If they are no longer interested in being students, then it is time to give it up. Rice's primary mission is education and sports is secondary. The ESUs can continue to provide athletes to pro sports that are not interested in -providing their own minor league.

I don't disagree with you that amateurism in college sports has become a sham, but if athletes aren't also students, even nominally, then it's just minor league sports. And nobody cares about minor league sports. College sports are the only exception and it's precisely because of the idea that the fans (largely alums) share something in common with the players -- they all are or were students. And while that may be mostly a myth now, there is still some level of plausible deniability that actually turns out to be the whole key to its popularity.

So if we share the same goal of wanting as much favorable publicity as possible for Rice, I don't see how sponsoring a minor-league team that calls itself the "Rice Owls" does anything. I wouldn't watch. I wouldn't care if they beat the "Texas Longhorns" or not. At some point "Texas" fans would stop caring if they beat anybody too. You are presuming the passion and attendance and TV money will all just continue on for this league of "college" teams. I think it would quickly lose everyone's interest. Again, if the whole point is publicity, we'd be better off sponsoring a major league team because then at least people would know it exists. Or we could buy naming rights to a major league stadium.

I would go the other way. I would quadruple the NCAA enforcement staff and give them subpoena power and audit the grades and the players' and families' bank accounts and on and on, and make cheating as close to impossible to get away with as we can. Seems like Rice would have a better chance to thrive in that environment with a truly level playing field than in a lawless one like the present one or yours which takes it the final step. The overall quality of play would decrease (probably significantly) but college sports don't actually need the athletes to be good to be popular, they just need them to be students too.

(06-21-2020 01:07 AM)illiniowl Wrote:  I would quadruple the NCAA enforcement staff and give them subpoena power and audit the grades and the players' and families' bank accounts and on and on, and make cheating as close to impossible to get away with as we can. Seems like Rice would have a better chance to thrive in that environment with a truly level playing field than in a lawless one like the present one ...

Nice. would love to see something like this.

Would the ESUs agree to increase funding for NCAA enforcement? And what are the legal barriers to giving NCAA access to family bank accounts etc.? (Or would it have to be treated like the recent admissions-cheating fraud/scandal civil law convictions involving sports-related admissions for rich kids who weren't actually the elite athletes their parents claimed them to be? Did that involve any NCAA investigators?)

(06-21-2020 06:40 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 01:07 AM)illiniowl Wrote:  I would quadruple the NCAA enforcement staff and give them subpoena power and audit the grades and the players' and families' bank accounts and on and on, and make cheating as close to impossible to get away with as we can. Seems like Rice would have a better chance to thrive in that environment with a truly level playing field than in a lawless one like the present one ...

Nice. would love to see something like this.

Would the ESUs agree to increase funding for NCAA enforcement? And what are the legal barriers to giving NCAA access to family bank accounts etc.? (Or would it have to be treated like the recent admissions-cheating fraud/scandal civil law convictions involving sports-related admissions for rich kids who weren't actually the elite athletes their parents claimed them to be? Did that involve any NCAA investigators?)

My recommendations were all pie in the sky. ;-) The short answer is that the federal government would have to take over enforcement, meaning Congress would have to pass a whole suite of laws. Which I see no appetite for, at all. I think the G5 schools see the system as broken but the P5 schools don't, and they have the clout in Congress and in the NCAA.

The admissions scandal was (IIRC) investigated and prosecuted by the US Attorney's office in Boston after the consultant at the center of it all (Rick Singer) got himself in some sort of federal criminal trouble (taxes maybe?). No real NCAA role as far as I know. It's possible no NCAA rules were even violated - as you note, the kids weren't athletes and didn't compete for the schools where their parents bought them admission.

(06-21-2020 01:07 AM)illiniowl Wrote:  I don't disagree with you that amateurism in college sports has become a sham, but if athletes aren't also students, even nominally, then it's just minor league sports. And nobody cares about minor league sports. College sports are the only exception and it's precisely because of the idea that the fans (largely alums) share something in common with the players -- they all are or were students. And while that may be mostly a myth now, there is still some level of plausible deniability that actually turns out to be the whole key to its popularity.

So if we share the same goal of wanting as much favorable publicity as possible for Rice, I don't see how sponsoring a minor-league team that calls itself the "Rice Owls" does anything. I wouldn't watch. I wouldn't care if they beat the "Texas Longhorns" or not. At some point "Texas" fans would stop caring if they beat anybody too. You are presuming the passion and attendance and TV money will all just continue on for this league of "college" teams. I think it would quickly lose everyone's interest. Again, if the whole point is publicity, we'd be better off sponsoring a major league team because then at least people would know it exists. Or we could buy naming rights to a major league stadium.

I would go the other way. I would quadruple the NCAA enforcement staff and give them subpoena power and audit the grades and the players' and families' bank accounts and on and on, and make cheating as close to impossible to get away with as we can. Seems like Rice would have a better chance to thrive in that environment with a truly level playing field than in a lawless one like the present one or yours which takes it the final step. The overall quality of play would decrease (probably significantly) but college sports don't actually need the athletes to be good to be popular, they just need them to be students too.

Hmmmm. I'm not as confident as you are that cheating can be eliminated by increased NCAA enforcement. I'm not so sure they care too much about it. While I and millions of other fans do care about some minor league sports, that's not exactly what I'm advocating above. I am still interested in students who happen to be athletes that are several levels of talent above intramurals. My suggested model in my post presupposes that people should be paid fairly for their services without unreasonable market obstructions, like the NCAA does by using its anti-trust shield as a sham to support what is calls 'amateurism' but really seems anything but. I do suggest these athletes be students, but am willing to allow theses students to shift the time of their academic focus if they wish to. In my model, they'd have a much better chance of actually being decent students than with [present situation or in what you suggest. Why does the mere fact that they can play a sport(s) at a very high level, which is clearly a talent worth money, disqualify them from exploiting their own talent to the highest bidder? Do we equally disqualify a student who also is an entrepreneur and makes money from a business or invention on the side or concurrently while he is enrolled in college as well? No, of course we don't, because that would be stupid and completely unfair to that kid. So why do we treat the athlete unequally? And remember, a high percentage of athletes are minorities, which makes their treatment even more egregious under the NCAA system. Why don't their lives matter to you?

(06-23-2020 04:05 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 01:07 AM)illiniowl Wrote:  I don't disagree with you that amateurism in college sports has become a sham, but if athletes aren't also students, even nominally, then it's just minor league sports. And nobody cares about minor league sports. College sports are the only exception and it's precisely because of the idea that the fans (largely alums) share something in common with the players -- they all are or were students. And while that may be mostly a myth now, there is still some level of plausible deniability that actually turns out to be the whole key to its popularity.

So if we share the same goal of wanting as much favorable publicity as possible for Rice, I don't see how sponsoring a minor-league team that calls itself the "Rice Owls" does anything. I wouldn't watch. I wouldn't care if they beat the "Texas Longhorns" or not. At some point "Texas" fans would stop caring if they beat anybody too. You are presuming the passion and attendance and TV money will all just continue on for this league of "college" teams. I think it would quickly lose everyone's interest. Again, if the whole point is publicity, we'd be better off sponsoring a major league team because then at least people would know it exists. Or we could buy naming rights to a major league stadium.

I would go the other way. I would quadruple the NCAA enforcement staff and give them subpoena power and audit the grades and the players' and families' bank accounts and on and on, and make cheating as close to impossible to get away with as we can. Seems like Rice would have a better chance to thrive in that environment with a truly level playing field than in a lawless one like the present one or yours which takes it the final step. The overall quality of play would decrease (probably significantly) but college sports don't actually need the athletes to be good to be popular, they just need them to be students too.

Hmmmm. I'm not as confident as you are that cheating can be eliminated by increased NCAA enforcement. I'm not so sure they care too much about it. While I and millions of other fans do care about some minor league sports, that's not exactly what I'm advocating above. I am still interested in students who happen to be athletes that are several levels of talent above intramurals. My suggested model in my post presupposes that people should be paid fairly for their services without unreasonable market obstructions, like the NCAA does by using its anti-trust shield as a sham to support what is calls 'amateurism' but really seems anything but. I do suggest these athletes be students, but am willing to allow theses students to shift the time of their academic focus if they wish to. In my model, they'd have a much better chance of actually being decent students than with [present situation or in what you suggest. Why does the mere fact that they can play a sport(s) at a very high level, which is clearly a talent worth money, disqualify them from exploiting their own talent to the highest bidder? Do we equally disqualify a student who also is an entrepreneur and makes money from a business or invention on the side or concurrently while he is enrolled in college as well? No, of course we don't, because that would be stupid and completely unfair to that kid. So why do we treat the athlete unequally? And remember, a high percentage of athletes are minorities, which makes their treatment even more egregious under the NCAA system. Why don't their lives matter to you?

The way to make the NCAA care about cheating is to give them the ability to levy cash fines against the cheaters.

(06-23-2020 04:14 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  The way to make the NCAA care about cheating is to give them the ability to levy cash fines against the cheaters.

Or force them to forfeit future games and lose out on associated revenue (both TV broadcast and tickets/concessions/parking). Even losing one home game would hit nearly all programs hard, and the prospect of a postseason ban would give nearly all P5 teams (and especially the best ones, in line for a playoff berth) incentive to toe the line.

I know the main argument against this is that it punishes current players for the misdeeds of past coaching staffs/university administrations, but this kind of thing would clean up the bad behavior very quickly. It would also force recruits to do their own due diligence as to the cleanliness of the programs they are interested in to minimize the likelihood of having to forfeit games after they enroll.

Imagine being a high school junior/senior (or prospective transfer) being recruited to a school with a shot of getting lots of visibility by making the playoff. Right now, if you hear stories that current players at that school are getting paid good money under the table you have an incentive to hop on the gravy train. With the penalty I suggested, stories of such payments would instead be a deterrent.

(06-23-2020 06:46 PM)Seventyniner Wrote:  

(06-23-2020 04:14 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  The way to make the NCAA care about cheating is to give them the ability to levy cash fines against the cheaters.

Or force them to forfeit future games and lose out on associated revenue (both TV broadcast and tickets/concessions/parking). Even losing one home game would hit nearly all programs hard, and the prospect of a postseason ban would give nearly all P5 teams (and especially the best ones, in line for a playoff berth) incentive to toe the line.

I know the main argument against this is that it punishes current players for the misdeeds of past coaching staffs/university administrations, but this kind of thing would clean up the bad behavior very quickly. It would also force recruits to do their own due diligence as to the cleanliness of the programs they are interested in to minimize the likelihood of having to forfeit games after they enroll.

Imagine being a high school junior/senior (or prospective transfer) being recruited to a school with a shot of getting lots of visibility by making the playoff. Right now, if you hear stories that current players at that school are getting paid good money under the table you have an incentive to hop on the gravy train. With the penalty I suggested, stories of such payments would instead be a deterrent.

I like my idea better. It puts money in the pocket of the NCAA, and does not hurt players.

CFP and NCAA basketball tournament money should not only be allocated dependent on athletics performance, but also on academic performance. The NCAA has abandoned original mission of promoting true student athletes. It is now an entity that only rewards the accomplishments of power conference members. It has no legitimate function in today's college athletics environment.

Pat Forde definitely aims to be provocative at times (so he's not always everyone's cup of tea), but in his estimation, Rice should make the cut for a reorganized FBS into 10 12-team conferences, with a focus on regional organization, and an expanded FBS playoff.

https://www.si.com/college/2020/06/29/nc...ealignment

Would Rice be ready for something like this? That's a pretty challenging football and basketball (men's and women's) slate, but it does raise Rice's conference profile.

Not going to happen, but worth pondering.

(06-29-2020 10:25 AM)gsloth Wrote:  Pat Forde definitely aims to be provocative at times (so he's not always everyone's cup of tea), but in his estimation, Rice should make the cut for a reorganized FBS into 10 12-team conferences, with a focus on regional organization, and an expanded FBS playoff.

https://www.si.com/college/2020/06/29/nc...ealignment

Would Rice be ready for something like this? That's a pretty challenging football and basketball (men's and women's) slate, but it does raise Rice's conference profile.

Not going to happen, but worth pondering.

Back to the SWC!

That's such a joke that I can't even read past the first two paragraphs.

We’d all take it in a heartbeat. Won’t happen, but it’s fun to dream. Would certainty force Rice to ante up or drop down. That would be a heck of a baseball conference.

My question would be why Rice vs UTSA? History maybe? Fan base in SA potentially dwarfs anything Rice has shown the ability to draw.

(06-29-2020 11:33 AM)Ourland Wrote:  That's such a joke that I can't even read past the first two paragraphs.

Zero chance of anything like that happening, naturally. But with no games being played, writers have to do something. It's fun to think about at the very least.

Nice article today in the comical on Bryce Callahan. That's the good news. Re Rice-he said it was great education, very hard, but said that Rice is not interested in college athletics. Sad, but true...…...

(06-29-2020 01:45 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  Nice article today in the comical on Bryce Callahan. That's the good news. Re Rice-he said it was great education, very hard, but said that Rice is not interested in college athletics. Sad, but true...…...

Yeah that's terrible advertisement, but completely true. I wish he hadn't said that. Rice doesn't give a damn about athletics. Never has, never will.

(06-29-2020 04:21 PM)Ourland Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 01:45 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  Nice article today in the comical on Bryce Callahan. That's the good news. Re Rice-he said it was great education, very hard, but said that Rice is not interested in college athletics. Sad, but true...…...

Yeah that's terrible advertisement, but completely true. I wish he hadn't said that. Rice doesn't give a damn about athletics. Never has, never will.

If never is how you spell 60 years, then I agree...

I would like it since it puts the SWC back together which would make Rice relevant again. It will not happen. One reason is that A&M would not want to leave the SEC.

(06-29-2020 10:34 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 10:25 AM)gsloth Wrote:  Pat Forde definitely aims to be provocative at times (so he's not always everyone's cup of tea), but in his estimation, Rice should make the cut for a reorganized FBS into 10 12-team conferences, with a focus on regional organization, and an expanded FBS playoff.

https://www.si.com/college/2020/06/29/nc...ealignment

Would Rice be ready for something like this? That's a pretty challenging football and basketball (men's and women's) slate, but it does raise Rice's conference profile.

Not going to happen, but worth pondering.

Back to the SWC!

We did care 60 years ago. My parents started taking me to games around 1960 and Rice football was a big thing back then.

(06-30-2020 09:19 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 04:21 PM)Ourland Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 01:45 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  Nice article today in the comical on Bryce Callahan. That's the good news. Re Rice-he said it was great education, very hard, but said that Rice is not interested in college athletics. Sad, but true...…...

Yeah that's terrible advertisement, but completely true. I wish he hadn't said that. Rice doesn't give a damn about athletics. Never has, never will.

If never is how you spell 60 years, then I agree...

This thread is subject to the thread clean up announcement. Mods please proactively split this thread.