So... I just returned from a nice beach vacation with several families.

Usually, while on the beach we start solving the worlds problems (after several beers, of course). This year we talked about the rule changes the P5 want, and how it will affect college sports in general.

General consensus... if the P5 break away from the rest of the the D1 schools, or make rule changes that allows for easy transfer of players from non-P5 to P5 schools, college athletics as a whole are done. The OSU and Wisconsin grads were in full agreement, admitting that even they are now having less interest in their alma-mater because of all the upheaval of schools in recent years.

I think the P5 really is at a tipping point here... if they push for their "independence" from the non-P5 when it comes to rules for athletes they could very well find themselves with a significantly smaller audience... including their own alumni.

Here is the breakdown of our little group:

1 University of Dayton graduate (but huge Notre Dame fan)
1 Ohio State University graduate
1 University of Cincinnati graduate (me)
1 Shawnee State University graduate (huge OSU fan, lives in Columbus)
1 University of Wisconsin-Madison graduate
1 Ohio University graduate
1 Wright State University graduate
1 University of Cincinnati current student

Obviously anecdotal, but if people all living in a football crazed state (Ohio) are having these feelings how are the casual fans in areas not so football crazed reacting to what is going on with college athletics?

I don't think it will impact most people. The folks want to see teams play for the trophies that matter. They want to see their state beat the ass holes next door etc.

A breakaway won't change the fact that a huge percentage of G5 school alums and students are still fans of the bigger programs and schools.

I don't think there is a chance the transfer rules get changed to where a G5 guy could transfer into a p5 school and play immediately. i think that is one of the major sticking points quite frankly that the G5 will not bend on.

(07-21-2014 10:56 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I don't think it will impact most people. The folks want to see teams play for the trophies that matter. They want to see their state beat the ass holes next door etc.

A breakaway won't change the fact that a huge percentage of G5 school alums and students are still fans of the bigger programs and schools.

While that may be true in football, it isn't for the other sports, specifically men's basketball. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there has been talk of the stipends going to basketball players as well as making transferring easier in men's basketball as well. You can bet your ass that the grads of the non-P5 schools will be up in arms about anything that could hurt their basketball programs.

(07-21-2014 11:02 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I don't think there is a chance the transfer rules get changed to where a G5 guy could transfer into a p5 school and play immediately. i think that is one of the major sticking points quite frankly that the G5 will not bend on.

And this is where all the adults in college sports (not just the G5 or P5 or whomever) have it wrong.

They are stuck on this model of treating student-athletes as indentured servants, rather than students or employees. They want it to be very difficult for the athlete to cut ties with the school while at the same time it is very easy for the school to kick the athlete to the curb any time they want to.

If the athlete was a regular student, there would be no such restrictions. If an engineering major wants to transfer from a small school to, say, Georgia Tech because GT has an excellent rep in engineering, or because almost all their engineering grads get good jobs -- no one tells the student that he or she can't take engineering courses for a full year after transferring. If the athlete was an employee, again, no such restrictions. A lab technician at a small university gets a better paying job at GT, or maybe they just want to live in Atlanta -- the lab tech doesn't have to stay out of the lab or twiddle their thumbs for a year before starting their new job.

(07-21-2014 11:48 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 11:02 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I don't think there is a chance the transfer rules get changed to where a G5 guy could transfer into a p5 school and play immediately. i think that is one of the major sticking points quite frankly that the G5 will not bend on.

And this is where all the adults in college sports (not just the G5 or P5 or whomever) have it wrong.

They are stuck on this model of treating student-athletes as indentured servants, rather than students or employees. They want it to be very difficult for the athlete to cut ties with the school while at the same time it is very easy for the school to kick the athlete to the curb any time they want to.

If the athlete was a regular student, there would be no such restrictions. If an engineering major wants to transfer from a small school to, say, Georgia Tech because GT has an excellent rep in engineering, or because almost all their engineering grads get good jobs -- no one tells the student that he or she can't take engineering courses for a full year after transferring. If the athlete was an employee, again, no such restrictions. A lab technician at a small university gets a better paying job at GT, or maybe they just want to live in Atlanta -- the lab tech doesn't have to stay out of the lab or twiddle their thumbs for a year before starting their new job.

I don't disagree. I just think it's not going to be where G5 to P5 you don't have to sit out a year- but where P5 to G5 you do(or P5 to P5).

Actually I think this 'transfer rule' would benefit the G5 far more than P5's. Sure the star G5's could move but what about all the depth at the P5's who are riding the pine. Generally P5 recruits go in there thinking it's just a matter of time until they win the job; after a year or two their poisition on the team is going to be pretty clear.

So, as a P5 player, you can wait and see or you can reevalutate and take your talents to a G5 and be an every down starter. There are a lot more of this type of player in the P5's than there are stars in the G5's. Sure, it's going to be a turnstile mentallity in college athletics but I think unintended consequences may favor the G5's here.

p.s. further, perhaps a once and only amnesty transfer after your RS-Soph. year. Would be like the JUCO's who sign after their second year.

(07-21-2014 10:56 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I don't think it will impact most people. The folks want to see teams play for the trophies that matter. They want to see their state beat the ass holes next door etc.

A breakaway won't change the fact that a huge percentage of G5 school alums and students are still fans of the bigger programs and schools.

I think it is naive to assume that everyone will just rally around their local Big State U. There will be a percentage who will just never do that and with very large schools (30K+) being left out of the equation, we are talking significant numbers.

IMO you will see a definite drop in support in cities with NFL franchises who have been left out of the cold (ie. Cincinnati, Houston, Tampa in particular). A lot of the people in those cities support CFB over the NFL franchises for a variety of reasons but one of them being at least the illusion it is not professional sports. Screw their college teams and you will see people in those towns turn off the sets on Saturday and stick to the NFL.

I am not aware of any other business model where big wigs get don't get upset and people get fired when said businesses loses a few percentage points in market share.

(07-21-2014 12:44 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 10:56 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I don't think it will impact most people. The folks want to see teams play for the trophies that matter. They want to see their state beat the ass holes next door etc.

A breakaway won't change the fact that a huge percentage of G5 school alums and students are still fans of the bigger programs and schools.

I think it is naive to assume that everyone will just rally around their local Big State U. There will be a percentage who will just never do that and with very large schools (30K+) being left out of the equation, we are talking significant numbers.

IMO you will see a definite drop in support in cities with NFL franchises who have been left out of the cold (ie. Cincinnati, Houston, Tampa in particular). A lot of the people in those cities support CFB over the NFL franchises for a variety of reasons but one of them being at least the illusion it is not professional sports. Screw their college teams and you will see people in those towns turn off the sets on Saturday and stick to the NFL.

I am not aware of any other business model where big wigs get don't get upset and people get fired when said businesses loses a few percentage points in market share.

You mean rally around the Big State U like they do now?

(07-21-2014 11:02 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I don't think there is a chance the transfer rules get changed to where a G5 guy could transfer into a p5 school and play immediately. i think that is one of the major sticking points quite frankly that the G5 will not bend on.

Correct. That is why it is not part of the autonomy group requests. The rest of the changes are doable or beneficial for the G5 and won't ruin college football. Splitting away and/or drastic changes to transfer rules could ruin everything. It isn't just G5 schools. Imagine if Kentucky, Indiana, Colorado, etc. had to worry about Oregon St., Alabama or FSU poaching their players without a "sitting out" rule.

(07-21-2014 11:02 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I don't think there is a chance the transfer rules get changed to where a G5 guy could transfer into a p5 school and play immediately. i think that is one of the major sticking points quite frankly that the G5 will not bend on.

I agree with stever20 on this. Allowing players to transfer from G5 to P5 and play immediately would be disastrous. I'm ok with P5 players going to G5 teams, and I could possibly be convinced to go with P5 to P5 - as long as ALL P5 scholarships are guaranteed for 4 years and count against the limit whether the player is cut or not. No way do I want a rule that allows Alabama to cut a 3rd string player so they can offer his scholarship to a VT starter. That becomes nothing more than minor league professional ball at that point - which is when I stop watching (and I'm sure I'm not alone). If it's going to be handled like minor league NFL, why not just watch the NFL?

(07-21-2014 12:45 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 12:44 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 10:56 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I don't think it will impact most people. The folks want to see teams play for the trophies that matter. They want to see their state beat the ass holes next door etc.

A breakaway won't change the fact that a huge percentage of G5 school alums and students are still fans of the bigger programs and schools.

I think it is naive to assume that everyone will just rally around their local Big State U. There will be a percentage who will just never do that and with very large schools (30K+) being left out of the equation, we are talking significant numbers.

IMO you will see a definite drop in support in cities with NFL franchises who have been left out of the cold (ie. Cincinnati, Houston, Tampa in particular). A lot of the people in those cities support CFB over the NFL franchises for a variety of reasons but one of them being at least the illusion it is not professional sports. Screw their college teams and you will see people in those towns turn off the sets on Saturday and stick to the NFL.

I am not aware of any other business model where big wigs get don't get upset and people get fired when said businesses loses a few percentage points in market share.

You mean rally around the Big State U like they do now?

It doesn't happen in my city right now to the extent you believe. In college sports Ohio State is at best the third most followed program here (depending on what part of the metro area you are in it they might be fourth).

If people pick up the fact that UC got screwed over a lot of folks in this town will just not watch college football. This town supports the Reds and Bengals over everything else as it stands anyway.

(07-21-2014 11:48 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 11:02 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I don't think there is a chance the transfer rules get changed to where a G5 guy could transfer into a p5 school and play immediately. i think that is one of the major sticking points quite frankly that the G5 will not bend on.

And this is where all the adults in college sports (not just the G5 or P5 or whomever) have it wrong.

They are stuck on this model of treating student-athletes as indentured servants, rather than students or employees. They want it to be very difficult for the athlete to cut ties with the school while at the same time it is very easy for the school to kick the athlete to the curb any time they want to.

If the athlete was a regular student, there would be no such restrictions. If an engineering major wants to transfer from a small school to, say, Georgia Tech because GT has an excellent rep in engineering, or because almost all their engineering grads get good jobs -- no one tells the student that he or she can't take engineering courses for a full year after transferring. If the athlete was an employee, again, no such restrictions. A lab technician at a small university gets a better paying job at GT, or maybe they just want to live in Atlanta -- the lab tech doesn't have to stay out of the lab or twiddle their thumbs for a year before starting their new job.

This is one instance where trying to compare a regular student versus an athlete does NOT work.

The athletes can still transfer academically without penalty. We are talking about an extra-curricular activity that they were recruited to a school for.

Why should say, Weber State, that took a chance on an under-recruited kid like Damian Lilliard have to worry about coaching him up, getting him great, then Utah swooping in and stealing him? That is insane.



if anything, college should be stricter on the coaches as well.

(07-21-2014 12:45 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 12:44 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 10:56 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I don't think it will impact most people. The folks want to see teams play for the trophies that matter. They want to see their state beat the ass holes next door etc.

A breakaway won't change the fact that a huge percentage of G5 school alums and students are still fans of the bigger programs and schools.

I think it is naive to assume that everyone will just rally around their local Big State U. There will be a percentage who will just never do that and with very large schools (30K+) being left out of the equation, we are talking significant numbers.

IMO you will see a definite drop in support in cities with NFL franchises who have been left out of the cold (ie. Cincinnati, Houston, Tampa in particular). A lot of the people in those cities support CFB over the NFL franchises for a variety of reasons but one of them being at least the illusion it is not professional sports. Screw their college teams and you will see people in those towns turn off the sets on Saturday and stick to the NFL.

I am not aware of any other business model where big wigs get don't get upset and people get fired when said businesses loses a few percentage points in market share.

You mean rally around the Big State U like they do now?

Living in the deep south probably distorts your view just a little. It doesn't work that way in most parts of the country. In the Northeast people really don't give a rip about rallying behind any college program. Same with places in the mountain time zones. Other states have a lot of split allegiances like Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, etc. even more so in the towns that have professional sports.

Frankly, there aren't THAT many college sports fans out there that truly "rally behind" anybody. Most people simply don't care.

(07-21-2014 01:08 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 11:48 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 11:02 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I don't think there is a chance the transfer rules get changed to where a G5 guy could transfer into a p5 school and play immediately. i think that is one of the major sticking points quite frankly that the G5 will not bend on.

And this is where all the adults in college sports (not just the G5 or P5 or whomever) have it wrong.

They are stuck on this model of treating student-athletes as indentured servants, rather than students or employees. They want it to be very difficult for the athlete to cut ties with the school while at the same time it is very easy for the school to kick the athlete to the curb any time they want to.

If the athlete was a regular student, there would be no such restrictions. If an engineering major wants to transfer from a small school to, say, Georgia Tech because GT has an excellent rep in engineering, or because almost all their engineering grads get good jobs -- no one tells the student that he or she can't take engineering courses for a full year after transferring. If the athlete was an employee, again, no such restrictions. A lab technician at a small university gets a better paying job at GT, or maybe they just want to live in Atlanta -- the lab tech doesn't have to stay out of the lab or twiddle their thumbs for a year before starting their new job.

This is one instance where trying to compare a regular student versus an athlete does NOT work.

The athletes can still transfer academically without penalty. We are talking about an extra-curricular activity that they were recruited to a school for.

Why should say, Weber State, that took a chance on an under-recruited kid like Damian Lilliard have to worry about coaching him up, getting him great, then Utah swooping in and stealing him? That is insane.



if anything, college should be stricter on the coaches as well.

And what if Weber ST. has a great freshman QB and this guy can't play, but he has a chance at Utah. Same thing would apply with a drama major. Would you say they couldn't do plays at their new school for a year? I'm totally with Wedge on this.

Have big penalties for recruiting other's students so that if they get caught, the cost is way too much. But allow the students to do things that they believe are in their best interest.

There's a big difference between doing a play and competing in a sport though. AFIK there isn't a million dollar play industry where schools are competing with each other. That's the million dollar difference

(07-21-2014 01:08 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 11:48 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 11:02 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I don't think there is a chance the transfer rules get changed to where a G5 guy could transfer into a p5 school and play immediately. i think that is one of the major sticking points quite frankly that the G5 will not bend on.

And this is where all the adults in college sports (not just the G5 or P5 or whomever) have it wrong.

They are stuck on this model of treating student-athletes as indentured servants, rather than students or employees. They want it to be very difficult for the athlete to cut ties with the school while at the same time it is very easy for the school to kick the athlete to the curb any time they want to.

If the athlete was a regular student, there would be no such restrictions. If an engineering major wants to transfer from a small school to, say, Georgia Tech because GT has an excellent rep in engineering, or because almost all their engineering grads get good jobs -- no one tells the student that he or she can't take engineering courses for a full year after transferring. If the athlete was an employee, again, no such restrictions. A lab technician at a small university gets a better paying job at GT, or maybe they just want to live in Atlanta -- the lab tech doesn't have to stay out of the lab or twiddle their thumbs for a year before starting their new job.

This is one instance where trying to compare a regular student versus an athlete does NOT work.

The athletes can still transfer academically without penalty. We are talking about an extra-curricular activity that they were recruited to a school for.

Why should say, Weber State, that took a chance on an under-recruited kid like Damian Lilliard have to worry about coaching him up, getting him great, then Utah swooping in and stealing him? That is insane.

Why? Because it's not reciprocal. If Weber State gives a scholarship to a player who ends up disappointing them (obviously not Lillard), then they can and do tell the kid that his playing time is gone and his scholarship will not be renewed, forcing him to transfer out. That happens every single year at schools all over the country, P5, or G5, or no-football schools, you name it. And even when they force the player out, the player has to sit for a year before playing at his new school. Basketball coaches, in particular, are notorious for starting a job at a new school with the condition that they be allowed to revoke as many scholarships as they want so they can fill their scholarship limit with guys they recruited.

If schools guaranteed tuition, r&b, and "full cost of attendance" not just for one year, but for every semester/quarter that the athlete is enrolled in school, as long as they want, until they are awarded their bachelor's degree (as Delany once suggested), then you would have something closer to a two-way street.

Also, if a player is not on scholarship, your reasons for restricting his/her transfer go out the window entirely.

(07-21-2014 01:35 PM)stever20 Wrote:  There's a big difference between doing a play and competing in a sport though. AFIK there isn't a million dollar play industry where schools are competing with each other. That's the million dollar difference

Why is that relevant?

There is still competition between schools for the best drama department. There is still the potential to go "pro."

I liked Bob Bowlsby's terminology-Not "P5," not "high revenue," not "contract," but "high visibility."

The other terms are a little of branding terms distinguishing them (or denigrating the others) from the others. The latter is simply more descriptive.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca.../12941181/

I would imagine Teams Like Kentucky, Indiana, Wake forest, Washington State, Vanderbilt, Iowa State, etc would hate to see their stars all transfer to the top programs. I think they might hesitate a bit on that one