“As time goes on, there's not a lot of similarities,” Hyman said. “And the gap has gotten larger. To be able to have the autonomy, there are things we'd like to be able to do. And now I think we'll be able to do them a lot faster than we have in the past.”

Within the 65, some are more powerful than others. Florida is not the same as Vandy even if the television revenue distribution is equal.

If we're talking about raw power on a broader scale, is Wake Forest really that much different than NIU? Is Mississippi State that much more powerful than UCF?

Maybe there's a slight edge in tradition, but not always on the field.

If money equals power, however, then the answer is a resounding yes. Sixty-five found the right side of the television revenue line, even if 30 or so aren't all that powerful.

But Hyman doesn't sense power plays on the autonomy issue among 14 members. When officials leave meetings, “we are the SEC,” Hyman said.

Florida athletic director Jeremy Foley runs one of the SEC's proudest programs but probably speaks for the league when saying, “the time has come” for change.

“For the longest time we haven't had total control of how we run our enterprise,” Foley said. “There are things that need to get done related to our students and how we do our business…We're not trying to upset the apple cart. I think that time has come. That's what people are thinking.”

Sure sounds like Power 5 language.f


http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...er-playing

(05-29-2014 01:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  “For the longest time we haven't had total control of how we run our enterprise,” Foley said. “There are things that need to get done related to our students and how we do our business…We're not trying to upset the apple cart. I think that time has come. That's what people are thinking.”

public institutions forming private clubs, sounds pretty fishy.

(05-29-2014 02:12 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 01:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  “For the longest time we haven't had total control of how we run our enterprise,” Foley said. “There are things that need to get done related to our students and how we do our business…We're not trying to upset the apple cart. I think that time has come. That's what people are thinking.”

public institutions forming private clubs, sounds pretty fishy.

Good point. In my experience whenever any institution has "total" control over anything, it rarely turns out well.

It's worse when the institution is public, because at least private institutions have the fear of bankruptcy keeping them on their toes. But elite private colleges have such big endowments that they don't have that fear and are as removed from responsibility as public schools.

Public Universities are already part of numerous private clubs like the AAU and CIC and , of course, athletic conferences.

The quest for greed and power ultimately destroys things. Removing tradition, fun, and amateurism doesn't actually help the tens of thousands of student-athletes. It helps an elite few...maybe.

(05-29-2014 03:51 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  The quest for greed and power ultimately destroys things. Removing tradition, fun, and amateurism doesn't actually help the tens of thousands of student-athletes. It helps an elite few...maybe.

Yep. You don't know what you've got 'til it's gone.

The greatest risk to a nation, corporation, organization is when all the moves have been turning out right and the leadership becomes convinced that it is solely because they are smarter than everyone else with no recognition of the various things that luckily turned the right way or the instances when timing just happened to be right.

Once that happens the conversation moves from what should be done to what can be done. Lines get pushed and hubris leads to little introspection on decisions.

The P5 are walking into this territory.

Right now they are promoting good ideas, full cost of attendance, guaranteed scholarships, freer transfer rules, improved degree completion programs, possible trust funds for post-graduation receipt of revenue earned for use of likeness.

But that doesn't mean they will stick with the high ideals. If they push toward professionalism and push toward ever more profitable alignments forget the talk of the "65" because it won't just be Rice, Houston, SMU, UConn, and Temple talking about when they used to be in a power conference, they will just be the early waves.

Right now the P5 are sweating the fact they've become litigation targets but bump the money even more and this is just the start. Add a dash of economic crisis in academics and before you know it the government comes into to sort things out.

Never forget that nearly $2 billion in revenue collected by the networks is deducted from their taxable income and transferred to non-taxable non-profit entities and then you have the billions deducted from income as a charitable donation that flows to these non-taxable non-profit entities.

(05-29-2014 03:51 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  The quest for greed and power ultimately destroys things. Removing tradition, fun, and amateurism doesn't actually help the tens of thousands of student-athletes. It helps an elite few...maybe.

I do like how the G5 likes to pretend this isn't about losing YOUR access to the P5's money and exposure.

Just be honest and say "If we don't get to nominally be in the same division as the P5 and lose access to the money and exposure they generate that we cant generate for ourselves, our fans will lose interest and our programs are going to be in serious trouble!"

(05-29-2014 06:12 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 03:51 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  The quest for greed and power ultimately destroys things. Removing tradition, fun, and amateurism doesn't actually help the tens of thousands of student-athletes. It helps an elite few...maybe.

I do like how the G5 likes to pretend this isn't about losing YOUR access to the P5's money and exposure.

Just be honest and say "If we don't get to nominally be in the same division as the P5 and lose access to the money and exposure they generate that we cant generate for ourselves, our fans will lose interest and our programs are going to be in serious trouble!"

Strangely, from the G5 its not about the money at all. My guess is if the P5 offered a 16 team play off where every conference was AQ, but the P5 kept all the money---I suspect the G5 would take that deal in an instant. I KNOW the G5 fans would accept the deal. The funny thing is, from a TV standpoint, the P5 should actually be promoting interaction with the G5. The P5 are mostly nearing the upper end of what they can realistically be. The growth in any industry is in the new markets. The biggest potential lies in the FBS schools in the G5. If you could get rid of the in-fighting and turf battles---if there were a college football commisioner over all of FBS---I wonder what he would do to maximize the value of the sport over the long haul.

(05-29-2014 06:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 06:12 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 03:51 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  The quest for greed and power ultimately destroys things. Removing tradition, fun, and amateurism doesn't actually help the tens of thousands of student-athletes. It helps an elite few...maybe.

I do like how the G5 likes to pretend this isn't about losing YOUR access to the P5's money and exposure.

Just be honest and say "If we don't get to nominally be in the same division as the P5 and lose access to the money and exposure they generate that we cant generate for ourselves, our fans will lose interest and our programs are going to be in serious trouble!"

Strangely, from the G5 its not about the money at all. My guess is if the P5 offered a 16 team play off where every conference was AQ, but the P5 kept all the money---I suspect the G5 would take that deal in an instant. I KNOW the G5 fans would accept the deal. The funny thing is, from a TV standpoint, the P5 should actually be promoting interaction with the G5. The P5 are mostly nearing the upper end of what they can realistically be. The growth in any industry is in the new markets. The biggest potential lies in the FBS schools in the G5. If you could get rid of the in-fighting and turf battles---if there were a college football commisioner over all of FBS---I wonder what he would do to maximize the value of the sport over the long haul.

Plus, there's money in a good Cinderella story. Why would they want to lock that possibility out?

You might be right about the money, but that's why I said exposure too. If the G5 is no longer in the same division as the P5 and cant at least in theory compete for the same title then the interest will dry up and blow away

I have no doubt the G5 would give all the money up from a playoff if only their champions could be seen as equal to the champions of the P5.

But that is my point. You arent concerned about amateurism or honor. You're worried about protecting your bottom lines too. That's why no G5 ever left for FCS to play in a real playoff. The money wasn't good enough.

(05-29-2014 06:35 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  You might be right about the money, but that's why I said exposure too. If the G5 is no longer in the same division as the P5 and cant at least in theory compete for the same title then the interest will dry up and blow away

I have no doubt the G5 would give all the money up from a playoff if only their champions could be seen as equal to the champions of the P5.

I don't think anyone would argue that. Highest level = more fans, viewers, $$, exposure..etc. If there was a split and the best HS recruits and coaches went to the G5 instead of the P5 teams, and the G5 teams were sending all of these recruits to the NFL...eventually the fan tables would start to turn. Demand for G5 football would increase and P5 would decrease...eventually to a complete 180. But that won't ever happen.

(05-29-2014 06:12 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 03:51 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  The quest for greed and power ultimately destroys things. Removing tradition, fun, and amateurism doesn't actually help the tens of thousands of student-athletes. It helps an elite few...maybe.

I do like how the G5 likes to pretend this isn't about losing YOUR access to the P5's money and exposure.

Just be honest and say "If we don't get to nominally be in the same division as the P5 and lose access to the money and exposure they generate that we cant generate for ourselves, our fans will lose interest and our programs are going to be in serious trouble!"

If there is a total split in all sports and governance I can deal. It's not like the P5 school in our state is ever going to man up and play us.

What will damage us all in G5 is being in a sports league where half the league does everything in its power to make the other half completely uncompetitive with them on the field in order to convince their fans that they've had a successful season and to buy more t-shirts.

It is no longer about sports or student-athletes or fun. It is about marketing, branding, and consuming. If competition, traditions, sports, student-athletes, or institutions of higher education need to be stabbed in the neck to assure the pie remains undivided..oh well.

Accusing the G5 of being the money grubbers here is amusing.

(05-29-2014 07:12 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 06:12 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 03:51 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  The quest for greed and power ultimately destroys things. Removing tradition, fun, and amateurism doesn't actually help the tens of thousands of student-athletes. It helps an elite few...maybe.

I do like how the G5 likes to pretend this isn't about losing YOUR access to the P5's money and exposure.

Just be honest and say "If we don't get to nominally be in the same division as the P5 and lose access to the money and exposure they generate that we cant generate for ourselves, our fans will lose interest and our programs are going to be in serious trouble!"

If there is a total split in all sports and governance I can deal. It's not like the P5 school in our state is ever going to man up and play us.

What will damage us all in G5 is being in a sports league where half the league does everything in its power to make the other half completely uncompetitive with them on the field in order to convince their fans that they've had a successful season and to buy more t-shirts.

It is no longer about sports or student-athletes or fun. It is about marketing, branding, and consuming. If competition, traditions, sports, student-athletes, or institutions of higher education need to be stabbed in the neck to assure the pie remains undivided..oh well.

Accusing the G5 of being the money grubbers here is amusing.

That's what he does.

(05-29-2014 06:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Strangely, from the G5 its not about the money at all. My guess is if the P5 offered a 16 team play off where every conference was AQ, but the P5 kept all the money---I suspect the G5 would take that deal in an instant.

Not sure I buy that, but don't feel strongly enough about it to get into a debate about this. I do believe though that many G5 schools entered into FBS in the hopes of hitting it big $$$ and prestige wise.

Quote:The funny thing is, from a TV standpoint, the P5 should actually be promoting interaction with the G5. The P5 are mostly nearing the upper end of what they can realistically be. The growth in any industry is in the new markets. The biggest potential lies in the FBS schools in the G5. If you could get rid of the in-fighting and turf battles---if there were a college football commisioner over all of FBS---I wonder what he would do to maximize the value of the sport over the long haul.

But how many G5 school could one logically argue might potentially bring "new markets" not already covered by the P5 or at the very least significantly add enough support to make it meaningful (in other words, a money-maker to the P5)? What percentage of the G5 do you think could? two-thirds? a half? a third? a quarter?

Cheers,
Neil

(05-29-2014 07:12 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 06:12 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 03:51 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  The quest for greed and power ultimately destroys things. Removing tradition, fun, and amateurism doesn't actually help the tens of thousands of student-athletes. It helps an elite few...maybe.

I do like how the G5 likes to pretend this isn't about losing YOUR access to the P5's money and exposure.

Just be honest and say "If we don't get to nominally be in the same division as the P5 and lose access to the money and exposure they generate that we cant generate for ourselves, our fans will lose interest and our programs are going to be in serious trouble!"

If there is a total split in all sports and governance I can deal. It's not like the P5 school in our state is ever going to man up and play us.

What will damage us all in G5 is being in a sports league where half the league does everything in its power to make the other half completely uncompetitive with them on the field in order to convince their fans that they've had a successful season and to buy more t-shirts.

It is no longer about sports or student-athletes or fun. It is about marketing, branding, and consuming. If competition, traditions, sports, student-athletes, or institutions of higher education need to be stabbed in the neck to assure the pie remains undivided..oh well.

Accusing the G5 of being the money grubbers here is amusing.

Again you act like the G5 is the sacred defender of all that is right in sports when in fact the only thing you're trying to protect is your own bottom line because you know a G5 on its own will have no money, no fans and no exposure.

(05-29-2014 06:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 06:12 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 03:51 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  The quest for greed and power ultimately destroys things. Removing tradition, fun, and amateurism doesn't actually help the tens of thousands of student-athletes. It helps an elite few...maybe.

I do like how the G5 likes to pretend this isn't about losing YOUR access to the P5's money and exposure.

Just be honest and say "If we don't get to nominally be in the same division as the P5 and lose access to the money and exposure they generate that we cant generate for ourselves, our fans will lose interest and our programs are going to be in serious trouble!"

Strangely, from the G5 its not about the money at all. My guess is if the P5 offered a 16 team play off where every conference was AQ, but the P5 kept all the money---I suspect the G5 would take that deal in an instant. I KNOW the G5 fans would accept the deal. The funny thing is, from a TV standpoint, the P5 should actually be promoting interaction with the G5. The P5 are mostly nearing the upper end of what they can realistically be. The growth in any industry is in the new markets. The biggest potential lies in the FBS schools in the G5. If you could get rid of the in-fighting and turf battles---if there were a college football commisioner over all of FBS---I wonder what he would do to maximize the value of the sport over the long haul.

Oh hey, maybe he'd notice that unlike every other sport that rates a blip on the American sports radar CFB was insisting on staggering forward with the same set of rusty old brands that were old timey IN THE SIXTIES?

Completely agree the G5 would trade money for access. Just win, baby (or get in the playoffs at least and get your name out there.)

(05-29-2014 09:17 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Again you act like the G5 is the sacred defender of all that is right in sports when in fact the only thing you're trying to protect is your own bottom line because you know a G5 on its own will have no money, no fans and no exposure.

Never said we're the sacred defender of all college sports. Just said that we aren't the robber barons threatening to stab college sports in the neck.

All of this, of course, should not come as a surprise to anyone. It has been coming down the pike for some time now. What is surprising to me, however, is the NonBCS conferences inability to organize themselves and respond to BCS conference moves in a thoughtful and productive manner.

(05-29-2014 09:17 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Again you act like the G5 is the sacred defender of all that is right in sports when in fact the only thing you're trying to protect is your own bottom line because you know a G5 on its own will have no money, no fans and no exposure.

Don't you think that applies to 70% of the P5 as well. And the G5 could care less about its 'bottom line', all we/they are looking for is far access; then let market forces do the rest.