Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
Author Message
perimeterpost Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,977
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 132
I Root For: OHIO
Location:
Post: #81
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-11-2013 07:41 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 06:44 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Why should Wake Forrest get a share of 72% of the revenue but Boise State only gets a share of 27%?
Maybe because Wake Forest has 77 years of equity built into the system. They had a seat at the big boy table long before Boise even thought about holding their first truck driving class.

built in equity? you mean 77 years of being an easy conference win to pad other team's records.

so that's it, if you didn't have the dumb luck of being a founding member of the B1G in 1896(N'western), or the SEC in 1932(bandy), or the ACC in 1953(Wake Forrest), before there was even a thing as TV Revenue, then you can go pound sand for the rest of eterity because an old timey boys club doesn't want more competition?

unAmerican.
(This post was last modified: 08-11-2013 08:28 PM by perimeterpost.)
08-11-2013 08:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kaplony Offline
Palmetto State Deplorable

Posts: 25,393
Joined: Apr 2013
I Root For: Newberry
Location: SC
Post: #82
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-11-2013 08:26 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 07:41 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 06:44 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Why should Wake Forrest get a share of 72% of the revenue but Boise State only gets a share of 27%?
Maybe because Wake Forest has 77 years of equity built into the system. They had a seat at the big boy table long before Boise even thought about holding their first truck driving class.

built in equity? you mean 77 years of being an easy conference win to pad other team's records.

so that's it, if you didn't have the dumb luck of being a founding member of the B1G in 1896(N'western), or the SEC in 1932(bandy), or the ACC in 1953(Wake Forrest), before there was even a thing as TV Revenue, then you can go pound sand for the rest of eterity because an old timey boys club doesn't want more competition?

unAmerican.
In Wake's case it goes back to 1936 when they joined the SoCon.

And there are a number of schools in the recent past who have found their way into the big boys club because they were willing to work hard and build their athletic programs into something that was desirable to better conferences. To use your example of Boise....sure they have had a solid football program...but that is about it, both athletically and academically.

And actually it IS the American Way, or what it used to be. What you seem to be asking for is what is quickly becoming the mantra of this country " I didn't do jack chit but I want my share"

What does your own Ohio Bobcats bring to the table that suggests they deserve the same piece of the pie as Ohio State?
(This post was last modified: 08-11-2013 08:46 PM by Kaplony.)
08-11-2013 08:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
perimeterpost Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,977
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 132
I Root For: OHIO
Location:
Post: #83
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-11-2013 08:44 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 08:26 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 07:41 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 06:44 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Why should Wake Forrest get a share of 72% of the revenue but Boise State only gets a share of 27%?
Maybe because Wake Forest has 77 years of equity built into the system. They had a seat at the big boy table long before Boise even thought about holding their first truck driving class.

built in equity? you mean 77 years of being an easy conference win to pad other team's records.

so that's it, if you didn't have the dumb luck of being a founding member of the B1G in 1896(N'western), or the SEC in 1932(bandy), or the ACC in 1953(Wake Forrest), before there was even a thing as TV Revenue, then you can go pound sand for the rest of eterity because an old timey boys club doesn't want more competition?

unAmerican.
In Wake's case it goes back to 1936 when they joined the SoCon.

And there are a number of schools in the recent past who have found their way into the big boys club because they were willing to work hard and build their athletic programs into something that was desirable to better conferences. To use your example of Boise....sure they have had a solid football program...but that is about it, both athletically and academically.

And actually it IS the American Way, or what it used to be. What you seem to be asking for is what is quickly becoming the mantra of this country " I didn't do jack chit but I want my share"

What does your own Ohio Bobcats bring to the table that suggests they deserve the same piece of the pie as Ohio State?

Ohio University plays D1 football in the Football Bowl Sub Division, the same as Ohio State. Therefore they deserve a chance to earn the same piece of the pie. I'm not asking for a handout, that's what teams like Indiana and Wake Forrest get.

Starting in 2014 a 12 year deal with ESPN will pay the 10 FBS conferences $470m per year. 71.5% of that will be divided amongst 5 conferences, the other 5 only get to share 27%.

This is creating a group of Haves and a group of Have Nots that is predetermined regardless of how they perform on the field. Boise State is the winningest team in the BCS era but regardless of their current value to the game and to tv advertisers they get about 1/4 of the tv money compared to do-nothings like WF, IU and Duke.

How is that good for the game?
08-11-2013 09:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NIU007 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,240
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 315
I Root For: NIU, MAC
Location: Naperville, IL
Post: #84
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-11-2013 08:44 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 08:26 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 07:41 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 06:44 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Why should Wake Forrest get a share of 72% of the revenue but Boise State only gets a share of 27%?
Maybe because Wake Forest has 77 years of equity built into the system. They had a seat at the big boy table long before Boise even thought about holding their first truck driving class.

built in equity? you mean 77 years of being an easy conference win to pad other team's records.

so that's it, if you didn't have the dumb luck of being a founding member of the B1G in 1896(N'western), or the SEC in 1932(bandy), or the ACC in 1953(Wake Forrest), before there was even a thing as TV Revenue, then you can go pound sand for the rest of eterity because an old timey boys club doesn't want more competition?

unAmerican.
In Wake's case it goes back to 1936 when they joined the SoCon.

And there are a number of schools in the recent past who have found their way into the big boys club because they were willing to work hard and build their athletic programs into something that was desirable to better conferences. To use your example of Boise....sure they have had a solid football program...but that is about it, both athletically and academically.

And actually it IS the American Way, or what it used to be. What you seem to be asking for is what is quickly becoming the mantra of this country " I didn't do jack chit but I want my share"

What does your own Ohio Bobcats bring to the table that suggests they deserve the same piece of the pie as Ohio State?

There you go again. Who's saying Ohio deserves the same amount as Ohio State? And what exactly does Northwestern bring to the table? What did they do to produce football factories like Ohio State and Michigan? They're just along for the ride.

It's bad for football when you have bad teams that get a lot of money, while good teams who have proved themselves when they had a chance have NO opportunity to break into the old boys club. They're forever limited to second class status by the P5 and by the media.

BTW I just watched a "College football special" on a major network that only mentioned the P5 conferences, and then talked about Heisman candidates, all of which were from P5 schools. That's a lot of built-in bias in the system that G5 teams are fighting against, that didn't exist before.
(This post was last modified: 08-11-2013 09:42 PM by NIU007.)
08-11-2013 09:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Online
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #85
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-11-2013 09:33 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Ohio University plays D1 football in the Football Bowl Sub Division, the same as Ohio State. Therefore they deserve a chance to earn the same piece of the pie. I'm not asking for a handout, that's what teams like Indiana and Wake Forrest get.

Starting in 2014 a 12 year deal with ESPN will pay the 10 FBS conferences $470m per year. 71.5% of that will be divided amongst 5 conferences, the other 5 only get to share 27%.

This is creating a group of Haves and a group of Have Nots that is predetermined regardless of how they perform on the field.

No, it is reflecting an already-existing grouping of haves and have-nots, also reflected in TV revenue, attendance, overall athletic budget, or several other measurable factors that reflect a clear separation between the Tennessees and the Memphises.

There are a handful of outliers who you could argue should be on the other side of the chasm (WSU, Wake Forest, Boise STate, UConn, BYU) but that doesn't reduce the reality of the chasm between the economics of the Big Ten and the economics of the MAC.

You want to say that the playoff distribution _sustains_ the gap between the haves and have-nots formalized by the Bowl Alliance, Bowl Coalition and BCS system? That's true. But you could have split the playoff money equally among every FBS school or every FBS conference and not changed anything important about that gap.

Quote:Boise State is the winningest team in the BCS era but regardless of their current value to the game and to tv advertisers they get about 1/4 of the tv money compared to do-nothings like WF, IU and Duke.

Two of which are all-time blueblood basketball programs, which makes them valuable TV properties. And Wake Forest has made as many BCS bowls in the last 10 years as the MAC has. Is the MAC a do-nothing?
08-11-2013 09:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kaplony Offline
Palmetto State Deplorable

Posts: 25,393
Joined: Apr 2013
I Root For: Newberry
Location: SC
Post: #86
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-11-2013 09:33 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 08:44 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 08:26 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 07:41 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 06:44 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Why should Wake Forrest get a share of 72% of the revenue but Boise State only gets a share of 27%?
Maybe because Wake Forest has 77 years of equity built into the system. They had a seat at the big boy table long before Boise even thought about holding their first truck driving class.

built in equity? you mean 77 years of being an easy conference win to pad other team's records.

so that's it, if you didn't have the dumb luck of being a founding member of the B1G in 1896(N'western), or the SEC in 1932(bandy), or the ACC in 1953(Wake Forrest), before there was even a thing as TV Revenue, then you can go pound sand for the rest of eterity because an old timey boys club doesn't want more competition?

unAmerican.
In Wake's case it goes back to 1936 when they joined the SoCon.

And there are a number of schools in the recent past who have found their way into the big boys club because they were willing to work hard and build their athletic programs into something that was desirable to better conferences. To use your example of Boise....sure they have had a solid football program...but that is about it, both athletically and academically.

And actually it IS the American Way, or what it used to be. What you seem to be asking for is what is quickly becoming the mantra of this country " I didn't do jack chit but I want my share"

What does your own Ohio Bobcats bring to the table that suggests they deserve the same piece of the pie as Ohio State?

Ohio University plays D1 football in the Football Bowl Sub Division, the same as Ohio State. Therefore they deserve a chance to earn the same piece of the pie. I'm not asking for a handout, that's what teams like Indiana and Wake Forrest get.

Starting in 2014 a 12 year deal with ESPN will pay the 10 FBS conferences $470m per year. 71.5% of that will be divided amongst 5 conferences, the other 5 only get to share 27%.

This is creating a group of Haves and a group of Have Nots that is predetermined regardless of how they perform on the field. Boise State is the winningest team in the BCS era but regardless of their current value to the game and to tv advertisers they get about 1/4 of the tv money compared to do-nothings like WF, IU and Duke.

How is that good for the game?

If Boise had the value you seem to think that they have then it seems to me that one of those TV networks who cut the checks would have cut the MWC one big enough to bring them closer than they are. Evidently they don't, so they didn't.
08-11-2013 09:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ohio1317 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,675
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 358
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #87
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
The current structure exists because the top 20-30 power schools like their conferences enough to be willing to give up some of the money they could get in a different type of set-up. The Big Ten isn't getting big money because of Indiana football and the ACC isn't because of Wake Forest. At the end of the day though, a disproportionate part of that money is coming from the top handful of programs in each conference.

All of that is one reason I say conference better be darn careful about all this expansion. I can tell you as an Ohio State fan, I still certainly feel a connection to the Big Ten conference, but I can also tell you it's diminished from the 11 team era and that will likely continue down as we play traditional opponents a lot less often going forward and the Midwestern pride I feel starts to feel less and less like a part of the identity of the conference. I can now imagine scenarios where leaving the conference is a conceivable choice and I couldn't do that in the past. Keep getting bigger and all conferences will start to feel less a key part of the identity of the big schools.
(This post was last modified: 08-11-2013 09:59 PM by ohio1317.)
08-11-2013 09:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #88
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-11-2013 09:58 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The current structure exists because the top 20-30 power schools like their conferences enough to be willing to give up some of the money they could get in a different type of set-up. The Big Ten isn't getting big money because of Indiana football and the ACC isn't because of Wake Forest. At the end of the day though, a disproportionate part of that money is coming from the top handful of programs in each conference.

All of that is one reason I say conference better be darn careful about all this expansion. I can tell you as an Ohio State fan, I still certainly feel a connection to the Big Ten conference, but I can also tell you it's diminished from the 11 team era and that will likely continue down as we play traditional opponents a lot less often going forward and the Midwestern pride I feel starts to feel less and less like a part of the identity of the conference. I can now imagine scenarios where leaving the conference is a conceivable choice and I couldn't do that in the past. Keep getting bigger and all conferences will start to feel less a key part of the identity of the big schools.

And where exactly would Ohio State go?

Kind of an empty threat.
08-11-2013 10:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #89
Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
Some of these "earned place" arguments fail rigorous scrutiny.

The G5 TV ratings aren't as good? I think all of us can agree to the following facts.
1 College football draws better crowds on Saturday
2 College football draws better audiences for TV on Saturday.
3 The casual viewer of college sports seriously views 5 channels. ABC CBS NBC ESPN ESPN2. Games even involving name programs off those channels draw lower ratings.

The sample of G5 games that are on Saturday on one of those 5 channels is virtually non-existent.

If you look at the bowls, few G5 games fall in the desired dates and slots of New Year's Day and the 5 days preceding. Yet still draw reasonably well. In the BCS only twice has a buster involved bowl been the lowest rated BCS game (Hawaii-UGA and NIU-FSU the two least regarded busters).

Last year ArkSt-Kent St, SJSU-Bowling Green and UCF-Ball St individually drew basically the same TV audience as Arizona St-Navy and OkSt-Purdue combined. More people watched Utah St - Toledo than Ole Miss - Pitt.

TV is a "me-too" business with little risk taking. How many singing competitions were on network TV prior to Idol now they are common because it became a proven formula.

TV isn't going to experiment and put ECU-Houston on NBC or ESPN on at 3:30 ET on a Saturday and now has way too much invested in other inventory to take that risk. It's like being a minor league player when a club needs to cut someone to make roster space for the new guys. If you were a 20th round pick playing short and its between you and a 3d round pick from the same draft, you can't be as good as the other guy and survive, you've got to be better because there is too much money tied up in the other guy.

If ESPN has $120 million tied up in the Big XII and $20 million in the AAC then given a choice between Baylor-Iowa St and USF-Navy for the 6pm ESPN2 telecast on Saturday they are going to take Baylor - Iowa St.

There are about 20 programs that will draw great ratings on their own power. The rest draw mainly because of the time slot and channel. Because the nets pay fat money to get those 20 under the conference rights model 40ish teams get access to those channels and time slot because of the size of investment not because they are a draw outside their own area.
08-11-2013 10:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
loki_the_bubba Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,696
Joined: Jul 2010
Reputation: 701
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #90
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-11-2013 08:44 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  In Wake's case it goes back to 1936 when they joined the SoCon.

Compare and contrast Wake with Rice. One got lucky. One did not.
08-11-2013 11:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #91
Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-11-2013 11:38 PM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 08:44 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  In Wake's case it goes back to 1936 when they joined the SoCon.

Compare and contrast Wake with Rice. One got lucky. One did not.

Am I the only who noticed that the "they don't play a tough schedule" argument that was used on busters Utah, Boise and Hawaii was rarely raised regarding TCU. I think TCU's circumstance caused many to avoid that argument.

If Florida State had picked the SEC over the ACC, the ACC might well have ended up in different circumstances.
08-12-2013 12:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #92
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-11-2013 10:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Some of these "earned place" arguments fail rigorous scrutiny.

...

There are about 20 programs that will draw great ratings on their own power. The rest draw mainly because of the time slot and channel. Because the nets pay fat money to get those 20 under the conference rights model 40ish teams get access to those channels and time slot because of the size of investment not because they are a draw outside their own area.

This statement I think get to the heart of the realignment issue. But the issue is that I don't see a viable solution save for some draconian plan to force said 20 teams to play FBS schools they normally wouldn't. These games provide no benefit to the demands driver schools.

UGA has played Boise twice, once in 2005 and again in 2011. No remembers the contest in '05 while everyone points to how massive an upset the '11 loss was for the Dawgs and how this is proof that the Broncos deserve to be included with the big boys.

While Boise does compete, why should UGA or any top school even bother scheduling such opponents? If you're going to risk the loss, you're served playing those large intersection match-ups like UTK vs. OU or 'Bama vs. MSU.


Quote:perimeterpost: Big programs that drive demand do get rewarded, look at the B1G, the disparity amongst its schools is immense. Michigan earns $85m a year in football revenue compared to Indiana who only gets $16m. That is a huge gap for two teams in the same conference. But nobody is suggesting that Michigan share that money, that is their reward for driving demand.

The issue of equitable money distribution is in regards to the revenue allocated to the 10 conferences in FBS that is split 72/27 between the 5 Haves and the 5 Have Nots. Why should Wake Forrest get a share of 72% of the revenue but Boise State only gets a share of 27%?

Its an unfair class system that keeps the poor from rising up and competing with the elite.

You know the answer to that question. The price of the networks getting FSU and Miami is accepting WF and BC. What you are asking for is OSU and UM to negotiate no only on behalf of the B1G, but the MAC as well. What benefit would the power schools get out of such a deal? Going to sleep at night knowing that they haven't fulfilled their fiduciary responsibilities?

The only way to get the 50/50 split that you think should exist is if the NCAA was still in charge of TV distribution. Of course this is pure fantasy because if OU would have lost the Supreme Court case, those 20 power schools would have left the NCAA, taken with them the 60 or so friends of their choosing and paid current FCs schools to fill out the gaps in the schedule.
08-12-2013 07:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 21,880
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1171
I Root For: Jimmy Nippert
Location:
Post: #93
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-11-2013 08:44 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 08:26 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 07:41 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 06:44 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Why should Wake Forrest get a share of 72% of the revenue but Boise State only gets a share of 27%?
Maybe because Wake Forest has 77 years of equity built into the system. They had a seat at the big boy table long before Boise even thought about holding their first truck driving class.

built in equity? you mean 77 years of being an easy conference win to pad other team's records.

so that's it, if you didn't have the dumb luck of being a founding member of the B1G in 1896(N'western), or the SEC in 1932(bandy), or the ACC in 1953(Wake Forrest), before there was even a thing as TV Revenue, then you can go pound sand for the rest of eterity because an old timey boys club doesn't want more competition?

unAmerican.
In Wake's case it goes back to 1936 when they joined the SoCon.

And there are a number of schools in the recent past who have found their way into the big boys club because they were willing to work hard and build their athletic programs into something that was desirable to better conferences. To use your example of Boise....sure they have had a solid football program...but that is about it, both athletically and academically.

And actually it IS the American Way, or what it used to be. What you seem to be asking for is what is quickly becoming the mantra of this country " I didn't do jack chit but I want my share"

What does your own Ohio Bobcats bring to the table that suggests they deserve the same piece of the pie as Ohio State?

I am far from an Ohio State fan, but in all honesty if this is the standard teams were held to there are probably only about 10 teams who deserve the same peach of pie as Ohio State.

It is a good thing other college sports are not holding themselves up to these same standards, or else women's basketball will narrow itself down to a division comprising itself of only of UConn and Tennessee 03-lmfao
08-12-2013 09:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NIU007 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,240
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 315
I Root For: NIU, MAC
Location: Naperville, IL
Post: #94
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-11-2013 09:57 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 09:33 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 08:44 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 08:26 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 07:41 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Maybe because Wake Forest has 77 years of equity built into the system. They had a seat at the big boy table long before Boise even thought about holding their first truck driving class.

built in equity? you mean 77 years of being an easy conference win to pad other team's records.

so that's it, if you didn't have the dumb luck of being a founding member of the B1G in 1896(N'western), or the SEC in 1932(bandy), or the ACC in 1953(Wake Forrest), before there was even a thing as TV Revenue, then you can go pound sand for the rest of eterity because an old timey boys club doesn't want more competition?

unAmerican.
In Wake's case it goes back to 1936 when they joined the SoCon.

And there are a number of schools in the recent past who have found their way into the big boys club because they were willing to work hard and build their athletic programs into something that was desirable to better conferences. To use your example of Boise....sure they have had a solid football program...but that is about it, both athletically and academically.

And actually it IS the American Way, or what it used to be. What you seem to be asking for is what is quickly becoming the mantra of this country " I didn't do jack chit but I want my share"

What does your own Ohio Bobcats bring to the table that suggests they deserve the same piece of the pie as Ohio State?

Ohio University plays D1 football in the Football Bowl Sub Division, the same as Ohio State. Therefore they deserve a chance to earn the same piece of the pie. I'm not asking for a handout, that's what teams like Indiana and Wake Forrest get.

Starting in 2014 a 12 year deal with ESPN will pay the 10 FBS conferences $470m per year. 71.5% of that will be divided amongst 5 conferences, the other 5 only get to share 27%.

This is creating a group of Haves and a group of Have Nots that is predetermined regardless of how they perform on the field. Boise State is the winningest team in the BCS era but regardless of their current value to the game and to tv advertisers they get about 1/4 of the tv money compared to do-nothings like WF, IU and Duke.

How is that good for the game?

If Boise had the value you seem to think that they have then it seems to me that one of those TV networks who cut the checks would have cut the MWC one big enough to bring them closer than they are. Evidently they don't, so they didn't.

So we're supposed to enjoy watching inferior teams lose but still rake in the money, while better teams collect peanuts?

I think college football is on thin ice. That much is shown by decreasing attendance (not sure if ratings have dropped too).
08-12-2013 09:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #95
Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
There is a false argument being made. I don't know of any school saying gimmie half the pie. When a school grosses $4-$5 million on a home game I don't see anyone asking for half.

What does irritate?
A post season system where 5 leagues have colluded to insure a minimum of one spot and potentially 4 spots for each of their teams while the 6th best team that year may be excluded in favor of teams not as good (if the top G5 is 1-5 and the second best is #6 they have no guarantee of participation).

Prior to adoption of CFP one proposal on the table was for a 4 team playoff with 8 premier bowls. Finish 1-4 in the playoff. Finish 5-20 get placed in the 8 premier bowls with a selection committee holding a mandate to respect historic pairings and geography as much as possible. Guess who wouldn't sign off?

So we get a system where a potentially unranked champ gets a guaranteed slot while #6 ends up in Las Vegas or Mobile. We have years of ticket sales data and TV ratings to establish that limp-in team will struggle to sell tickets and will draw low viewership.

All it takes is for a 6-6 division winner to pull the upset in a league title game.
08-12-2013 10:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #96
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-12-2013 10:20 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  There is a false argument being made. I don't know of any school saying gimmie half the pie. When a school grosses $4-$5 million on a home game I don't see anyone asking for half.

You're right, but there is a lot of hate for schools in P5 conferences that are perceived to have very little ROI with regard to CFB. (i.e., Wazzu, IU and WF) Not such much about 'half the pie' and more of 'why do they get this unearned charity and we don't?'

Quote:What does irritate? A post season system where 5 leagues have colluded to insure a minimum of one spot and potentially 4 spots for each of their teams while the 6th best team that year may be excluded in favor of teams not as good (if the top G5 is 1-5 and the second best is #6 they have no guarantee of participation).

Prior to adoption of CFP one proposal on the table was for a 4 team playoff with 8 premier bowls. Finish 1-4 in the playoff. Finish 5-20 get placed in the 8 premier bowls with a selection committee holding a mandate to respect historic pairings and geography as much as possible. Guess who wouldn't sign off?

So we get a system where a potentially unranked champ gets a guaranteed slot while #6 ends up in Las Vegas or Mobile. We have years of ticket sales data and TV ratings to establish that limp-in team will struggle to sell tickets and will draw low viewership.

All it takes is for a 6-6 division winner to pull the upset in a league title game.

I've never heard this story before but if I had to guess as to who vetoed[/quote] it, I'd say the TV networks. They too have loads of research info that say a #15 UF would draw better numbers than a C-USA champ.
08-12-2013 10:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #97
Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
TV liked it. Winner of the rights was guaranteed 11 games with Top 20 teams.
08-12-2013 10:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #98
RE: Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
Bowls are individualized contracts.

They want attendance and TV ratings don't give a crap who supplies it.

So its no wonder they want long term agreements with the winners of the p5 leagues but want nothing to do with the G5 winners save for the one Boise type team that comes along every year.
08-12-2013 12:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #99
Division 4 conference attendance average requirements.
(08-12-2013 12:38 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Bowls are individualized contracts.

They want attendance and TV ratings don't give a crap who supplies it.

So its no wonder they want long term agreements with the winners of the p5 leagues but want nothing to do with the G5 winners save for the one Boise type team that comes along every year.

BCS deal was collective
08-12-2013 01:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.