(05-03-2013 02:32 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  Spurrier is an a-hole, but UT fans hate him so much I like him.

I wish he was the o coordinator for the Cowboys.
I am a Cowboy's fan...and America's most arrogant team...deserves America's most arrogant offensive mind behind them.
I think his offenses could have worked in the NFL had he had the right players in his system.

(05-05-2013 09:39 PM)BigTex77 Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 02:32 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  Spurrier is an a-hole, but UT fans hate him so much I like him.

I have watched Steve Spurrier for years. Never came across as an a-hole to me. Perhaps it's you?

Perhaps

Some are estimating that once everything kicks in the payout will be as high as 70 million per school.

(05-06-2013 12:53 AM)mjaytee Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 07:44 AM)btiger Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 07:34 AM)tigerjeb Wrote:  ironic....


Arkansas tailback Darren McFadden (5) rushes against South Carolina defensive tackle Stanley Doughty (55) during the third quarter of a Southeastern Conference game in 2005. (AP / April L. Brown)

The National Collegiate Athletics Association Division I manual includes more than 400 pages of mandates for its member schools.

But there is less than a page regarding healthcare for athletes.

Instead, there's a half-page list of healthcare services that institutions may finance should they choose. Athletic departments (with the exception of those in California, where specific legislation has been passed) don't have to publish their healthcare policies in writing, leaving players to rely solely on the promises of recruiters.

In other words, after an incoming student signs a letter of intent binding him or her to a university, many schools have no contractual obligation to treat injuries or strains that result from playing for that college.

link for rest of article
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment...tes/275407

unbelievable.....players need to go on strike.

I, for the life of me, do not understand why they won't. I'm not a labor guy, but if anyone has any reason and leverage to "strike" it is big time college football players. It has gotten to the point that I am embarrassed for them at how passive they are.

Strike = no playing = no exposure = no NFL

(05-06-2013 02:40 PM)WaywardMemphian Wrote:  Some are estimating that once everything kicks in the payout will be as high as 70 million per school.

great ******* business model

(05-06-2013 03:15 PM)Tygrys Wrote:  

(05-06-2013 12:53 AM)mjaytee Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 07:44 AM)btiger Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 07:34 AM)tigerjeb Wrote:  ironic....


Arkansas tailback Darren McFadden (5) rushes against South Carolina defensive tackle Stanley Doughty (55) during the third quarter of a Southeastern Conference game in 2005. (AP / April L. Brown)

The National Collegiate Athletics Association Division I manual includes more than 400 pages of mandates for its member schools.

But there is less than a page regarding healthcare for athletes.

Instead, there's a half-page list of healthcare services that institutions may finance should they choose. Athletic departments (with the exception of those in California, where specific legislation has been passed) don't have to publish their healthcare policies in writing, leaving players to rely solely on the promises of recruiters.

In other words, after an incoming student signs a letter of intent binding him or her to a university, many schools have no contractual obligation to treat injuries or strains that result from playing for that college.

link for rest of article
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment...tes/275407

unbelievable.....players need to go on strike.

I, for the life of me, do not understand why they won't. I'm not a labor guy, but if anyone has any reason and leverage to "strike" it is big time college football players. It has gotten to the point that I am embarrassed for them at how passive they are.

Strike = no playing = no exposure = no NFL

The NFL would set up a minor league system if need be. The players would still get exposure.

(05-06-2013 03:21 PM)fsquid Wrote:  

(05-06-2013 02:40 PM)WaywardMemphian Wrote:  Some are estimating that once everything kicks in the payout will be as high as 70 million per school.

great ******* business model

That the possible payout to each school after the SEC network is in full swing.

For example, Arkansas got it's equal share on tv and bowl proceeds and it was around 21 million in 2012, add what it gets from it's tier 3 rights and that's around 30. Arkansas' athletic revenue was around 70 million. So, if the payout hits the max that's projected at 70 million, that's 40 million more than 2012. What I haven't seen yet are the figures on how it impacts our tier 3 rights. They'll be no more pay per view and I don't know how it effects the in state network that shows a handful of basketball games and pay per view football games along with the stadium and coaches show marketing revenues and radio rights revenue.

Bottom line, it's a gigantic windfall

In this economy it is amazing actually. Something will eventually have to give.

The states that these BCS teams are in...would want a nice piece of that pie.