS schools, they simply believe they do because they have bought into the unsustainable business model. Leave the BCS to semi pro status and reinforce the true idea of student athletes and pride of playing for and achieving for your university by going to a retro model of true collegiate athletics. Forget not likely - - it's not going to happen.
There are already coaches in the non BCS schools talking about being higher in the new pecking order.
These smaller schools depend on the big paydays in September to lose to a major football program.
|
|
|
Post by StuffU on Aug 9, 2014 14:09:27 GMT -5
He's already said, "it's not likely to happen". But from a strategic standpoint, if the non-BCS schools are satisfied as second tier without ever really having the financial resources to compete in any sport for a National Championship, then why are they in existence? The non-BCS schools could take the whole model back to old school college athletics where they compete on an even financial plane (or relatively even) and have a realistic shot at a National Championship. They don't NEED the BCS schools, they simply believe they do because they have bought into the unsustainable business model. Leave the BCS to semi pro status and reinforce the true idea of student athletes and pride of playing for and achieving for your university by going to a retro model of true collegiate athletics. Forget not likely - - it's not going to happen.
There are already coaches in the non BCS schools talking about being higher in the new pecking order.
These smaller schools depend on the big paydays in September to lose to a major football program.
Barack was never gonna happen either. When you speak in absolutes, you speak absolute @$$%*!*.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Aug 9, 2014 14:14:02 GMT -5
all the more reason for the non-BCS to walk away NOW, and be bold. every argument against what I am saying plays into the BCS schools power. ultimately the non-BCS should control their own destiny. You never know, a new institution free of the BCS might create a model consistent and with long-term stability and with a sustainable financial model not based on football I hear these arguments against like, 'you won't get the 'payouts' for playing the BCS games' - all of these arguments just solidify that long-term non-BCS schools are in an untenable position, so why not be bold and confront the issue NOW, especially while the PR for BCS is not too favorable and the perception of BCS has some major problems. If enough Presidents of non-BCS took a stand, there are 250 or so universities that wield collectively some weight, sure not the weight re-inforced by the profession model (the BCS-media 'complex'). The question is will a couple of savvy non-BCS PResidents and commissioners take a stand and use a pulpit to confront their long-term problem. Let the non power 5 walk away. Good riddance. Then all our strength of schedules will go up and we won't have to split our revenue. Starting to sound like a lot of whining brats... a BCS supporting talking about whining brats! that's so rich. BCS whines and threatens to leave NCAA if they don't get their way?!?! talk about the kettle calling the pot black I'm not whining, I'm supporting the non-BCS to go it alone, and SHUT out the BCS in every sport, whatever the consequences. at this point, they really have nothing to lose, they will keep on the bottom slope of the BCS slippery slope if they stay in the same organization of the BCS, so it is time to bolt. SCREW the BCS! if you don't like my attitude towards the BCS, too bad!! your institution is in the process of trying to screw my institution, so do you think I really care about anything the BCS proposes?? just doubt there is coherent leadership to make it happen. I'd LOVE to see the BCS schedule only within themselves non-conference, especially the Pac-12. I actually believe there would be a media market for such an organization - yeah, not the obscene BCS TV money, but they could certainly garner some deals, and furthermore 250 universities with some effective leadership could lobby for themselves (not let the BCS do the talking) with congress, etc.
|
|
|
Post by elevationvb on Aug 9, 2014 14:18:09 GMT -5
Sorry, but you are living in never, never land if you think the smaller D1 schools are going to pass up on $1,000,000 pay days to play a power 5 team.
then they are only hurting themselves long-run. and please provide an example of a 1 mil payday?? don't think so!! it's time for the non-BCS schools to give the middle finger to the BCS, because the BCS has essentially given the middle finger to the them From 2009, usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/2009-09-02-smallschool_payoffs_N.htmThe Hornets aren't the only ones. Throughout the football season that begins this weekend, so-called guarantee games — where lesser programs are paid lots of money in exchange for a presumed loss — are common. For the larger, better-funded programs, such deals typically mean an easy home game. Saturday alone, Western Kentucky will get $700,000 to play at Tennessee, Montana State will make $650,000 playing at Michigan State, Charleston Southern will get $450,000 for playing at defending national champion Florida and Liberty will earn $365,000 at West Virginia.
And Navy will receive an eye-popping $1 million for playing at Ohio State for the first time since 1931.
"I think $1 million is going to be the market price in the coming years," Ohio State athletics director Gene Smith says.
Arkansas State has signed for $1 million payouts from Auburn next season and Virginia Tech in 2011. This season, the Sun Belt Conference team has guarantee games against Nebraska for $750,000 and Iowa for $900,000.
|
|
|
Post by elevationvb on Aug 9, 2014 14:19:53 GMT -5
Forget not likely - - it's not going to happen.
There are already coaches in the non BCS schools talking about being higher in the new pecking order.
These smaller schools depend on the big paydays in September to lose to a major football program.
Barack was never gonna happen either. When you speak in absolutes, you speak absolute bull%*$#. No. I'm living in reality.
These small schools need the money. That is reality.
|
|
|
Post by StuffU on Aug 9, 2014 14:22:27 GMT -5
Let the non power 5 walk away. Good riddance. Then all our strength of schedules will go up and we won't have to split our revenue. Starting to sound like a lot of whining brats... a BCS supporting talking about whining brats! that's so rich. BCS whines and threatens to leave NCAA if they don't get their way?!?! talk about the kettle calling the pot black I'm not whining, I'm supporting the non-BCS to go it alone, and SHUT out the BCS in every sport, whatever the consequences. at this point, they really have nothing to lose, they will keep on the bottom slope of the BCS slippery slope if they stay in the same organization of the BCS, so it is time to bolt. SCREW the BCS! if you don't like my attitude towards the BCS, too bad!! your institution is in the process of trying to screw my institution, so do you think I really care about anything the BCS proposes?? just doubt there is coherent leadership to make it happen. I'd LOVE to see the BCS schedule only within themselves non-conference, especially the Pac-12. I actually believe there would be a media market for such an organization - yeah, not the obscene BCS TV money, but they could certainly garner some deals, and furthermore 250 universities with some effective leadership could lobby for themselves (not let the BCS do the talking) with congress, etc. I am 100% in agreement. I specialized in working with boot strap tech start ups with no cash. If all you do is wait to follow the financially well-backed leaders of the industries, you will always be in the dust.
|
|