on billion dollar a year TV contract. That would be only 900 minutes of ad time for 15 games. I think TV would pay at least an average of $400,000 per 15 sec commercial easily. Most playoff games are at least 4 hours. Then let all the conferences work out their on TV contracts. So simple.
There are 124 schools now.
On what planet is Michigan and Alabama going to agree to an equal split of cash with Middle Tennessee State and Buffalo?
(02-25-2012 07:55 AM)bronconick Wrote: [ -> ]On what planet is Michigan and Alabama going to agree to an equal split of cash with Middle Tennessee State and Buffalo?
I see your point. It should, however, be the same planet that God awful basketball teams from The Big 10 and SEC get charity first round high seed paydays in the NCAA tournament while more deserving programs from the OVC, MVC, WCC and others stay home. My point is most seasons The Big 10 deserves no more than 4 bids but almost always gets 6 on name alone. The SEC like wise usually doesn't deserve more than 3 but usually gets 5. What's fair is fair. Unfortunately the good ol boy network that controls college football wants no part of what is fair.
That's why you see schools like WVU walking away from a rivalry like Pitt or Nebraska and Oklahoma stopping a 100 plus year old series. Today it's every program for themselves. We all like to think that our school would "do the right thing". The truth is "the right thing" might involve looking out for number one above all else. Sadly it's a game of conference musical chairs right now and you don't want to be left without a seat.
CJ
that 10 million dollar paycut for B-10
(02-25-2012 07:55 AM)bronconick Wrote: [ -> ]On what planet is Michigan and Alabama going to agree to an equal split of cash with Middle Tennessee State and Buffalo?
Winner!
And here is the thing: when we human beings say "fairness", we mean ourselves being equal with those on top, not those on bottom even though in an equal sharing models, every new share means less and less for everyone.
IOW, a middle team like UAB wants to make the same amount as Alabama and Auburn, but as soon as they do, they want to shut the door and keep Troy and USA from demanding THEIR "fair share" which would lower UAB's "fair share"
(02-25-2012 09:27 AM)CardinalJim Wrote: [ -> ] (02-25-2012 07:55 AM)bronconick Wrote: [ -> ]On what planet is Michigan and Alabama going to agree to an equal split of cash with Middle Tennessee State and Buffalo?
I see your point. It should, however, be the same planet that God awful basketball teams from The Big 10 and SEC get charity first round high seed paydays in the NCAA tournament while more deserving programs from the OVC, MVC, WCC and others stay home. My point is most seasons The Big 10 deserves no more than 4 bids but almost always gets 6 on name alone. The SEC like wise usually doesn't deserve more than 3 but usually gets 5. What's fair is fair. Unfortunately the good ol boy network that controls college football wants no part of what is fair.
Meh. There are about 20, maybe 25 teams worthy of at-large bids in any given season. By the time we're down looking at the bubble, it's a bunch of crap regardless of conference and I'm hard pressed to give two craps that teams that people have heard of get those bids over equally inept smaller school teams.
(02-25-2012 09:59 AM)templefootballfan Wrote: [ -> ]that 10 million dollar paycut for B-10
No it isn't, you got to remember that they still have their own conference TV contract where most of their money comes from any way. This is a playoff vs the BcS money. Even when the BcS tv contract's money is only a couple of million a team.
(02-25-2012 09:27 AM)CardinalJim Wrote: [ -> ] (02-25-2012 07:55 AM)bronconick Wrote: [ -> ]On what planet is Michigan and Alabama going to agree to an equal split of cash with Middle Tennessee State and Buffalo?
I see your point. It should, however, be the same planet that God awful basketball teams from The Big 10 and SEC get charity first round high seed paydays in the NCAA tournament while more deserving programs from the OVC, MVC, WCC and others stay home. My point is most seasons The Big 10 deserves no more than 4 bids but almost always gets 6 on name alone. The SEC like wise usually doesn't deserve more than 3 but usually gets 5. What's fair is fair. Unfortunately the good ol boy network that controls college football wants no part of what is fair.
That's why you see schools like WVU walking away from a rivalry like Pitt or Nebraska and Oklahoma stopping a 100 plus year old series. Today it's every program for themselves. We all like to think that our school would "do the right thing". The truth is "the right thing" might involve looking out for number one above all else. Sadly it's a game of conference musical chairs right now and you don't want to be left without a seat.
CJ
The debate about how many teams deserve to be in the NCAA Tournament is one where some big conference teams claim they aren't getting in over teams in conferences that play no one and where smaller schools claim the big schools are getting in over more qualified lower teams. I'm not a big enough basketball expert to say where the right balance is, but I don't think there is any extra effort to get extra Big Ten or SEC teams into the tournament. Some years we get too many, some too few. A couple years back Ohio State just missed the tournament one year and Penn State the next year. They both won the NIT suggesting those years, the Big Ten was probably under-represented.
Things go in cycles and it helps a conference to have a lot of middle of the pack teams.
(02-25-2012 10:54 AM)10thMountain Wrote: [ -> ] (02-25-2012 07:55 AM)bronconick Wrote: [ -> ]On what planet is Michigan and Alabama going to agree to an equal split of cash with Middle Tennessee State and Buffalo?
Winner!
And here is the thing: when we human beings say "fairness", we mean ourselves being equal with those on top, not those on bottom even though in an equal sharing models, every new share means less and less for everyone.
IOW, a middle team like UAB wants to make the same amount as Alabama and Auburn, but as soon as they do, they want to shut the door and keep Troy and USA from demanding THEIR "fair share" which would lower UAB's "fair share"
You mean kind of like how us Americans demand quality of life well above that of most of the rest of the world yet in our college football world we demand "fairness"?
(02-25-2012 09:27 AM)CardinalJim Wrote: [ -> ] (02-25-2012 07:55 AM)bronconick Wrote: [ -> ]On what planet is Michigan and Alabama going to agree to an equal split of cash with Middle Tennessee State and Buffalo?
I see your point. It should, however, be the same planet that God awful basketball teams from The Big 10 and SEC get charity first round high seed paydays in the NCAA tournament while more deserving programs from the OVC, MVC, WCC and others stay home. My point is most seasons The Big 10 deserves no more than 4 bids but almost always gets 6 on name alone. The SEC like wise usually doesn't deserve more than 3 but usually gets 5. What's fair is fair. Unfortunately the good ol boy network that controls college football wants no part of what is fair.
That's why you see schools like WVU walking away from a rivalry like Pitt or Nebraska and Oklahoma stopping a 100 plus year old series. Today it's every program for themselves. We all like to think that our school would "do the right thing". The truth is "the right thing" might involve looking out for number one above all else. Sadly it's a game of conference musical chairs right now and you don't want to be left without a seat.
CJ
You speak the truth.
It's been that way since 1978, when I started watching the NCAA tournament. For many years, the Big 10 would get six teams in and only one would make it to the second round. But the media loves them ....
(02-25-2012 05:36 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote: [ -> ] (02-25-2012 09:27 AM)CardinalJim Wrote: [ -> ] (02-25-2012 07:55 AM)bronconick Wrote: [ -> ]On what planet is Michigan and Alabama going to agree to an equal split of cash with Middle Tennessee State and Buffalo?
I see your point. It should, however, be the same planet that God awful basketball teams from The Big 10 and SEC get charity first round high seed paydays in the NCAA tournament while more deserving programs from the OVC, MVC, WCC and others stay home. My point is most seasons The Big 10 deserves no more than 4 bids but almost always gets 6 on name alone. The SEC like wise usually doesn't deserve more than 3 but usually gets 5. What's fair is fair. Unfortunately the good ol boy network that controls college football wants no part of what is fair.
That's why you see schools like WVU walking away from a rivalry like Pitt or Nebraska and Oklahoma stopping a 100 plus year old series. Today it's every program for themselves. We all like to think that our school would "do the right thing". The truth is "the right thing" might involve looking out for number one above all else. Sadly it's a game of conference musical chairs right now and you don't want to be left without a seat.
CJ
You speak the truth.
It's been that way since 1978, when I started watching the NCAA tournament. For many years, the Big 10 would get six teams in and only one would make it to the second round. But the media loves them ....
That is because those Big Ten losses will be heavily watched by Big Ten fans. The make up of the 64 isn't ALL about who the best teams are. I figured folks would take the lesson learned from football and apply it to similar situations in basketball such as this.
Quote:IOW, a middle team like UAB wants to make the same amount as Alabama and Auburn, but as soon as they do, they want to shut the door and keep Troy and USA from demanding THEIR "fair share" which would lower UAB's "fair share"
UAB and UAT share a Board of Trustees and are one "system." Those fine facilities in Tuscaloosa - this year, $8 million for a stadium media center, $5 million for a new parking lot, $62 million for a cafeteria, $15 million for a frat house (the BOT pres' old frat dontcha know), $25 million for a new student center to accommodate a larger Starbucks and on and on - have been built with bonds issued by the "system" and backed by system revenue. Not campus revenue, system revenue. Seventy (70) percent of system revenue is generated by UAB. Not Tuscaloosa. UAB. Yet over three-quarters of facilities spending this year has been for Tuscaloosa.
What we want is a level playing field - equal representation on the system board, or our own board. Then we can talk about "fair shares." But not while Tuscaloosa remains a treebagging leech feeding off the economic engine that is UAB.
I have always advocated for a 16 team playoff because it could include conference champs and at larges. At this point, it appears we may only have 9 D-1 conferences in the near future. That leaves 7 at large bids. Very inclusive, but not diluted. MAC champ and SB champ get in, which gives all of their games meaning throughout the year. It may mean that LSU versus Bama regular season game means less....but, err....thats actually about the same as now, huh?
Each school wouldnt get that much, the schools that make it in the playoff get more. And the farther you go, the more money you make.
I think 16 is the perfect number, its just lining up the conference champs and anyone left in the Top 10. IMO, there is not much separation between #5 and #7 in the Top 10. And anything that puts postseason football on campus and takes away the good old boy netwrok in college football is good in my book. Give the biggest conferences most of the revenue, lets just play it out on the field more fairly and stop the ridiculous selection process.
(02-25-2012 09:27 AM)CardinalJim Wrote: [ -> ] (02-25-2012 07:55 AM)bronconick Wrote: [ -> ]On what planet is Michigan and Alabama going to agree to an equal split of cash with Middle Tennessee State and Buffalo?
I see your point. It should, however, be the same planet that God awful basketball teams from The Big 10 and SEC get charity first round high seed paydays in the NCAA tournament while more deserving programs from the OVC, MVC, WCC and others stay home. My point is most seasons The Big 10 deserves no more than 4 bids but almost always gets 6 on name alone. The SEC like wise usually doesn't deserve more than 3 but usually gets 5. What's fair is fair. Unfortunately the good ol boy network that controls college football wants no part of what is fair.
That's why you see schools like WVU walking away from a rivalry like Pitt or Nebraska and Oklahoma stopping a 100 plus year old series. Today it's every program for themselves. We all like to think that our school would "do the right thing". The truth is "the right thing" might involve looking out for number one above all else. Sadly it's a game of conference musical chairs right now and you don't want to be left without a seat.
CJ
And yet fans of Big East football schools bitched on these boards incessantly from 2003 on about ND "looking out for number one" and not "saving" the football conference by giving up its independence and taking a hit to its football program to help the BE.
I used to argue all of the time that ND was only doing what every other school was doing and should be doing....looking out for its own best interests.
Many BE posters thought that ND should give up its then existing advantages in football to thank the BE for helping its basketball program.
Now, everyone agrees that football is king and drives the bus, that basketball (especially at ND) is a poor, distant second.
Will those posted now acknowledge that their school would have done the same thing that ND did from 2003 on, i.e. look after its own interests?