(05-01-2014 04:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  The big schools are paying more for assistants than some FBS schools are paying for head coaches.

"big schools" How many students? How big are the buildings?

(04-29-2014 04:42 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Fans are better than taxpayers for this particular payment.

Tax payers are already getting screwed. Billions of dollars are switching hands in play off money and TV money that the tax payers are screwed over in cable payments they don't want and have to pay for, and the college institutions aren't paying one cent in taxes on it. Its is corporate profit in the millions per institution in a PRIVATE CLUB situation and it is all tax free.

(04-29-2014 04:55 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Pfffft. Only teams that sell out and have excess demand can get away with increasing ticket prices to cover these costs.

Also, I'm not moved by the crocodile tears of an athletic director who is paid in the high six figures, at least, while he is complaining about the cost of feeding student-athletes.

This or there will be more empty seats. All the greed in college football is going to drive people like me away from the Saturday games the way the Pro teams did. The colleges are getting greedy now too. I use to go to all of the home games for one of my schools and drove 12 hours once a year for another one of my schools. Now I am cutting down on games at the local institution as parking and tickets increase but still make the long drive south because it gets me out of the area and I can tag a round of golf or two on to it before winter sets in up north.

(04-30-2014 05:54 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 05:33 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(04-29-2014 05:51 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Ignoring the G5, the new "changes" that are coming will do serious damage to a number of P5 programs. This is an example of such.

Let's say Iowa St. decides to match player compensation with WHATEVER Texas does. How are they now going to be able to maintain on the facilities/coaching front?

...they likely won't - and that fact alone could really turn most P5 conferences into something similar to La Liga (Spain).

That's the way I see it too. Texas will still be Texas. Always has been and always will be a very powerful and rich athletic program. Same goes for Florida, USC, Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame, Alabama, Oklahoma, Penn State, LSU, etc.

The interesting part will be how second tier P5 programs like Iowa State, Purdue, Mississippi State, Texas Tech, Oregon State, Boston College, Pitt, Wake Forest, etc. will compete against the likes of Texas and Ohio State. Even with all that money they get, they're still at disavantage and the gap will get wider. Do I feel bad for those programs? Absolutely not but it will be interesting watching those programs compete with the heavyweights.

You don't have to be in a P5 conference to compete. Louisville has had a bigger budget than every team in The PAC, Big 12 and ACC except Texas, Oklahoma, Oregon and Florida State while almost making almost nothing from the conference. PSL's, naming rights and luxury boxes are all ways programs can compete. It just requires leadership and a fan base willing to pay the price.
CJ

But what happens when the fan says no and stops paying the INCREASED PRICE year after year while their disposable income continues to spiral downward.

(04-29-2014 04:34 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  http://footballscoop.com/news/13361-iowa-state-ad

Quote:Last week, the NCAA moved forward with legislation that would allow Power Five schools to provide cost-of-attendance scholarships for their student-athletes and would allow programs to provide unlimited food for its athletes, scholarship or walk-on.

It's a long overdue move that was rightly celebrated. Not many, however, have asked the question of what it's all going to cost.

Iowa State athletics director Jamie Pollard has an educated guess. "It would be a big outlay of expenditures for us — probably close to $750,000 (a year)," Pollard told Des Moines Register To cover the cost, the Cyclones would likely have to pass it off to the consumer. "And we're self-funded, so we'd have to pass that on or cut in other areas."

They go on to say that Iowa State only had about a $30K surplus this past season, so the additional costs of the benefits would have to come from other areas.

Price elasticity will dictate who pays for the increase. Given most schools are short on fan support as is, the average fan won't be paying the increase. Instead, schools will cut unpopular programs.

-end of discussion.

(05-03-2014 10:00 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-29-2014 04:34 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  http://footballscoop.com/news/13361-iowa-state-ad

Quote:Last week, the NCAA moved forward with legislation that would allow Power Five schools to provide cost-of-attendance scholarships for their student-athletes and would allow programs to provide unlimited food for its athletes, scholarship or walk-on.

It's a long overdue move that was rightly celebrated. Not many, however, have asked the question of what it's all going to cost.

Iowa State athletics director Jamie Pollard has an educated guess. "It would be a big outlay of expenditures for us — probably close to $750,000 (a year)," Pollard told Des Moines Register To cover the cost, the Cyclones would likely have to pass it off to the consumer. "And we're self-funded, so we'd have to pass that on or cut in other areas."

They go on to say that Iowa State only had about a $30K surplus this past season, so the additional costs of the benefits would have to come from other areas.

Price elasticity will dictate who pays for the increase. Given most schools are short on fan support as is, the average fan won't be paying the increase. Instead, schools will cut unpopular programs.

-end of discussion.

This is why I think you will eventually see a new model in tickets. Extremely expensive premium seating and dirt cheap non-premium tickets.

It creates better long tail potential. Develop a supporters culture of younger fans who sit in one end zone making racket and a family oriented section with low pricing.

With a high/low model you can cultivate fans who may eventually be able to move to premium seating. You also create atmosphere that helps the TV value.

Why worry about a model built with emphasis on middle income earners when they are a shrinking demographic?