NCAA approves unlimited meals and snacks.

dales5050

Banned
Messages
404
Reaction score
39
You are the one that seems to have difficulty grasping the reality. You seem to live in some kind of fantasy land where the producers of products are compensated equally to the ownership that they work for. The reality is that the world doesn't work that way. Maybe in some specialized sales fields a super salesman might earn close to the same money as his manager(s) and owner(s), but that would be an anomaly.

So there has never been a case where the talent of a company leaves and thus the company closes or is not nearly as profitable? Heh. You can own THAT company all you want. You're the guy that invests in Apple when John Sculley is in charge I suppose.

The product here is the quality of football being played not the history of it. There is a reason why ESPN pays the SEC more than the ACC and there is a reason why ESPN pays the ACC more then the MAC. It's the quality of the players.

Under your line of thinking, the market value of the schools are locked in but they are not. It's why schools rise and fall. It's why there is an arms race right now in spending. It's all about the players.

My point is, you can spend all you want on training tables or facilities or coaches salaries but all of this spending still does not pay the players outside of the mythical value of a degree that many do not get.

My point is, someone is going to come along eventually and say let's pay the players. When that happens, the bottom of this house of cards will collapse.

Just consider the projections of the conferences outside of the Power 5 today. Look at the AAC conference. Look at their value in 2015 compared to 2005. Ask yourself what happened to them?

They were shut out of the party and now no longer can get the top level players. Because of that their value has dropped. The NCAA is not a parts of equals.

You also seem to think that losing eyeballs automatically means that Universities lose money. That's not necessarily the case. If the delivery of television changes to the point that schools can start putting on their own broadcast, then the school will receive 100% of the advertising dollars. Those dollars might drop some, but the University might still be better off financially, depending on their cut of advertising revenues previously.

For who? Notre Dame? Maybe.

What about South Carolina? What about Boston College? What about Oklahoma State? What about Cal?

Step away from your fandom of ND and look at the entire college football spectrum. It's a fabric of teams. If you really think that ALL of the parts are greater than the whole, that's an interesting perspective.
 

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
For who? Notre Dame? Maybe.

What about South Carolina? What about Boston College? What about Oklahoma State? What about Cal?

Step away from your fandom of ND and look at the entire college football spectrum. It's a fabric of teams. If you really think that ALL of the parts are greater than the whole, that's an interesting perspective.

What about South Carolina and Boston College and Oklahoma State and Cal? When was the last time that Cal was available on ESPN in New York? With the streaming method of delivery, Cal and Oklahoma State will be available to every person in the world with an internet connection. Cal grads in f'in Russia will be able to tune into the games. Not to mention that the schools could charge a nominal fee for the content. The bottom line here is this, and it's not up for debate:

As the number, reliability, and availability of alternate delivery methods for games increases, the traditional television ratings model of financing is going to figure in less and less prominently.

So the argument that teams in a lower division could become irrelevant because of TV ratings is just not sustainable. Creativity and unprecedented advances in mass communications may just fill the void left by those ratings, and their resultant financing.
 

dales5050

Banned
Messages
404
Reaction score
39
What about South Carolina and Boston College and Oklahoma State and Cal? When was the last time that Cal was available on ESPN in New York? With the streaming method of delivery, Cal and Oklahoma State will be available to every person in the world with an internet connection. Cal grads in f'in Russia will be able to tune into the games. Not to mention that the schools could charge a nominal fee for the content.

You seem to put a lot of stock on alumni supporting these teams. I think that is misguided.

A lot of programs out there live and die with the success of the team and the quality of football being played. Not their love for the school. Again, take off your ND blinders for a minute.

My thinking is pretty straightforward. If the top players leave the quality of football goes down. That is not up for debate. In turn, when the quality goes down, typical fans (not diehard alumni) will have less of a desire to watch those games. That impacts the value.

The bottom line here is this, and it's not up for debate:
As the number, reliability, and availability of alternate delivery methods for games increases, the traditional television ratings model of financing is going to figure in less and less prominently.

I would agree with this but that still does not solve the value of the product issue.

Let's look at this by comparing it to Cable v. HBO/Netflix. You're correct that alternate delivery methods have and will continue to eat into cable subscriptions. This is obvious by what Netflix is doing and why HBO is making the move to go directly to consumers.

That said, the value HBO or Netflix for consumers is not loyalty to the brand but the programming itself. It's House of Cards and Game of Thrones.

If HBO were to find itself in a position say 5 years from now in not being able to provide the next Game of Thrones or continue to have several high quality shows that people want to watch, people are not going to pay for HBO. It does not matter how the product is delivered. It's the product itself that matters at the end of the day.

Even more important, there is going to be another Netflix and there will be another HBO. The advancements you talk about are going to make the barrier of entry easier and when that happens power shifts.

You can talk about Cal grads in Russia tuning paying a subscription to what their beloved Bears play but if the quality of football goes down to the point where it's like watching a MAC game between Buffalo and Ball State, outside of the most die hard fans...you're not going to get people watching.

So the argument that teams in a lower division could become irrelevant because of TV ratings is just not sustainable. Creativity and unprecedented advances in mass communications may just fill the void left by those ratings, and their resultant financing.

If it's not TV ratings it's subscribers to a service. The advancements you're talking about and ones that I agree will happen will allow ANY video product to be accessed with ease. So all things are equal there.

At that point, the only thing that really matters is the quality of the product itself.


The really sticky point with CFB is while the Colleges are tied to the NCAA and the networks (at least currently) are tied to the conferences and schools...the new players themselves are free agents. Every. Single. Year.

While a the player 'contract' prevents them from going to another school or declaring for the NFL draft before a specific time...they are free to do what they please in other areas. Similar to how a college sophomore can leave a school and go play professional baseball.



Honest question here. Do you really think that if there was a viable option for kids both in college and high school to sign a contract with a development league that paid them and did not force them to go to school at the same time...that kids would not pick that option?
 

IRISHDODGER

Blue Chip Recruit
Messages
8,044
Reaction score
6,110
You are correct that these kids do not have a gun to their head. You're also correct that they could go to play in Canada or the Arenal leagues. Those are the options that exist today.

What you don't seem to grasp is the billions and billions at play for TV contracts. Right now, ESPN can only negotiate with groups that have a product. Right now, the best product is the power 5 conferences and that's because they have the best players.

Do you really think everyone else with money is going to stand on the sidelines and watch colleges bring in these kinds of revenues forever? Do you really think someone or a group of people with the financial resources are not going to sit back and ask themselves....how much would it cost to siphon off 50% of the top 2,000 players in CFB?

To put some historical perspective on it, there was a time when NFL owners thought they were untouchable. They thought they 'owned' the rights to professional football in the US. They scoffed at the idea of teams in Buffalo, Boston, Dallas and Denver putting a dent in 'their league'....

10 years later the AFL merged with the NFL.

I have no issue with this. I agree the money is too big to not be exploited. Something will change sooner or later...too much money for this not to happen.


They get housed in dorms where they have to follow the rules that don't make sense to them. They get books and tuition for classes they don't want to go to. They get to go to parties but have to watch every single step out of fear of losing their eligibility.

Like many here, you really are not looking at this from the perspective of the typical college football player.

Everything you mention that is being provided to them could be provided on an equal or grater value by a development league. It's just a matter of someone with enough money crunching the numbers and seeing that there is a lot of money to be made if you don't have to feed the fat cats at the university.

Yes, every student has to follow rules. If it doesn't "make sense", maybe they should seek counseling or maybe college is not for them. Again, if they don't want to go to classess, go to the CFL or AFL until a league like you described is organized.

Yes, they have to be careful at parties if they're at a high profile D1 Power 5 school (which are the only ones I'm referring to b/c they're the only ones generating this revenue...not sure why you brought D3 or D1 mid-majors into the discussion)

.Saban and Harbaugh are just two of the coaches. Speaking of Harbaugh, I wonder how the kids who signed with him at Stanford felt about him leaving for the NFL. They signed up to be developed by him but then were told tough sh*t about transferring if they wanted to. I wonder what the kids at LSU felt when Saban bounced to the NFL.

Really? they probably felt the same as Harbaugh, Saban and others feel when a kid leaves early for the pros, breaks the law leading to expulsion, transfers w/o penalty to be closer to grandma who is suffering from in-grown butt hairs or flips to a rival school after multiple promises that they will keep their verbal commitment and sign.

Many of these kids do not give a crap about Pell Grants. Many of these kids don't give a crap about getting a degree.

So the kids that need more spending money "do not give a crap about Pell Grants (free money)'? Please explain b/c I pray that even elite athletes aren't so entitled that they're too lazy to have someone help them fill out the proper papwerwork to receive additional funds.

Do you think these kids have some sort of misguided notion that even though they had to struggle to even get eligible they are somehow going to excel in college? They don't.

No, if they don't want to go to college & worry about being eligible for something they're not interested in, they should take their talents to the CFL or AFL until they prove worthy of being drafted inthe NFL. For the millioneth time....if it's money they want & schoolwork & rules they want to avoid...there's options...it may not include a $25 million signing bonus but sooner or later they have to earn an invite to the NFL...no?

But are you serious in asking what they need spending money for? Jesus Christ you sound like a plantation owner. I feed the slaves, I house the slaves, I give them something to do each day...just what do they need to learn how to read or write for? Why do they need to be paid for their labor.

You just offended people's forefathers who were unfortunate enough to have actually suffered slavery...you owe them an apology for comparing their plight to an elite athlete from a division 1 Power5 school who chose to attend said school on their own free will. But I digress...They are being paid for their labor...if not, how could they afford books, tuition, room/board, meals, healthcare, premium athletic gear (clothes & shoes), elite strenght & conditioning to assist them on their "labor", a dietician to ensure they are getting the healthiest food money can buy, (again) elite coaching to develop their talents to the maximum. A Pell Grant will cover money for clothes, meals, cell phone, etc. So what specifically are they being deprived of?


Title IX applies to college athletics. College athletics is corrupt. Remove the aspect of college from the picture and Title IX goes away.

Agreed.

We agree on a lot of your notions about another entity stepping in to generated revenue for a league that can sign players out of HS who are not interested in college studies but aren't ready for the NFL and need to support their families.

You're continually all over the place, so it's hard to keep up. Why you drifted to the non Power 5 football athletes is muddying the water. The Ball States, FAUs of the FBS or the numerous FCS schools or the D1AA - D2 - D3 athletes shouldn't be incl in this discussion as I'm not aware them generating the billions of dollars that we originally discussed...Those classifications are for anthother thread.

I went to an NAIA school where I walked on the baseball team. Injuries prevented me from fulfilling by desire to be in uniform but the best I could've hoped for is a work study option. It consisted of busy work (landscaping, weedeating around the flag pole, mowing the field, manning the sign=in desk at the weightroom) that would justify funds toward my tuition & room/board. Instead, I resorted to a small academic scholarship that covered my first year tuition & then worked full time. My parents weren't wealthy enough to stroke a check to send me to school so I had to take loans out which required reams of paperwork that you seem to allude that athletes don't give a crap about (when referencing Pell Gants). I also did a little research to find I could get some finanical relief while rehabbing my ACL injuries b/c it prevented me from working. This helped offset my expenses while I couldn't work. I was the only male teenager at the Welfare office to apply for relief. And I was just an average college student so don't act like it's hard for student-athletes to do something similer toward Pell Grant b/c I know for a fact they have resources in the athletic dept to assist them in this...it's in both parties best interest. Oh yeah, if I wanted anything extra (not that Beats by Dre were available in the early 90s) I carpooled w/ buddies to the plasma center and spent 45 minutes w/ aa 17-gauge needle in my arm which drained my plasma for a cool $20 twice a week.
 

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
Honest question here. Do you really think that if there was a viable option for kids both in college and high school to sign a contract with a development league that paid them and did not force them to go to school at the same time...that kids would not pick that option?

My honest answer is that I think kids would take whichever path offered them the best opportunity to make it to the NFL. If that was a developmental league, then that is where I think they would go. If that was college, then I think that they would go there.

You seem to think that people will not watch unless the best of the best are playing. I think that's wrong. I think that, as long as you have a minimum level of talent (let's say 3star guys, in today's terms), then people will be more concerned about the games being competitive. People get addicted to the adrenaline rush that they get from watching their favorite team. As long as the games are competitive and compelling, people will tune in. Baseball has the most well established developmental league in the history of sports on this planet, but the College World Series continues to increase their ratings. Why should football be any different?
 

MNIrishman

Well-known member
Messages
2,532
Reaction score
481
This thread seemed as good a place to say it as any, but Fr. John said today that he could not envision any scenario whatsoever where players of any sport were paid. Reasonably similar to Captain Jack's comments from earlier (couldn't find that thread).
 

RDU Irish

Catholics vs. Cousins
Messages
8,622
Reaction score
2,724
We aren't putting E85 in our fighter jets and only changing oil every 5000 miles for maintenance. Expecting athletes to be elite without the ability to feed them to appropriately maximize their potential is doing them a disservice.

My concern is maximizing potential and helping them be the best they can be. For the fencing squad, fuel is not a big issue. For football players it is a different animal with crazy calorie and nutritional requirements that also differ greatly from position to position.

Much like teaching a class without a book or not allowing kids to study, improper nutrition and feeding schedules inhibit the ability to succeed.

However, I can see this back firing into a fatter slower football team at plenty of places. The kids are given a diet but I would love to see how many adhere closely to that. One of the big deals with a training table is SHOWING them how to eat, not just telling them. However, those menu options aren't on the board at the fast food joints these kids will have 24/7 free access to now.

Also look for the abuse of buying for friends. How backwards will it be when the NCAA cracks down on football players buying meals for dates, or more likely entourage.
 

PANDFAN

Look Down
Messages
16,770
Reaction score
2,278
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Effective Aug. 1, FBS programs may now pay for 2 parents/guardians to accompany recruits on official visits <a href="https://t.co/UdeVaQmwDf">https://t.co/UdeVaQmwDf</a></p>— Zach Barnett (@zach_barnett) <a href="https://twitter.com/zach_barnett/status/722471290355916801">April 19, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

greyhammer90

the drunk piano player
Messages
16,825
Reaction score
16,088
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Effective Aug. 1, FBS programs may now pay for 2 parents/guardians to accompany recruits on official visits <a href="https://t.co/UdeVaQmwDf">https://t.co/UdeVaQmwDf</a></p>— Zach Barnett (@zach_barnett) <a href="https://twitter.com/zach_barnett/status/722471290355916801">April 19, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Big win for ND.
 
K

koonja

Guest
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Effective Aug. 1, FBS programs may now pay for 2 parents/guardians to accompany recruits on official visits <a href="https://t.co/UdeVaQmwDf">https://t.co/UdeVaQmwDf</a></p>— Zach Barnett (@zach_barnett) <a href="https://twitter.com/zach_barnett/status/722471290355916801">April 19, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Year late or we'd have Demetris Robertson's brother on campus. But this is still sweet.
 
Top