Just one man's opinion, but there's some truth to it

"The dream division of Alden -- and many of the athletic directors and presidents at the top of the Division I food chain -- is a group of like-minded, similarly funded athletic departments. Alden didn't say this, but a good rule of thumb would be the current BCS automatic qualifying conferences. (Whether the Big East is included in that group would depend on the results of the league's upcoming media rights negotiation.)"

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/wr...z1rqwHkYpr

The article is his opinion, but it repeats the popular position that the BCS will break away from the NCAA, or form its own division, and thus eliminate the VCUs and George Masons of the world from March Madness.

He also seems to think we (the Big East) are on the fence between the haves and have nots. Let's hope if that ever happens, we fall on the right side of the divide. I think we will.

(04-12-2012 03:37 PM)TripleA Wrote:  The article is his opinion, but it repeats the popular position that the BCS will break away from the NCAA, or form its own division, and thus eliminate the VCUs and George Masons of the world from March Madness.

He also seems to think we (the Big East) are on the fence between the haves and have nots. Let's hope if that ever happens, we fall on the right side of the divide. I think we will.

I think that statement says everything you need to know about why the big east went after the schools it did.

"The big schools aren't only tired of sharing their revenue with the small schools. They're tired of one-size-fits-all rules that treat a school with a $10 million annual budget the same as a school with a $100 million annual budget."

I never quite understand this logic. Don't pro leagues use one-size-fits-all rules? Aren't the Royals treated the same way as the Yankees?

Sorry if this is old news but has anyone heard weather or not the Big East is going to start its own TV channel for tier 3 Football games and Basketball games? Seems to me that their is plenty of inventory especially during basketball season. I know the mtn got a lot of heat and was very unpopular but I hope the Big East starts its own channel. We won t have the same problem the mtn had, cable and satellite providers will be forced to carry it with all of the demand it will create.

(04-12-2012 08:20 PM)Boisestate78 Wrote:  Sorry if this is old news but has anyone heard weather or not the Big East is going to start its own TV channel for tier 3 Football games and Basketball games? Seems to me that their is plenty of inventory especially during basketball season. I know the mtn got a lot of heat and was very unpopular but I hope the Big East starts its own channel. We won t have the same problem the mtn had, cable and satellite providers will be forced to carry it with all of the demand it will create.

Considering that cable providers had to be forced to carry the Big Ten Network, IIRC, and nobody has volunteered to carry the Longhorn Network (even in TX), I wouldn't say that there's instant demand for a national Big East network. Heck, I love tOSU, but almost never watch the BTN.

(04-12-2012 04:35 PM)justinslot Wrote:  "The big schools aren't only tired of sharing their revenue with the small schools. They're tired of one-size-fits-all rules that treat a school with a $10 million annual budget the same as a school with a $100 million annual budget."

I never quite understand this logic. Don't pro leagues use one-size-fits-all rules? Aren't the Royals treated the same way as the Yankees?

Why would the biggest programs want to continue sharing revenue with the smaller conferences?

(04-12-2012 09:17 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-12-2012 04:35 PM)justinslot Wrote:  "The big schools aren't only tired of sharing their revenue with the small schools. They're tired of one-size-fits-all rules that treat a school with a $10 million annual budget the same as a school with a $100 million annual budget."

I never quite understand this logic. Don't pro leagues use one-size-fits-all rules? Aren't the Royals treated the same way as the Yankees?

Why would the biggest programs want to continue sharing revenue with the smaller conferences?

I think in terms of the NCAA tourney, how much would the overall pie shrink if they didn't include the smaller schools? How much do viewers drop off, etc. Is it really worth it to find that out?

(04-12-2012 09:41 PM)Jassbale Wrote:  

(04-12-2012 09:17 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-12-2012 04:35 PM)justinslot Wrote:  "The big schools aren't only tired of sharing their revenue with the small schools. They're tired of one-size-fits-all rules that treat a school with a $10 million annual budget the same as a school with a $100 million annual budget."

I never quite understand this logic. Don't pro leagues use one-size-fits-all rules? Aren't the Royals treated the same way as the Yankees?

Why would the biggest programs want to continue sharing revenue with the smaller conferences?

I think in terms of the NCAA tourney, how much would the overall pie shrink if they didn't include the smaller schools? How much do viewers drop off, etc. Is it really worth it to find that out?

My guess is that it wouldn't shrink, it would grow. If you had a 32-team tournament full of Duke, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, Ohio State, Indiana, Syracuse, etc. with each game at or near prime time, don't you think that would draw more than a 64-team tournament with a noon weekday game with Norfolk St. as one of the teams?

The thing I find laughable is the idea that the power schools are really losing out on all that much by having to keep the smaller programs around. The Final Four this year was Big East, Big Ten, Big XII, and SEC. Xavier and Ohio were the last non-AQ teams standing in the tourney and they only made the sweet 16. So out of the possible 132 units of NCAA pool money, the AQ conferences got 81 of them. Yep, those same 6 that get 80% of the BCS money are splitting over 60% of the tournament money, too. So as of this year, you have the top 74 teams (20%) getting easily 80% of the money for college sports (if you throw in TV contracts) and they think it's not enough and the little guys are taking too much away.

(04-13-2012 12:50 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(04-12-2012 09:41 PM)Jassbale Wrote:  

(04-12-2012 09:17 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-12-2012 04:35 PM)justinslot Wrote:  "The big schools aren't only tired of sharing their revenue with the small schools. They're tired of one-size-fits-all rules that treat a school with a $10 million annual budget the same as a school with a $100 million annual budget."

I never quite understand this logic. Don't pro leagues use one-size-fits-all rules? Aren't the Royals treated the same way as the Yankees?

Why would the biggest programs want to continue sharing revenue with the smaller conferences?

I think in terms of the NCAA tourney, how much would the overall pie shrink if they didn't include the smaller schools? How much do viewers drop off, etc. Is it really worth it to find that out?

My guess is that it wouldn't shrink, it would grow. If you had a 32-team tournament full of Duke, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, Ohio State, Indiana, Syracuse, etc. with each game at or near prime time, don't you think that would draw more than a 64-team tournament with a noon weekday game with Norfolk St. as one of the teams?

The thing I find laughable is the idea that the power schools are really losing out on all that much by having to keep the smaller programs around. The Final Four this year was Big East, Big Ten, Big XII, and SEC. Xavier and Ohio were the last non-AQ teams standing in the tourney and they only made the sweet 16. So out of the possible 132 units of NCAA pool money, the AQ conferences got 81 of them. Yep, those same 6 that get 80% of the BCS money are splitting over 60% of the tournament money, too. So as of this year, you have the top 74 teams (20%) getting easily 80% of the money for college sports (if you throw in TV contracts) and they think it's not enough and the little guys are taking too much away.

A university's appetite for money is insatiable. The big boys probably figure they should be getting 90% of college basketball money too.

A split from the NCAA is a worst-case scenario for the Big East.

If the "Big Boys" split off from the NCAA, then all recruiting rules will fly out the window and payment of players will begin as a standard practice. If this happens, the Big East is screwed either way. None of our schools have the money to pay recruits or players at the same level as the other BCS Conferences, making us non-competive. If we stay in the NCAA with all of the mid-majors, we will rule the world but won't get any respect and will lose major TV dollars.

If this happens, I hope Congress revokes the tax-exempt status of the Big Boys.

(04-13-2012 06:23 AM)jnewyouth Wrote:  A split from the NCAA is a worst-case scenario for the Big East.

If the "Big Boys" split off from the NCAA, then all recruiting rules will fly out the window and payment of players will begin as a standard practice. If this happens, the Big East is screwed either way. None of our schools have the money to pay recruits or players at the same level as the other BCS Conferences, making us non-competive. If we stay in the NCAA with all of the mid-majors, we will rule the world but won't get any respect and will lose major TV dollars.

If this happens, I hope Congress revokes the tax-exempt status of the Big Boys.

They won't go pro style because Congress would have to revoke the tax exempt status. You'll see genuine equal stipends to all revenue sport athletes. Maybe $10K a year in addition to room, board, tuition, student fees and books. You will probably see a premier division on top of Divisions 1, 2, and 3. The questions then are how do service academy athletics fit in, how does ND football fit in, does BYU join a big 6 conference, do the non-football schools of the Big East get included in Premier Division athletics?

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

(04-13-2012 06:52 AM)brista21 Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 06:23 AM)jnewyouth Wrote:  A split from the NCAA is a worst-case scenario for the Big East.

If the "Big Boys" split off from the NCAA, then all recruiting rules will fly out the window and payment of players will begin as a standard practice. If this happens, the Big East is screwed either way. None of our schools have the money to pay recruits or players at the same level as the other BCS Conferences, making us non-competive. If we stay in the NCAA with all of the mid-majors, we will rule the world but won't get any respect and will lose major TV dollars.

If this happens, I hope Congress revokes the tax-exempt status of the Big Boys.

They won't go pro style because Congress would have to revoke the tax exempt status. You'll see genuine equal stipends to all revenue sport athletes. Maybe $10K a year in addition to room, board, tuition, student fees and books. You will probably see a premier division on top of Divisions 1, 2, and 3. The questions then are how do service academy athletics fit in, how does ND football fit in, does BYU join a big 6 conference, do the non-football schools of the Big East get included in Premier Division athletics?

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

Since most schools have around 600-800 plus student athletes, even at just 600 student athletes, at $10k per year, that's an extra $6 Million per year....and seeing how most of the 340 plus Div I teams don't make money on athletics, doubt a stipend would ever get that high.

Student-athletes already do get some stipends (those that live off-campus) plus other stipends/grants are available based on NEED.

If some schools want stipends to be added/increase...always best to get your foot in the door with a minimal amount (say $100-$200 per month), because its soooo much easier to increase an amount after the stipend has been in effect for quite sometime vs shooting for the stars $10k right out of the box.

Then You get into the problem of the students whom have family with income vs families that don't. Some will argue that the ones with families with money not get the 10k or whatever it becomes, then the have nots will want more money. It would be a Cluster F***!

(04-12-2012 09:17 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Why would the biggest programs want to continue sharing revenue with the smaller conferences?

They don't of course, just most individuals would all prefer not to pay any taxes. There are such matters as public (and congressional) approval to be considered.

(04-13-2012 08:42 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(04-12-2012 09:17 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Why would the biggest programs want to continue sharing revenue with the smaller conferences?

They don't of course, just most individuals would all prefer not to pay any taxes. There are such matters as public (and congressional) approval to be considered.

But seriously, why would the public or congress care if Florida decides not to share with Memphis anymore? Alabama with SDSU? Ohio State with Houston? I doubt this is a top priority ...