Division 4??

[KansasSooner]

But what people don't understand is if you pay one sport you have to pay them all, women's included. Title X and such. No athletic department generates enough money to do that.

I wouldn't put it past some schools to be able to, like Texas...or any school with a large alumni base like Michigan to be able to pull it off.

 

[jonvi]

I'm on the fence. I like quality play. But I'm not convinced this will make what we have now better.

Who decides what teams will be Div IV? BSU being left out doesn't make sense to me. And if BSU is out, why would SU be in. Is SU in? Is BC in?

Some have mentioned 4 - 16 team conferences. 64 teams leaves another 60ish out. Not everyone's team is going to make the cut. And that is when the reality will set in. I go to SU games to see SU but to also see the other teams talents.

When UM rolled into the Dome with the likes of Edgerin James, Jeramy Shockey, Santana Moss...those were special events.

Teams that don't make the D4 cut will just fade away. That doesn't sound good for the sport to me.

 

[Olyduck]

Notre Dame would finally be forced to get into a conference.

I guess the simplest solution would be for the Big XII to increase from 10 to 14 members by adding Notre Dame, BYU, Boise State, and Cincinnati (West Virginia would no longer be on an island by themselves with the addition of Notre Dame & Cincinnati as travel partners, and Boise State & BYU would be western travel partners).

Proposed Big XII (Big XIV) divisions with the 4 new members in bold:

Big XIV North:

Boise State
BYU
Cincinnati
Iowa State
Kansas State
Notre Dame
West Virginia


Big XIV South:

Baylor
Kansas
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
TCU
Texas
Texas Tech

Let's get this thing done.

As an option...if the PAC wishes to increase to 14 schools too by getting into the Texas market, they could always consider adding SMU for the north Texas market and Rice or Houston for the south Texas market.

The new look PAC could be:

PAC North:

Cal
Oregon
Oregon State
Stanford
Utah
Washington
Washington State


PAC South:

Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado
Rice or Houston
SMU
UCLA
USC

 

[Wild Turkey]

I think we are headed towards super conferences but the following needs to happen along with it:

1. We need to consolidate down to just 4 big conferences at 16 teams each that means the ACC or Big 12 needs to fold (my bet is its the ACC).

2. These conferences need to break away from the NCAA altogether and start a new organization from scratch.

3. Each conference needs to have a championship game that feeds into the playoff. Note each conference will decide for themselves who plays in that game and how to determine tie breakers.

4. The 4 conference champions play a two game playoff to decide the national championship.

Play 1st round of the playoff and a month later play the second with bowl games being played in between for those that do not qualify.

Basketball:

With 4 conferences of 16 that gives you a total of 64 four teams so just play the basketball national championship with everyone in the tournament. Honestly this gives me the most heartburn but I could live with it.

 

[potzer25]

I think we are headed towards super conferences but the following needs to happen along with it:

1. We need to consolidate down to just 4 big conferences at 16 teams each that means the ACC or Big 12 needs to fold (my bet is its the ACC).

2. These conferences need to break away from the NCAA altogether and start a new organization from scratch.

3. Each conference needs to have a championship game that feeds into the playoff. Note each conference will decide for themselves who plays in that game and how to determine tie breakers.

4. The 4 conference champions play a two game playoff to decide the national championship.

Play 1st round of the playoff and a month later play the second with bowl games being played in between for those that do not qualify.

Basketball:

With 4 conferences of 16 that gives you a total of 64 four teams so just play the basketball national championship with everyone in the tournament. Honestly this gives me the most heartburn but I could live with it.

This makes no sense. Alabama wouldn't approve of it and it doesn't setup an SEC vs. SEC Championship game.

You would have to an 8 team playoff with 4 Conference Champs and then wildcards (not even necessarily the conference championship loser).

 

[Camfantasy]

You do realize that 5-7k is more take home than a college kid working 20 hours a week @ $10/hour right? Not to mention about on a par with what I have seen in proposals for 'paying' players....

We are fixing to see the fine edjamacational system in bammerville at work here fellas.

Show me how a typical college student who makes $10,400 per year in total income makes < $5,000 after taxes.

 

[Wild Turkey]

This makes no sense. Alabama wouldn't approve of it and it doesn't setup an SEC vs. SEC Championship game.

You would have to an 8 team playoff with 4 Conference Champs and then wildcards (not even necessarily the conference championship loser).

Interesting point the format would have cost Alabama one of their National Championships but then again they have plenty of questionable ones claimed to make up for it.

 

[TonyTheGator]

I'm not a fan of this happening, as I don't think players should be paid. That being said, it will be awfully funny when Boise is left out because they can't keep up financially.

 

[starbigd]

I think players should and will be paid......I really don't understand why people are against it.

What's happening right now is schools (with the blessing of the NCAA) are making billions off SPECIFIC athletes and their images/likenesses, stats, jersey numbers, etc. All the while forbidding those same athletes to make money off their own skillset and marketability. This at face value is what is the basis of the O'bannon suit, and he SHOULD win. It's not only unamerican, it's arguably commie.

You can't forbid people from profiting off their own image/skills under the guise of "amateurism"......and I hope the judge sees the obvious of this as well. If you're going to sign 9 billion dollar TV contracts off the skills of students, then ban those same students from making money off their own abilities, you are endorsing slave labor.

The kid from Louisville that broke his leg in the tourney is a perfect example. He goes down.......Louisville IMMEDIATELY starts selling t-shirts with his number on them and PROFIT off his injury, while he has to hope and pray somebody can pony up money for his injuries. That cannot be allowed to stand as a policy, and it probably won't be.

The key question is who gets paid, and what they get paid. I'm thinking a small stipend of 3K a year for football players should be fine.

 

[jalopy]

I think players should and will be paid......I really don't understand why people are against it.

What's happening right now is schools (with the blessing of the NCAA) are making billions off SPECIFIC athletes and their images/likenesses, stats, jersey numbers, etc. All the while forbidding those same athletes to make money off their own skillset and marketability. This at face value is what is the basis of the O'bannon suit, and he SHOULD win. It's not only unamerican, it's arguably commie.

You can't forbid people from profiting off their own image/skills under the guise of "amateurism"......and I hope the judge sees the obvious of this as well. If you're going to sign 9 billion dollar TV contracts off the skills of students, then ban those same students from making money off their own abilities, you are endorsing slave labor.

The kid from Louisville that broke his leg in the tourney is a perfect example. He goes down.......Louisville IMMEDIATELY starts selling t-shirts with his number on them and PROFIT off his injury, while he has to hope and pray somebody can pony up money for his injuries. That cannot be allowed to stand as a policy, and it probably won't be.

The key question is who gets paid, and what they get paid. I'm thinking a small stipend of 3K a year for football players should be fine.

Get a clue!

 

[starbigd]

Get a clue!

LOL. If I was soooo off base, the NCAA would not be facing the reality of LOSING this lawsuit.

So, are you telling me you are a commie?

 

[jalopy]

LOL. If I was soooo off base, the NCAA would not be facing the reality of LOSING this lawsuit.

So, are you telling me you are a commie?

No, I am telling you that athletes are already a drag on universities. For every athlete that has their likeness used, there are 50 arrests. Also, consider that the most common use of an athletes likeness is used by the university to promote sports so that schools are able to offset the cost of "educating", feeding, and housing these "student" that often don't qualify academically to be allowed through university doors.

Now let's consider how these athletes pay the university back for the privilege of attending an academic institution they aren't qualified for. Well, they don't. Of all the alums that give back to a university once they are established in life, do you want to guess who contributes the least as a whole and on a percentage basis? That's right. These same idiots that end are getting bailed out of jail on a Sunday morning.

OK, now we should move on to the idea that athletes aren't getting paid. They have access to the finest academic institutions in the country for free. They travel for free, eat for free, and get housing. Just because they are choosing not to take advantage of the opportunity doesn't mean it doesn't have value.

I do agree that if a university sells their likeness to an outside entity (ERTS), there should be some restrictions or an escrow account should be set up for that particular athlete once he graduates (or leaves the school)

 

[starbigd]

No, I am telling you that athletes are already a drag on universities. For every athlete that has their likeness used, there are 50 arrests. Also, consider that the most common use of an athletes likeness is used by the university to promote sports so that schools are able to offset the cost of "educating", feeding, and housing these "student" that often don't qualify academically to be allowed through university doors.

Now let's consider how these athletes pay the university back for the privilege of attending an academic institution they aren't qualified for. Well, they don't. Of all the alums that give back to a university once they are established in life, do you want to guess who contributes the least as a whole and on a percentage basis? That's right. These same idiots that end are getting bailed out of jail on a Sunday morning.

OK, now we should move on to the idea that athletes aren't getting paid. They have access to the finest academic institutions in the country for free. They travel for free, eat for free, and get housing. Just because they are choosing not to take advantage of the opportunity doesn't mean it doesn't have value.

I do agree that if a university sells their likeness to an outside entity (ERTS), there should be some restrictions or an escrow account should be set up for that particular athlete once he graduates (or leaves the school)

Athletes aren't getting paid. That is fact.

An education is NOT compensation. That's the lamest, and dumbest argument that gets made, and partially WHY the NCAA is losing this lawsuit.

And no, every athlete is not getting arrested. If a school cannot afford to have athletes, that's a decision they CHOOSE.

At Texas, the football team brings in more than 100 million in revenues yearly, solely based on their talents. Do you know how much money was made selling VY and Colt McCoy jerseys?

This really isn't about paying the athletes......it's more about exploiting the athletes for money, while barring them from making money off their own work. THEY are the risk takers here......they are the money generating engine. They have a legal RIGHT to earn money on their work. To argue otherwise makes you a commie. You want them to do as you say, and not be able to market themselves or make money off their own image.

 

[Camfantasy]

lol at thinking college athletes are being exploited when they are getting tens of thousands in incentives per year and basically getting a continuous job interview for jobs that pay millions of dollars per year for a few months of work. That is just horrible for these kids.

 

[jalopy]

Athletes aren't getting paid. That is fact.

An education is NOT compensation. That's the lamest, and dumbest argument that gets made, and partially WHY the NCAA is losing this lawsuit.

And no, every athlete is not getting arrested. If a school cannot afford to have athletes, that's a decision they CHOOSE.

At Texas, the football team brings in more than 100 million in revenues yearly, solely based on their talents. Do you know how much money was made selling VY and Colt McCoy jerseys?

This really isn't about paying the athletes......it's more about exploiting the athletes for money, while barring them from making money off their own work. THEY are the risk takers here......they are the money generating engine. They have a legal RIGHT to earn money on their work. To argue otherwise makes you a commie. You want them to do as you say, and not be able to market themselves or make money off their own image.

An education isn't compensation? Really? This is going to be news to a lot of students that come out of college owing hundreds of thousands of dollars. Funny that it is these same students that end up giving endowments back to their university and not the student-athletes that had a free ride.
Every athlete is not getting arrested but do you really want to compare the arrest rates of the football team vs the rest of the school?
Texas, ND and Michigan are rare in that they don't draws funds from the general education budget but the primary business model in the NCAA shows that student tuition supports athletics.
Poor exploited athletes! They deserve so much more with their 1.5 GPA's. They are able to audition 12+ times a year on national television for a nice paying job in the NFL.
You are right, they have a right to earn money for their work, but they give up that right when they participate in AMATEUR athletics. If you tried posing for a tasteful piece in your local rag wearing your postman outfit, you can be darn sure that you would hear from the postmaster general. The fact is that the athletes need the institutions a lot more than the institutions need them.
I think you might need to look up the word communism. I don't think it means what you think it does.

 

[starbigd]

An education isn't compensation? Really? This is going to be news to a lot of students that come out of college owing hundreds of thousands of dollars. Funny that it is these same students that end up giving endowments back to their university and not the student-athletes that had a free ride.
Every athlete is not getting arrested but do you really want to compare the arrest rates of the football team vs the rest of the school?
Texas, ND and Michigan are rare in that they don't draws funds from the general education budget but the primary business model in the NCAA shows that student tuition supports athletics.
Poor exploited athletes! They deserve so much more with their 1.5 GPA's. They are able to audition 12+ times a year on national television for a nice paying job in the NFL.
You are right, they have a right to earn money for their work, but they give up that right when they participate in AMATEUR athletics. If you tried posing for a tasteful piece in your local rag wearing your postman outfit, you can be darn sure that you would hear from the postmaster general. The fact is that the athletes need the institutions a lot more than the institutions need them.
I think you might need to look up the word communism. I don't think it means what you think it does.

An education is NOT compensation. Can an athlete take his scholarship and exchange it for cash? It is not legal compensation in any sense, and never will be. An education does not guarantee money in any form or fashion. An actionable, highly sought SKILL is quite different.

And no, the athletes don't need the institutions. If there were no collegiate athletics, you can best believe there would immediately be a minor league system built for them.

No, they don't give up their rights......because the schools don't OWN them. You can't say it's "AMATEUR" athletics, then sign a contract for 9 billion AMATEUR dollars based solely on their talents. The only so called amateurs are the ones generating the money.

The bottom line is you are still arguing for a system that blocks the risk taker from earning money off their own skills, labor, and image. That will never be legal in this country longterm.

The NCAA knows this........they are running scared because their house of cards is about to fall. You guys amuse me with this nonsense. The students will legally retain their rights........now what the schools do about it is another issue altogether.

 

[jalopy]

And no, the athletes don't need the institutions. If there were no collegiate athletics, you can best believe there would immediately be a minor league system built for them.
Any such system would have to be funded by the NFL because it would require an outflow of funds,both initially and long term. The value of college football lies in the institutions, not the athletes. Why do you think leagues like the USFL fail?

No, they don't give up their rights......because the schools don't OWN them. You can't say it's "AMATEUR" athletics, then sign a contract for 9 billion AMATEUR dollars based solely on their talents. The only so called amateurs are the ones generating the money.
Actually, they do enter into a written contract ceding their rights to be compensated in a monetary manner. They do so of their own free will. The O'Bannon lawsuit is about selling individual's unique characteristics to a third party. I would agree that this is a highly questionable act.

But to think that college athletes will ever be paid in a manner you want is not only naive, it is not possible. Title IX would require that women athletes be compensated in a similar manner. The argument that football is "income producing" is a distinction that would not be recognized by a court.

The bottom line is that the NCAA is about to lose this case and it will have major implications in college football. The biggest being that the cash cows are willing to pack their bags and leave the building.

The biggest problem with your model is that it would only work at select universities. You talk at length about revenues generated but neglect to mention the associated expenses. The plain fact is that the huge majority of college athletes are not worth what they are being compensated.

 

[Olyduck]

An education is NOT compensation. Can an athlete take his scholarship and exchange it for cash? It is not legal compensation in any sense, and never will be. An education does not guarantee money in any form or fashion. An actionable, highly sought SKILL is quite different.

And no, the athletes don't need the institutions. If there were no collegiate athletics, you can best believe there would immediately be a minor league system built for them.

No, they don't give up their rights......because the schools don't OWN them. You can't say it's "AMATEUR" athletics, then sign a contract for 9 billion AMATEUR dollars based solely on their talents. The only so called amateurs are the ones generating the money.

The bottom line is you are still arguing for a system that blocks the risk taker from earning money off their own skills, labor, and image. That will never be legal in this country longterm.

The NCAA knows this........they are running scared because their house of cards is about to fall. You guys amuse me with this nonsense. The students will legally retain their rights........now what the schools do about it is another issue altogether.

An education is compensation. a free college degree that, in the event an athlete does NOT go pro, Which the majority of college athletes do not, is something they can use for a career.

 

[7Samurai13]

The NFL has a 53 man roster and 8 practice squad players giving us a total of 732 players in the NFL. Each team in college football is allowed 85 scholarships and just using the FBS schools, that gives roughly 10,000 players on scholarship (taking into account maybe not every team maxes out their scholarships but you also have medical scholarships). Using the bold assumption that every scholarship player makes the NFL (obviously not true), what happens to the other 9000+ players who never play in the NFL? They can go into a career path of their choosing without having the albatros of student loan debt hanging over their head.

And players are still making a ton of cash considering the ones who live off campus are getting paid a monthly stipend to cover rent and food. Most do not live on campus because they can get a house with a bunch of their friends and save a ton of cash and spend the left over money how they wish.

 

[jalopy]

I think the most valid point made by Star is that college football is about to be blown up. The O'Bannon case is a major part of that but there is also PED issues brewing. Major ones. It will be interesting to see how the pieces get put back together (Humpty Dumpty?)