As with most aspects of life, the political ramifications of college athletics can not be ignored.

Does anyone really think that the Senators from Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, New Mexico, etc. will sit idly by if their state flagship schools are relegated to a lower division?

The Mountain West has more "Senate votes" than any conference not named B1G or SEC. Big Sky and America East are right up there with the American. I just don't see the Mountain West being left out of any Division 4. And I don't see a total breakaway being feasible unless it includes more of the flagship schools from states not in P5 conferences.

Worse than the politics, you are reducing competition in the marketplace.

this is my point exactly. i have remained adamant that the flagship schools/service academies will get the first dibs of p5/div 4 inclusion. the states that have a strong number of public schools outside the p5, top of the g5 texas/florida will manage to get their schools in by hassling texas/ou/fla/fsu/tech/okie jr.

and other than the political power of the flagship schools they are just good to have for the name association. schools love playing flagships/major land grants because they represent a school of elevated status

(08-13-2013 01:38 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Worse than the politics, you are reducing competition in the marketplace.

How much sway does Arkansas State have in Arkansas? Would your Senators go to bat for you, or as long as the Razorbacks benefit more, you are screwed?

(08-13-2013 01:35 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  As with most aspects of life, the political ramifications of college athletics can not be ignored.

Does anyone really think that the Senators from Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, New Mexico, etc. will sit idly by if their state flagship schools are relegated to a lower division?

The Mountain West has more "Senate votes" than any conference not named B1G or SEC. Big Sky and America East are right up there with the American. I just don't see the Mountain West being left out of any Division 4. And I don't see a total breakaway being feasible unless it includes more of the flagship schools from states not in P5 conferences.

How many senate votes do all of the P5 conference states have compared to the Mountain West conference?

It really is a moot question, because the politicans will never get involved in this.

Once they decide they want to tax the massive profits, they will get involved. Start paying players and this could be step one of their involvement. Re-alignment, not so much, padding the coffers, heck yes.

(08-13-2013 01:49 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 01:35 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  As with most aspects of life, the political ramifications of college athletics can not be ignored.

Does anyone really think that the Senators from Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, New Mexico, etc. will sit idly by if their state flagship schools are relegated to a lower division?

The Mountain West has more "Senate votes" than any conference not named B1G or SEC. Big Sky and America East are right up there with the American. I just don't see the Mountain West being left out of any Division 4. And I don't see a total breakaway being feasible unless it includes more of the flagship schools from states not in P5 conferences.

How many senate votes do all of the P5 conference states have compared to the Mountain West conference?

It really is a moot question, because the politicans will never get involved in this.

the mwc has a service academy which is a lot of senate influence. plus colorado state which locks up the state of colorado. utah st & byu lock up utah. (byu is not MWC, but they have common interests here and will use their political pressure as well.) colorado/utah wont be able to fend off all that political pressure so they will be forced to cave, and if they cave the pac12 has to cave to their two schools who will be forced to vote against not including the mwc. (just like how the acc caved to virginia who caved to their politicians, or how baylor got into the b12)

plus theres
nevada is locked up cuz unlv has common interests.
new mexico has two mwc st. schools
hawaii/montana/wyoming is locked up with their one state school

i count 7 states who will raise hell over this......
so yeah believe it or not these guys have the political power to do some serious damage.

(08-13-2013 01:46 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 01:38 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Worse than the politics, you are reducing competition in the marketplace.

How much sway does Arkansas State have in Arkansas? Would your Senators go to bat for you, or as long as the Razorbacks benefit more, you are screwed?

Governor is an alum featured in our ads, hosts fund-raisers for athletics at the mansion, wouldn't allow the school to comp his tickets so that there would be no confusion on who the seats belong to when he left office.

Speaker of the House is an alum and he and the governor ate together at the GoDaddy Bowl alumni event in one of those rare cross-aisle bi-partisan efforts.

(08-13-2013 02:02 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  Once they decide they want to tax the massive profits, they will get involved. Start paying players and this could be step one of their involvement. Re-alignment, not so much, padding the coffers, heck yes.

Yea, you do not want the politicians involved, and IMO they will get involved if something as big as a Division I split happens.

(08-13-2013 02:02 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  Once they decide they want to tax the massive profits, they will get involved. .

That is why I never believed or believe it will happen. It's one thing to have tax exempt status grandfathered in. It's another to leave the for the obvious main purpose of keeping more money for yourself, and think the IRS will just sit back and rubber stamp a tax exempt status. The NFL has tax exempt status. Think if a new football league formed today they would get it?

This is exactly what we need, politicians and the government deciding who plays college football at the highest level.

Here’s an idea, how about all the TV and bowl money, ticket sale revenue along with the equipment sponsorship money from companies like Nike and Under Armour, merchandising and booster donations all goes into a pot managed by the government, and then they can distribute it evenly to each school that plays football. This way all the schools will be on a level playing field and we can find out who the best team REALLY is!

This country was built on competition. Universities have a decision to make, invest in their programs based on ROI or not. Unfortunately in life some will win and some wont.

(08-13-2013 02:24 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:02 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  Once they decide they want to tax the massive profits, they will get involved. .

That is why I never believed or believe it will happen. It's one thing to have tax exempt status grandfathered in. It's another to leave the for the obvious main purpose of keeping more money for yourself, and think the IRS will just sit back and rubber stamp a tax exempt status. The NFL has tax exempt status. Think if a new football league formed today they would get it?

The NFL as a league office has tax exempt status. The teams that participate in the league do not.

(08-13-2013 02:25 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  This is exactly what we need, politicians and the government deciding who plays college football at the highest level.

Here’s an idea, how about all the TV and bowl money, ticket sale revenue along with the equipment sponsorship money from companies like Nike and Under Armour, merchandising and booster donations all goes into a pot managed by the government, and then they can distribute it evenly to each school that plays football. This way all the schools will be on a level playing field and we can find out who the best team REALLY is!

This country was built on competition. Universities have a decision to make, invest in their programs based on ROI or not. Unfortunately in life some will win and some wont.

Yes but sports competition is supposed to be based on how good you are in sports, not in business. That's how it is in most college sports. Olympic stars don't win a gold medal because they got the most lucrative endorsements. And it isn't just the 60 richest countries that get to participate.

The fact that football is different doesn't make it right.

(08-13-2013 02:40 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:25 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  This is exactly what we need, politicians and the government deciding who plays college football at the highest level.

Here’s an idea, how about all the TV and bowl money, ticket sale revenue along with the equipment sponsorship money from companies like Nike and Under Armour, merchandising and booster donations all goes into a pot managed by the government, and then they can distribute it evenly to each school that plays football. This way all the schools will be on a level playing field and we can find out who the best team REALLY is!

This country was built on competition. Universities have a decision to make, invest in their programs based on ROI or not. Unfortunately in life some will win and some wont.

Yes but sports competition is supposed to be based on how good you are in sports, not in business. That's how it is in most college sports. Olympic stars don't win a gold medal because they got the most lucrative endorsements. And it isn't just the 60 richest countries that get to participate.

The fact that football is different doesn't make it right.

That’s very true, but the vast difference between college football (and basketball) and all the other sports is these are the only 2 that add money to the bottom line of the balance sheet, all the rest take it away.

College football and basketball are a business, hence the desire to cheat. You don’t see too many schools going on probation for a recruiting violation for a field hockey player signing. It shouldn't be a business, but sadly it is.

(08-13-2013 01:35 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  As with most aspects of life, the political ramifications of college athletics can not be ignored.

Does anyone really think that the Senators from Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, New Mexico, etc. will sit idly by if their state flagship schools are relegated to a lower division?

Ok I'll play along say the MWC political might..... in the Senate pass something (farfetched to start with).

It gets killed in the House. End of story thanks for playing.

That's how the legislature is set up. The more populous states can't push the smaller states into anything they don’t' want and vice versa thanks to representation based on population in the House.

The most they could do is hold some hearings (another long shot) and hold some press conferences.

(08-13-2013 02:49 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:40 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:25 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  This is exactly what we need, politicians and the government deciding who plays college football at the highest level.

Here’s an idea, how about all the TV and bowl money, ticket sale revenue along with the equipment sponsorship money from companies like Nike and Under Armour, merchandising and booster donations all goes into a pot managed by the government, and then they can distribute it evenly to each school that plays football. This way all the schools will be on a level playing field and we can find out who the best team REALLY is!

This country was built on competition. Universities have a decision to make, invest in their programs based on ROI or not. Unfortunately in life some will win and some wont.

Yes but sports competition is supposed to be based on how good you are in sports, not in business. That's how it is in most college sports. Olympic stars don't win a gold medal because they got the most lucrative endorsements. And it isn't just the 60 richest countries that get to participate.

The fact that football is different doesn't make it right.

That’s very true, but the vast difference between college football (and basketball) and all the other sports is these are the only 2 that add money to the bottom line of the balance sheet, all the rest take it away.

College football and basketball are a business, hence the desire to cheat. You don’t see too many schools going on probation for a recruiting violation for a field hockey player signing. It shouldn't be a business, but sadly it is.

And that's what I'm saying. The split is based on money, and not related to the competition. Also, how many football programs actually make money? From all I've heard, not many. So in many cases football is no different than the other sports.

(08-13-2013 02:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:49 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:40 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:25 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  This is exactly what we need, politicians and the government deciding who plays college football at the highest level.

Here’s an idea, how about all the TV and bowl money, ticket sale revenue along with the equipment sponsorship money from companies like Nike and Under Armour, merchandising and booster donations all goes into a pot managed by the government, and then they can distribute it evenly to each school that plays football. This way all the schools will be on a level playing field and we can find out who the best team REALLY is!

This country was built on competition. Universities have a decision to make, invest in their programs based on ROI or not. Unfortunately in life some will win and some wont.

Yes but sports competition is supposed to be based on how good you are in sports, not in business. That's how it is in most college sports. Olympic stars don't win a gold medal because they got the most lucrative endorsements. And it isn't just the 60 richest countries that get to participate.

The fact that football is different doesn't make it right.

That’s very true, but the vast difference between college football (and basketball) and all the other sports is these are the only 2 that add money to the bottom line of the balance sheet, all the rest take it away.

College football and basketball are a business, hence the desire to cheat. You don’t see too many schools going on probation for a recruiting violation for a field hockey player signing. It shouldn't be a business, but sadly it is.

And that's what I'm saying. The split is based on money, and not related to the competition. Also, how many football programs actually make money? From all I've heard, not many. So in many cases football is no different than the other sports.

I guess that’s why I don’t get pissed off about it, because I understand its business. At the end of the day my University Temple is either going to decide that the returns (not only revenue but exposure and perception as a national university, ect) are worth the investment to get to the criteria the P5 decides is the “minimum requirements” (I’m sure it will be stipends, athletic budget minimum, facilities, attendance, hopefully an academic component and so on), or it’s not worth it. Personally I hope they do decide to invest because I feel it’s in the best interest of Temple, but it’s not something I have a say in.

(08-13-2013 02:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:49 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:40 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:25 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  This is exactly what we need, politicians and the government deciding who plays college football at the highest level.

Here’s an idea, how about all the TV and bowl money, ticket sale revenue along with the equipment sponsorship money from companies like Nike and Under Armour, merchandising and booster donations all goes into a pot managed by the government, and then they can distribute it evenly to each school that plays football. This way all the schools will be on a level playing field and we can find out who the best team REALLY is!

This country was built on competition. Universities have a decision to make, invest in their programs based on ROI or not. Unfortunately in life some will win and some wont.

Yes but sports competition is supposed to be based on how good you are in sports, not in business. That's how it is in most college sports. Olympic stars don't win a gold medal because they got the most lucrative endorsements. And it isn't just the 60 richest countries that get to participate.

The fact that football is different doesn't make it right.

That’s very true, but the vast difference between college football (and basketball) and all the other sports is these are the only 2 that add money to the bottom line of the balance sheet, all the rest take it away.

College football and basketball are a business, hence the desire to cheat. You don’t see too many schools going on probation for a recruiting violation for a field hockey player signing. It shouldn't be a business, but sadly it is.

And that's what I'm saying. The split is based on money, and not related to the competition. Also, how many football programs actually make money? From all I've heard, not many. So in many cases football is no different than the other sports.

Lots of football programs make money. Most athletic departments as a whole don't.

Actually the simplest thing to do is crusade against the P5 not on a "help the little guy" campaign but rather a fiscally responsible government campaign. Deny the tax deductibility of donations to any school spending more than say $70 million on athletics and withhold the first X dollars of financial aid and grant money where X is the amount spent on athletics in excess of $70 million.

Makes much better TV than helping the little guy, it falls under "closing loopholes" and forces universities to end waste and abuse where they take Federal funds when they have adequate revenue to fund activities by running responsible athletic departments.

(08-13-2013 03:05 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:49 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:40 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 02:25 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  This is exactly what we need, politicians and the government deciding who plays college football at the highest level.

Here’s an idea, how about all the TV and bowl money, ticket sale revenue along with the equipment sponsorship money from companies like Nike and Under Armour, merchandising and booster donations all goes into a pot managed by the government, and then they can distribute it evenly to each school that plays football. This way all the schools will be on a level playing field and we can find out who the best team REALLY is!

This country was built on competition. Universities have a decision to make, invest in their programs based on ROI or not. Unfortunately in life some will win and some wont.

Yes but sports competition is supposed to be based on how good you are in sports, not in business. That's how it is in most college sports. Olympic stars don't win a gold medal because they got the most lucrative endorsements. And it isn't just the 60 richest countries that get to participate.

The fact that football is different doesn't make it right.

That’s very true, but the vast difference between college football (and basketball) and all the other sports is these are the only 2 that add money to the bottom line of the balance sheet, all the rest take it away.

College football and basketball are a business, hence the desire to cheat. You don’t see too many schools going on probation for a recruiting violation for a field hockey player signing. It shouldn't be a business, but sadly it is.

And that's what I'm saying. The split is based on money, and not related to the competition. Also, how many football programs actually make money? From all I've heard, not many. So in many cases football is no different than the other sports.

I guess that’s why I don’t get pissed off about it, because I understand its business. At the end of the day my University Temple is either going to decide that the returns (not only revenue but exposure and perception as a national university, ect) are worth the investment to get to the criteria the P5 decides is the “minimum requirements” (I’m sure it will be stipends, athletic budget minimum, facilities, attendance, hopefully an academic component and so on), or it’s not worth it. Personally I hope they do decide to invest because I feel it’s in the best interest of Temple, but it’s not something I have a say in.

Even if you spent more it wouldn't be enough. You STILL aren't in a P5 conference, so you're out of luck. And spending more won't magically increase attendance. And what's wrong with your facilities now that make them unsuitable?