
bullet
-
Posts
3444 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Posts posted by bullet
-
-
On 5/21/2024 at 2:00 PM, BurntOrange&White said:
Is it wrong to think this is going to destroy a lot of scholarship opportunities for student athletes as a whole?
Yes. Basketball and football and some non-rev P4 athletes benefit and everyone else loses.
-
On 5/21/2024 at 1:54 PM, Evil Bill Obrien said:
Absolutely insane that the power football conferences are gonna get the G5 and other non football conferences to take an order of magnitude bigger hit to their payout to pay for all the shenanigans of the SEC, Big 10, ACC and Big 12…
The smaller Div I schools kept the rules on amateurism and fought every attempt by those of the P5 who wanted to do more. And the non-FBS schools (other than Big East) are getting way more than they contribute to the tourney. The P5 could say, fine, we'll just have our own basketball invitational and leave you out.
-
On 5/20/2024 at 5:31 AM, notre dame joe said:
I can't tell if NIL is a part of Title IX or not. The journalists are discussing NIL as though it was a part of the athletic budget.
But otherwise T9 is not an insurmountable problem. The schools figure out what % they have to pay to the gender racket and cough it up.
If it is paid directly by the schools, then they have to figure out how Title IX impacts it. If its paid by collectives by now, then it doesn't apply.
Many of the schools are talking about taking over the NIL, but I don't see how it would work without giving them Title IX headaches.
-
Based on the recent NCAA championships TV deal, women's basketball ($65 of $115 million) is more valuable than all the other miscellaneous sports combined.
-
2 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:
Title IX occurs at the University level of federal funding, regardless of the amount of money the athletic department makes. If the university takes federal research grants, you have to follow Title IX regulations.
It would seem that if they gave everyone 22% of media, ticket and sponsorship money of their sport, it would be logical and should be compliant. But Title IX is not the least bit about logic.
Logically, you could have 3 pools and give everyone in each pool only from their own sport's money:
Men's football and basketball
Women's basketball
All other sports
These are the 3 class action categories in the House lawsuit.
-
2 hours ago, closetohumping said:
Wrong threads
This is extremely relevant to realignment.
A lot of schools won't make it.
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2024/05/18/house-v-ncaa-settlement-vote/
Title IX, future anti-trust. Big mess even after the settlement.
-
1
-
-
On 5/14/2024 at 3:21 PM, 'stache said:
Is Miami really a TV draw anymore? It's been 20 years since they were really good. Nebraska still has a huge fanbase and TV draw, even after 20 years of suck. Miami always felt more like a bandwagon fanbase when they were the "bad boys" of college football but not a super loyal large fanbase through thick and thin. Maybe I'm wrong.
When they are good, people watch.
-
On 5/14/2024 at 12:15 PM, TKthunder2 said:
CUSA went from the top of the non BCS conferences along with the MWC to now the bottom of all FBS.
It was the fall of the Big East and subsequent formation of the American and CUSA’s backfill strategy of copying the Big Ten’s strategy of going after under performing teams in big markets and having a horrible tv deal with Stadium and Facebook.
CUSA raided the Sun Belt for FIU, Middle Tennessee, Western Kentucky and LA Tech from the dying WAC; and the teams they did hit on like UNT, UTSA, FAU all got pulled up by the American conference.
Sun Belt added App State, Georgia Southern, Georgia State, and Coastal Carolina and made a MACtion style TV deal with ESPN which built a strong football brand and allowed them to pull Marshall, Southern Miss, and ODU from CUSA.
As a result CUSA has fallen from 3rd tier to 5th tier, while the Sun Belt has moved up 1 tier from 5th to 4th. No other conference, save the PAC12, has done worse for its membership over the last 2 decades.
They should have tried to kill off the Sun Belt in their previous expansion. Instead they left it alive and kicking to pull up the best of FCS. And the AAC kept pulling from them, so eventually CUSA was the one pulling from FCS.
-
Will all the P4 stay? How much of the G5 will be able to afford to stay? They won't be required to revenue share as they aren't part of this lawsuit, but that doesn't exempt them from other lawsuits and the cost to continue to compete. And even more, this will increase the number of schools sending their resumes to the Big 10 and SEC.
"...As industry executives continue to negotiate with plaintiff lawyers in the House antitrust case, details of a future compensation model — a necessary piece to any settlement agreement — continue to emerge. Those who shared details were granted anonymity as they were not authorized to speak about a proposed settlement that continues to undergo changes.
While negotiations are active and have been for as many as eight months — not a new revelation within the industry — concepts of the proposed new model are becoming more formalized as leaders work to meet a deadline set by attorneys.
Money figures are becoming clear: For those in the power conferences, the price tag is steep.
The 10-year settlement agreement could cost each power school as much as $300 million over the decade, or $30 million a year. That figure assumes a school meets what is believed to be: (1) a $17-22 million revenue distribution cap for athletes; (2) at least $2 million in withheld NCAA distribution for back damages; and (3) as much as $10 million in additional scholarship costs related to an expansion of sport-specific roster sizes — a concept previously unpublicized...."
-
I just don't see how going beyond 20 makes sense for the SEC or Big 10 at current contract rates. Only ND, FSU, Clemson and maybe Miami bring in high enough ratings to justify expansion financially. And it makes no sense to go to 24 for any reason other than financial. But clearly people are talking about it. 4X18 or 2X20, 2X16 just makes more sense than 3X24.
-
Good article on why Sankey became Cranky and became the Grinch that stole CFP $$s for the G5 and M2. And what comes next???!
"...During a meeting of CFP commissioners in November, well before the revenue negotiations began, a discussion point emerged about the CFP’s future.
“There was a belief that all of us had to stay together as is,” Sankey recalled. “I never viewed it that way.”
Sankey’s honest and stunning admission may indicate the future course of the SEC and perhaps the Big Ten too. It casts doubt on the glue that binds the nine leagues together.
Schwarz believes the future is not necessarily two 20-team conferences that create a separate entity, as so many predict. Instead, he sees two 24-team conferences plus a third, possibly three 20-team leagues. “They’d all love to rip one of the four apart and make it a Big Three,” he said.
Said one high-placed college athletics insider: “Five power leagues could not survive. Neither can four....""
-
On 4/18/2024 at 6:42 PM, TKthunder2 said:
16-18 is too small. You could cut schools like Vandy and Northwestern sure, but those schools serve a purpose of providing wins and great travel destinations to population centers in the middle of the conference. You could still cut a school like Mississippi State or Purdue who doesn’t check many boxes but there is not a lot of fat in the SEC/B1G that the presidents want to unanimously reject as it sets a bad president for those historically less successful teams.
I think 40-48 schools is as close as you’ll get to your “big brands breakaway league”. The SEC/B1G it sits at 34 so an easy jump to 40 would be ND, FSU, Clemson, UNC, UVA and then a wildcard school like Miami or Stanford. If they go to 48 you’d likely see some others from the B12/ACC as well, but I doubt it gets that big without a true league forming which could collectively agree that they need representation in the Four Corner states for viewership and political cover.
16-18 is Prestige Worldwide. The rest will still be around for ooc wins.
-
On 4/13/2024 at 9:39 AM, Longboard Horn said:
You give him way too much credit. It was not really a police chase. More of a parade. A boring parade. And whoever at NBC switched from game 5 of the NBA finals for that earned his ticket to hell!
-
He's baaaack! Actually the Dude of WV never left, after all, he's immortal, but just changed to his real name, Christopher Lambert. And his FSU and Clemson talk just won't go away.
So from others who do subscribe to his twitter, ESPN is brokering a deal whereby the ACC lets FSU and Clemson go to the SEC, sublicenses their rights to ESPN to use in the SEC and takes a cut. Meanwhile, ESPN agrees to exercise their option to renew the ACC contract from 2027-2036. That option expires in 2025.
Its just way too complicated for the Dude to have thought of it himself, so someone did tell him this. And it really does make sense, even if the source is the Dude. Its a win for FSU and Clemson, who get to go to the SEC and make more money. Its a win for the ACC who get rid of a couple of whiners, get their contract renewed and cash in on part of FSU/Clemson's FMV. Its a win for ESPN who keeps FSU and Clemson and gets even better matchups in the SEC, although they do pay a little more. Its a win for the SEC who seal up the southeast and get a couple more national brands.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:
He was the initial aggressor and got himself. It wasn’t that much of a sucker punch. Quit carrying water for this guy. He has clear issues and needs help.
Quit carrying water for the pussy who sucker punched him. I can't believe so many of you are defending that piece of shit. It would have been one thing if one of those two guys in front of him had done it.
-
1
-
-
On 3/26/2024 at 5:43 PM, shadow_operative said:
i didn’t read anything vic said after his first few sentences of his first internet tough guy post, because you couldn’t pay me to read the ramblings of an internet tough guy whose mind frame is stuck in middle school.
adults who get into fist fights at bars are losers. adults who sucker punch people are even bigger losers. adults who go on the internet to talk about how it ain’t no rules in the street like they’re some gangster tough guy and not some dorky ass internet poster the biggest losers imaginable.
Yeah. When I was growing up someone who sucker punched was a total pussy and coward. I lived in Vince's neighborhood, long before Vince. Our Junior High was rated one of the 10 most dangerous school in the nation. And the only junior high on the list. We were a little overrated--but there were lots of fights and they were always fair fights. And when somebody lost, it was over. They didn't bang their head into the concrete. Nobody used weapons. They didn't gang up 2 on 1. Only pieces of shit like the sucker punch guy would do that.
-
1
-
-
On 3/26/2024 at 3:44 PM, HRSchenker said:
Never ever hold someone back in a fight if you're not willing to become a target yourself by the guy you're holding. Nothing noble about being in that position. Either separate them or get the hell out. Hate to see this happen to one of my idols growing up but damn Vince why are you at a place like that?
He didn't get hit by the two guys he was holding. It was a loser guy on the side.
-
On 3/26/2024 at 10:40 AM, BurntOrange&White said:
Bro should really enroll in AA but that was kind of a sucker punch.
Absolutely a sucker punch. Vince looked like he was trying to keep things from getting out of hand. The two who weren't tangled up with him were fighting.
On 3/26/2024 at 10:49 AM, Vic Mackey said:Sucker punch? Sure. But why do people act like there are rules when it comes to fights? This isn't boxing or some controlled setting. Your head needs to be on a swivel at all times
That guy wasn't even involved with Vince. It was the two guys in front of him.
-
12 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:
You collectively bargain, and then pay out based on ratings. Better ratings = more money. That's how you sell the blue bloods on it. Financial reward becomes merit based, not about being lucky as to who you hooked up with 150 years ago. The whole conference model goes away completely in this system. There is no Big 10 or SEC, there is just the 70 schools that were part of the major conferences, and they all have varying levels of value in this equation.
This model we've been heading towards where Purdue and Northwestern get to make as much money as Ohio State and Michigan while Oklahoma State and West Virginia don't even get to participate is so mind-numbingly stupid, and this model would end that immediately.
Schools are going to want something more certain than year to year ratings.
-
On 3/30/2024 at 1:03 PM, utee94 said:
SEC scheduling has always been wonky. As I recall, back before the expansion to 12 teams in 1991/92, there were years when LSU might only play 6 or 7 of the other 9 teams.
It was 7 games in the 80s. Prior to that, some schools (notably LSU) might play only 5 conference games and others might play 8. Below is 1965 before Tulane left but after Georgia Tech. Looked up 1966 and Ole Miss played the most-7 games, while Georgia, Tennessee and Vandy played 5. LSU was the 1970 champ at 5-0.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:1965_Southeastern_Conference_football_standings
Team W L T W L T No. 1 Alabama $ 6 – 1 – 1 9 – 1 – 1 Auburn 4 – 1 – 1 5 – 5 – 1 Florida 4 – 2 – 0 7 – 4 – 0 No. 7 Tennessee 2 – 1 – 2 8 – 1 – 2 Ole Miss 5 – 3 – 0 7 – 4 – 0 No. 8 LSU 3 – 3 – 0 8 – 3 – 0 Kentucky 3 – 3 – 0 6 – 4 – 0 Georgia 2 – 3 – 0 6 – 4 – 0 Vanderbilt 1 – 5 – 0 2 – 7 – 1 Tulane 1 – 5 – 0 2 – 8 – 0 Mississippi State 1 – 5 – 0 4 – 6 – 0 -
1
-
-
5 hours ago, thunderlounge said:
It has potential, but hinges on alignments, IMO.
It has zero potential. It puts the SEC and Big 10 on a par with the M2.
Now if you could set something up where the SEC and Big 10 are 3 twelve team conferences or 4 ten team conferences and the M2 realign into 3 twelve team or 3 ten team, then you might get someone to listen.
Wouldn't be pretty for the 3rd conference, but you could have the 2005 Big 10 (11) + Rutgers, the 2005 SEC minus Arkansas + Maryland for twelve and a 3rd conference with UT, aggy, OU, Arkansas Mizzou, Nebraska, UCLA, USC, UW, Oregon, FSU and Clemson. Then the other 3 would be WSU/Or St./Cal/Stanford/BYU/Utah/AZ/ASU/CU/ISU/KU/KSU + BC/SU/Pitt/UVA/VT/UNC/NCSU/Wake/Duke/GT/Miami/ND + WVU/Cincy/Louisville/UH/SMU/TCU/TT/Baylor/Okie St./UCF/USF/UConn
If you stick with 7 of 10, then you add FSU, Clemson, ND, Miami, UNC, UVA to the P2. #1 1990 Big 10, #2 1990 SEC, #3 FSU, Clemson, ND, Miami, UNC, UVA, S. Carolina, Penn St., Rutgers, Maryland, #4 UT, aggy, OU, Arkansas, Mizzou, Nebraska, UCLA, USC, UW, Oregon. The other 3 are #5 BC, SU, Pitt, VT, NCSU, Wake, Duke, GT, UL, UCF; #6 WVU, Cincy, UH, TT, TCU, Baylor, Okie St., KU, KSU, ISU; #7 Stanford, Cal, SMU, Utah, BYU, ASU, Arizona, CU, WSU, Or St.
-
1
-
-
On 3/23/2024 at 6:36 PM, notre dame joe said:
It draws clicks to tournament and local news coverage even far from those 'power teams.' Only hard bball fans would care that UK was upset but when it was done by the other Oakland, it was on the local news all over the country.
The same would happen if it was Indiana St. of the MVC or Duqesne of the A10.
-
On 3/23/2024 at 12:09 AM, TKthunder2 said:
Okay thought it would be more inflammatory…but I agree with this and I figured the Big 12/ACC/Big East would too with quality bubble teams all being in the outside looking in. The SEC, notably, didn’t have a real quality team miss out this year (17 win LSU or #90 NET Ole Miss).
We have too many DI conferences which means too many AQs. DI is too big need to be split in half like the NCAA president was trying to propose.
Is anyone actually upset by this, or is it just fun to point and laugh at the SEC’s shitty basketball?
On another board someone calculated the Sweet 16s by conference since 1985. Here is BePcr07's calculations, which seem reasonable, based on 2025 conference membership:
ACC-140
Big 10-123
SEC-104
Big 12-95
Big East-69
Next tier:
AAC-20
WCC-18
A10-15
MWC-13
Bottom tier:
MAC-7
MVC-6
CUSA-5
the rest:
Horizon-2
Ivy-2
ASun, MAAC, Patriot, Southern, Summit-1
12 conferences with 5 or more. 14 conferences with more than 1. 19 conferences with at least one. 12 conferences with zero in 40 years. I've said you could drop the bottom 10 conferences and nobody would notice and probably the bottom 15.
The real reason college football will fail
in Football
Posted
They'll strike and kill the golden goose much like baseball hurt its popularity with multiple strikes.