(06-24-2014 09:50 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09...type=Blogs

if 1/4 of americans are college football fans how many of them follow g5 schools also how many people graduated from g5 or lower level schools and what about the other 75% who do not follow college football.

Most college football fans are woefully ignorant of the fact that MOST Americans don't give a crap about college football.

Sure in Alabama it's huge, it's big in Texas, and it dominates all sports media in Arkansas but end of the day on a national level, most Americans don't care.

Other than a few pockets around the country, a Congressman who said it is irresponsible for a university to spend more than $75 million on athletics and we are going to cut off aid to those schools in the amount they spend on athletics in excess of $75 there would be more people calling it responsible than throwing a fit.

(06-25-2014 08:43 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 09:50 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09...type=Blogs

if 1/4 of americans are college football fans how many of them follow g5 schools also how many people graduated from g5 or lower level schools and what about the other 75% who do not follow college football.

Most college football fans are woefully ignorant of the fact that MOST Americans don't give a crap about college football.

Sure in Alabama it's huge, it's big in Texas, and it dominates all sports media in Arkansas but end of the day on a national level, most Americans don't care.

Other than a few pockets around the country, a Congressman who said it is irresponsible for a university to spend more than $75 million on athletics and we are going to cut off aid to those schools in the amount they spend on athletics in excess of $75 there would be more people calling it responsible than throwing a fit.

My point is an extension of what you have said. Most people who don't follow college football won't give the Congressman any credit for that. But the people who do will punish him. So its not a winning issue for the Congressmen.

(06-24-2014 09:56 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  You've presented your own personal fantasy that you desperately want to come true.

I'm sure every G5 loves the idea of Uncle Sam stepping in and force the NCAA to create a tournament where they automatically get to be included.

I'm saying it's not happening but if you disagree then by all means hold your breath

I don't hold any such fantasy.

But don't be silly and act like you have "won" in the free market. In the last 9 years a government entity has subsidized TAMU football to the tune of around $19 million and before the TV and attendance boom that government subsidy was a much larger portion of revenue.

Intercollegiate football is pushing toward 150 years of existence with the powers established by government aid. It is laughable to claim to stand on your own two feet and having earned some right to be above government interference when you are a governmental operation that has been subsidized throughout existence.

(06-25-2014 08:48 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 08:43 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 09:50 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09...type=Blogs

if 1/4 of americans are college football fans how many of them follow g5 schools also how many people graduated from g5 or lower level schools and what about the other 75% who do not follow college football.

Most college football fans are woefully ignorant of the fact that MOST Americans don't give a crap about college football.

Sure in Alabama it's huge, it's big in Texas, and it dominates all sports media in Arkansas but end of the day on a national level, most Americans don't care.

Other than a few pockets around the country, a Congressman who said it is irresponsible for a university to spend more than $75 million on athletics and we are going to cut off aid to those schools in the amount they spend on athletics in excess of $75 there would be more people calling it responsible than throwing a fit.

My point is an extension of what you have said. Most people who don't follow college football won't give the Congressman any credit for that. But the people who do will punish him. So its not a winning issue for the Congressmen.

That's why the big winner is simply going on TV with a parade of students denied admission to college over far less qualified academically athletes.

(06-25-2014 01:47 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 09:51 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Yes they're going to take away UTs research and give it to more deserving UH until they come to their senses and give the AAC an AQ slot to the playoff

The only thing on display here is your complete detachment from reality

No, but they certainly could say give the other conferences a spot in the playoffs without taking away UT's research. While a P5 school, in general, has more support than a non P5 in their state, the P5 in total, do not always have greater support in their state than the sum of the G5. So screwing over the G5 et al isn't as clear as you make it seem.
80% of the schools, including P5, close tomorrow - tomorrow - but for the spigot of taxpayers dollars. And yet they decry lawmaker involvement when it involves anything else other than giving them the money that they want. They claim "market economics" while depending on the government for their very existence. Taxpayers own most of the schools (and those they don't own, they exempt form income taxes). Talk about a disassociation from reality.

The 65 P5 schools had 28.2 million in football attendance last year. The rest of FBS had less than 10.0 million. FCS, Division II and Division III put together were 11.7 million (bigger than the G5-and combined with them still considerably less than the P5). And the P5 has a lot more T-shirt fans and TV fans.

(06-25-2014 08:51 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 08:48 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 08:43 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 09:50 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09...type=Blogs

if 1/4 of americans are college football fans how many of them follow g5 schools also how many people graduated from g5 or lower level schools and what about the other 75% who do not follow college football.

Most college football fans are woefully ignorant of the fact that MOST Americans don't give a crap about college football.

Sure in Alabama it's huge, it's big in Texas, and it dominates all sports media in Arkansas but end of the day on a national level, most Americans don't care.

Other than a few pockets around the country, a Congressman who said it is irresponsible for a university to spend more than $75 million on athletics and we are going to cut off aid to those schools in the amount they spend on athletics in excess of $75 there would be more people calling it responsible than throwing a fit.

My point is an extension of what you have said. Most people who don't follow college football won't give the Congressman any credit for that. But the people who do will punish him. So its not a winning issue for the Congressmen.

That's why the big winner is simply going on TV with a parade of students denied admission to college over far less qualified academically athletes.

If OBannon wins that's a distinct possibility.

Some schools may drop out and I believe Delany when he says the Big 10 presidents are telling him they won't do it. But when it comes time to pull the trigger most will reconsider.

(06-25-2014 08:58 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 01:47 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 09:51 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Yes they're going to take away UTs research and give it to more deserving UH until they come to their senses and give the AAC an AQ slot to the playoff

The only thing on display here is your complete detachment from reality

No, but they certainly could say give the other conferences a spot in the playoffs without taking away UT's research. While a P5 school, in general, has more support than a non P5 in their state, the P5 in total, do not always have greater support in their state than the sum of the G5. So screwing over the G5 et al isn't as clear as you make it seem.
80% of the schools, including P5, close tomorrow - tomorrow - but for the spigot of taxpayers dollars. And yet they decry lawmaker involvement when it involves anything else other than giving them the money that they want. They claim "market economics" while depending on the government for their very existence. Taxpayers own most of the schools (and those they don't own, they exempt form income taxes). Talk about a disassociation from reality.

The 65 P5 schools had 28.2 million in football attendance last year. The rest of FBS had less than 10.0 million. FCS, Division II and Division III put together were 11.7 million (bigger than the G5-and combined with them still considerably less than the P5). And the P5 has a lot more T-shirt fans and TV fans.

So you are saying the P-5 mafia can get away with whatever they want. Articles claim football players cannot even read at some P-5 schools, but that is OK? Thought it was about education. Athletics was not why colleges were built.