(05-30-2020 02:45 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 09:30 AM)fresnofanatic Wrote:  I think it’s ridiculous to call the ncaa a monopoly (or cartel) while wanting to make a smaller, stronger, less inclusive, monopoly (or cartel) yourself. “The ncaa is tyrannical and power hungry! Let’s form a more tyrannical and power hungry organization of our own!”, is what I’m hearing.

Pretty much. Freedom to associate with whom you will is fine and we all already know the schism between the P5 and G5. If the P5 wants to leave the ncaa and form their own governing body then more power to them. The rest of us will just have to accept the new reality and adjust accordingly. I would think the power schools would not make the move at a time like this what with the economic uncertainty. Since the move would be based in greed the optics would be awful.

I actually think it's more likely they break. Timing has to do with survival.

Optics are in the eye of the beholder. G5 may whine, but they have far fewer supporters. The media who will partner with the P5 will tout it as a move forward. G5 have nothing much to fight against that narrative, and none of their schools carry statewide pride like sat Alabama, Ohio State or Texas. It's a PR mismatch.

(05-29-2020 05:42 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 01:58 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I read somewhere that the PAC 12 might expand with affiliates in men's wrestling.

Fresno State
Utah Valley
San Francisco State

Those three might be affiliates for them since they do not have many members in that sport.

The Alaska twins might be tag along in case the west coast schools start men's hockey. The Power 5 schools may go after the Canadian schools like McGill, Toronto, Calgory and British Columbia for academics and Simon Fraser as a sport scheduling.

The actual wrestling affiliates are Fresno State, CSU Bakersfield and Cal Poly. (only Stanford, Oregon State and ASU sponsor wrestling)

SF State is not D-I, does not have wrestling.

The Big XII collected a bunch of affiliates to sponsor the sport (only Texas Tech, OK State, Iowa State, West Virginia have wrestling)
North Dakota State, South Dakota State, Northern Iowa, Air Force, Wyoming, Northern Colorado, Utah Valley

All 14 Big Ten schools have wrestling. Only Missouri (old Big 12 school) has wrestling of the SEC. UNC, Duke, NC State, Wake, UVa, VT (all the VA and NC schools) and Pitt of the ACC have wrestling.

I could see the P12 and B12 working together, and the SEC and WVU with the ACC for wrestling in regional groups.

Affiliates could also be sanctioned in single sport as needed by the P5.

San Francisco State Wrestling

Hum, SF State has wrestling. Whatever, they are D-II, and 64 schools in D-II have wrestling. They are not moving to D-I.

There are only 8 Western schools with wrestling in D-II, 5 in Colorado, 7 in the RMAC (all but SF State).

But no, they are not going D-I

(05-31-2020 02:30 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Hum, SF State has wrestling. Whatever, they are D-II, and 64 schools in D-II have wrestling. They are not moving to D-I.

There are only 8 Western schools with wrestling in D-II, 5 in Colorado, 7 in the RMAC (all but SF State).

But no, they are not going D-I

Any time a thread on the P5 breaking away ends up referencing Wrestling at San Francisco State, you know the thread passed its Tipping Point quite some time ago.

(06-01-2020 09:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-31-2020 02:30 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Hum, SF State has wrestling. Whatever, they are D-II, and 64 schools in D-II have wrestling. They are not moving to D-I.

There are only 8 Western schools with wrestling in D-II, 5 in Colorado, 7 in the RMAC (all but SF State).

But no, they are not going D-I

Any time a thread on the P5 breaking away ends up referencing Wrestling at San Francisco State, you know the thread passed its Tipping Point quite some time ago.

We all experience vignettes of wisdom, glimpses of enlightenment, and epiphanies of inspiration, but ignorance is eternal, omnipresent, and persistent and is present at the end of everything.

(06-01-2020 09:12 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 09:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-31-2020 02:30 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Hum, SF State has wrestling. Whatever, they are D-II, and 64 schools in D-II have wrestling. They are not moving to D-I.

There are only 8 Western schools with wrestling in D-II, 5 in Colorado, 7 in the RMAC (all but SF State).

But no, they are not going D-I

Any time a thread on the P5 breaking away ends up referencing Wrestling at San Francisco State, you know the thread passed its Tipping Point quite some time ago.

We all experience vignettes of wisdom, glimpses of enlightenment, and epiphanies of inspiration, but ignorance is eternal, omnipresent, and persistent and is present at the end of everything.

JRsec, With your gracious permission, I would like to use this quote the next time I attempt to charm a lovely lady. I suppose it might work much better than my standard: "I like college sports."

(06-01-2020 03:23 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 09:12 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 09:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-31-2020 02:30 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Hum, SF State has wrestling. Whatever, they are D-II, and 64 schools in D-II have wrestling. They are not moving to D-I.

There are only 8 Western schools with wrestling in D-II, 5 in Colorado, 7 in the RMAC (all but SF State).

But no, they are not going D-I

Any time a thread on the P5 breaking away ends up referencing Wrestling at San Francisco State, you know the thread passed its Tipping Point quite some time ago.

We all experience vignettes of wisdom, glimpses of enlightenment, and epiphanies of inspiration, but ignorance is eternal, omnipresent, and persistent and is present at the end of everything.

JRsec, With your gracious permission, I would like to use this quote the next time I attempt to charm a lovely lady. I suppose it might work much better than my standard: "I like college sports."

Bill you have to use the first half only on women. If they think they are your muse for wisdom, enlightenment, and inspiration it will work. Save the all things end in ignorance for the sticky break up and if you are lucky it will leave them speechless as they wonder what it was that was ignorant. That will buy you some time to "slip out the back Jack and get yourself free" as Paul Simon reflected.

BTW women always think they are wise, enlightened, and inspirational so it plays to their hubris and vanity because it is true, at least the way women look at the world. What it is not is true of men or the world they have to deal with. Women live in the sublime of how it ought to be and men tend to live in the reality of how it is and those are never coincident subsets. You are lucky if they intersect at all.

And Bill always remember that women tend to exchange sex for good conversation and men tend to exchange good conversation for sex. That is the only intersection of our two worlds and the miracle behind the perpetuation of the species.

And so you know, and I'm not trying to spoil the mystery of life, but men tend to marry women because they are pleasant and women tend to marry men with which they feel secure. Good luck and good hunting!

And Bill I did not miss the sarcasm, I just chose to overlook it.

(05-28-2020 12:44 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-28-2020 09:32 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Assuming the entire P5 (and Notre Dame) breakaway to start: that's the ACC, Big 12, Big Ten, PAC and SEC (65 teams) for football. Anything more than 80 teams in this new football set-up does not really maximize revenue, so, in theory, you have a cap of an additional 15-teams (80 max), for football purposes. ...

Maximizing revenue for whom???

Start with the ACC, Big12, Big Ten, PAC and SEC.

Now, in terms of football revenues FOR those conference, what does it cost those conferences to add the AAC? Basically, nothing. The MWC? Nothing. CUSA? Nothing. How about strapping on the entire Funbelt? Nothing. Even a bit of MACtion? Nothing.

The SEC is getting it's FB money. If the media value of FB goes it, it will find a way to keep on doing so. Ditto the Big Ten. Adding the AAC doesn't cut the FB revenues of the SEC or the Big Ten at all. That's why we have the "FBS", after all.

The reason why the whole system is organized to keep down the number of conferences while allowing the lower conferences to keep promoting a trickle of new Division 1 schools and lower tier FBS conferences to promote a trickle of FCS schools is because the name of the game is not giving up more auto-bids to schools who would never get an at-large bid.

The pot of money is the BASKETBALL tournament money that is being funneled into keeping the entire NCAA system afloat.

Round the tourney revenues down to $800m for simplicity. 30% goes into the participant pool, so $240m. The first table I see is a bit long in the teeth at 2007-2012, but for back of the envelope old & real beats made up, so 10% ACC, 11% Big12, 11% Big Ten, 8% PAC-12, and 8% SEC, so 48%. It'll be higher 2012-2019, I'm sure, but round that to 50%, or $120m.

Suppose that the new "American Collegiate Athletics Association", ACAA takes 20% of tourney media revenue to pay the bills, and 80% is distributed, and a 64 school tournament drops down to 9-10 conferences ... even with 4 fewer entries, that is 8 more at large spots.

For simplicity, suppose they end up in the hands of the P5, that's up from 50% of 30% of $800m, or $120m ...
... to 62.5% of 80% of $800m, which is $400m
... an increase of $280m.

(And if it's actually presently 62.5% and it bumps it to 75%, that's $150m to $480m, which is an increase of $330m, so even better.)

And if the value of the tourney grows, the P5 would continue to gain the lion's share of the media value, rather than an agent's commission.

But only if the media value of the tournament is maintained. Adding conferences that add more to the perceived media value of the conference than they will cost the P5 in tournament shares would be the "revenue maximization".

It's pretty much immaterial how much money they are worth as Football conferences, since each football conference eats what it kills.

"Suppose that the new "American Collegiate Athletics Association", ACAA takes 20% of tourney media revenue to pay the bills, and 80% is distributed..."

How 'bout the member schools keep 100% of the revenue and simply allocate operating expenses back to their wholly owned ACAA.

(06-01-2020 09:12 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 09:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-31-2020 02:30 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Hum, SF State has wrestling. Whatever, they are D-II, and 64 schools in D-II have wrestling. They are not moving to D-I.

There are only 8 Western schools with wrestling in D-II, 5 in Colorado, 7 in the RMAC (all but SF State).

But no, they are not going D-I

Any time a thread on the P5 breaking away ends up referencing Wrestling at San Francisco State, you know the thread passed its Tipping Point quite some time ago.

We all experience vignettes of wisdom, glimpses of enlightenment, and epiphanies of inspiration, but ignorance is eternal, omnipresent, and persistent and is present at the end of everything.

JR, your "horticulture" vignette can be attributed to drama critic Dorothy Parker, who also gave us "If all of the pretty girls who attended the Yale Prom were laid end-to-end... I wouldn't be a bit surprised."

(06-01-2020 04:02 PM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 09:12 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 09:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-31-2020 02:30 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Hum, SF State has wrestling. Whatever, they are D-II, and 64 schools in D-II have wrestling. They are not moving to D-I.

There are only 8 Western schools with wrestling in D-II, 5 in Colorado, 7 in the RMAC (all but SF State).

But no, they are not going D-I

Any time a thread on the P5 breaking away ends up referencing Wrestling at San Francisco State, you know the thread passed its Tipping Point quite some time ago.

We all experience vignettes of wisdom, glimpses of enlightenment, and epiphanies of inspiration, but ignorance is eternal, omnipresent, and persistent and is present at the end of everything.

JR, your "horticulture" vignette can be attributed to drama critic Dorothy Parker, who also gave us "If all of the pretty girls who attended the Yale Prom were laid end-to-end... I wouldn't be a bit surprised."

It's nice to know the source of both. Dorothy Parker would have been a hoot to know. I just remembered what was painted on the wall. Of course today she would have been dismissed as sexist instead of admired for her wit. Herein lies the death of humor and with it tolerance.

(06-01-2020 03:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 03:23 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 09:12 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 09:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-31-2020 02:30 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Hum, SF State has wrestling. Whatever, they are D-II, and 64 schools in D-II have wrestling. They are not moving to D-I.

There are only 8 Western schools with wrestling in D-II, 5 in Colorado, 7 in the RMAC (all but SF State).

But no, they are not going D-I

Any time a thread on the P5 breaking away ends up referencing Wrestling at San Francisco State, you know the thread passed its Tipping Point quite some time ago.

We all experience vignettes of wisdom, glimpses of enlightenment, and epiphanies of inspiration, but ignorance is eternal, omnipresent, and persistent and is present at the end of everything.

JRsec, With your gracious permission, I would like to use this quote the next time I attempt to charm a lovely lady. I suppose it might work much better than my standard: "I like college sports."

Bill you have to use the first half only on women. If they think they are your muse for wisdom, enlightenment, and inspiration it will work. Save the all things end in ignorance for the sticky break up and if you are lucky it will leave them speechless as they wonder what it was that was ignorant. That will buy you some time to "slip out the back Jack and get yourself free" as Paul Simon reflected.

BTW women always think they are wise, enlightened, and inspirational so it plays to their hubris and vanity because it is true, at least the way women look at the world. What it is not is true of men or the world they have to deal with. Women live in the sublime of how it ought to be and men tend to live in the reality of how it is and those are never coincident subsets. You are lucky if they intersect at all.

And Bill always remember that women tend to exchange sex for good conversation and men tend to exchange good conversation for sex. That is the only intersection of our two worlds and the miracle behind the perpetuation of the species.

And so you know, and I'm not trying to spoil the mystery of life, but men tend to marry women because they are pleasant and women tend to marry men with which they feel secure. Good luck and good hunting!

And Bill I did not miss the sarcasm, I just chose to overlook it.

I likely enjoy your posts of this type as much as your spot-on posts regarding college sports, JRsec — which is saying something of note. You and Frank the Tank always deliver the goods.

(06-01-2020 05:07 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 03:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 03:23 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 09:12 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 09:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Any time a thread on the P5 breaking away ends up referencing Wrestling at San Francisco State, you know the thread passed its Tipping Point quite some time ago.

We all experience vignettes of wisdom, glimpses of enlightenment, and epiphanies of inspiration, but ignorance is eternal, omnipresent, and persistent and is present at the end of everything.

JRsec, With your gracious permission, I would like to use this quote the next time I attempt to charm a lovely lady. I suppose it might work much better than my standard: "I like college sports."

Bill you have to use the first half only on women. If they think they are your muse for wisdom, enlightenment, and inspiration it will work. Save the all things end in ignorance for the sticky break up and if you are lucky it will leave them speechless as they wonder what it was that was ignorant. That will buy you some time to "slip out the back Jack and get yourself free" as Paul Simon reflected.

BTW women always think they are wise, enlightened, and inspirational so it plays to their hubris and vanity because it is true, at least the way women look at the world. What it is not is true of men or the world they have to deal with. Women live in the sublime of how it ought to be and men tend to live in the reality of how it is and those are never coincident subsets. You are lucky if they intersect at all.

And Bill always remember that women tend to exchange sex for good conversation and men tend to exchange good conversation for sex. That is the only intersection of our two worlds and the miracle behind the perpetuation of the species.

And so you know, and I'm not trying to spoil the mystery of life, but men tend to marry women because they are pleasant and women tend to marry men with which they feel secure. Good luck and good hunting!

And Bill I did not miss the sarcasm, I just chose to overlook it.

I likely enjoy your posts of this type as much as your spot-on posts regarding college sports, JRsec — which is saying something of note. You and Frank the Tank always deliver the goods.

And here I thought it was the ladies you wanted to charm the pants off...

(05-30-2020 03:51 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Optics are in the eye of the beholder. G5 may whine, but they have far fewer supporters. The media who will partner with the P5 will tout it as a move forward. G5 have nothing much to fight against that narrative, and none of their schools carry statewide pride like sat Alabama, Ohio State or Texas. It's a PR mismatch.

Regarding the "Big Eight", P5 + Big East Basketball + AAC/MWC version of the concept, note on the political front that the states that have FBS schools but not P5 schools are Wyoming, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Hawaii, and Connecticut.

The MWC covers five of those six, and the Big East includes the last one for Basketball.


______________________________

(06-01-2020 03:56 PM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  

(05-28-2020 12:44 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Suppose that the new "American Collegiate Athletics Association", ACAA takes 20% of tourney media revenue to pay the bills, and 80% is distributed, ...

How 'bout the member schools keep 100% of the revenue and simply allocate operating expenses back to their wholly owned ACAA.

That statement above doesn't specify how it is done ... that would be one way.

In any case, to arrive as the surplus going to the member schools, we have to make an assumption about how much the operating expenses are. Suppose, to be conservative, they are 20% of the media revenues. Then in that case, 80% will be available to the schools.

(06-01-2020 10:16 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 03:51 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Optics are in the eye of the beholder. G5 may whine, but they have far fewer supporters. The media who will partner with the P5 will tout it as a move forward. G5 have nothing much to fight against that narrative, and none of their schools carry statewide pride like sat Alabama, Ohio State or Texas. It's a PR mismatch.

Regarding the "Big Eight", P5 + Big East Basketball + AAC/MWC version of the concept, note on the political front that the states that have FBS schools but not P5 schools are Wyoming, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Hawaii, and Connecticut.

The MWC covers five of those six, and the Big East includes the last one for Basketball.


______________________________

(06-01-2020 03:56 PM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  

(05-28-2020 12:44 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Suppose that the new "American Collegiate Athletics Association", ACAA takes 20% of tourney media revenue to pay the bills, and 80% is distributed, ...

How 'bout the member schools keep 100% of the revenue and simply allocate operating expenses back to their wholly owned ACAA.

That statement above doesn't specify how it is done ... that would be one way.

In any case, to arrive as the surplus going to the member schools, we have to make an assumption about how much the operating expenses are. Suppose, to be conservative, they are 20% of the media revenues. Then in that case, 80% will be available to the schools.

If the goal is for the P5 to retain all monies they earn and currently have to share to subsidize the lower divisions, why does it make sense for Alabama to share media money with Vanderbilt or Ohio St to share B1G media money with Rutgers? After all, we all know the money paid to the SEC and the B1G is huge because of the big name perennial winners. Will that be the next goal after the split, to keep the lions share of conference revenue since it is the value Alabama and Ohio St bring to the table as compared to value of Rutgers or Vanderbilt?

(06-01-2020 10:16 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 03:51 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Optics are in the eye of the beholder. G5 may whine, but they have far fewer supporters. The media who will partner with the P5 will tout it as a move forward. G5 have nothing much to fight against that narrative, and none of their schools carry statewide pride like sat Alabama, Ohio State or Texas. It's a PR mismatch.

Regarding the "Big Eight", P5 + Big East Basketball + AAC/MWC version of the concept, note on the political front that the states that have FBS schools but not P5 schools are Wyoming, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Hawaii, and Connecticut.

The MWC covers five of those six, and the Big East includes the last one for Basketball.

UConn is in the Big East, so irrelevant. If they get in the P5 it will be via the Big East.
Idaho FCS so irrelevant; besides they share flagship with far more popular Boise State. (Strange situation in Idaho with split flagship)
Wyoming and New Mexico are small States.
Nevada is split between UNLV and Nevada-Reno. Effectively its a split State. Neither has what you'd call a large football following.
-- Gambling is the #1 sport, the Raiders and Golden Knights fulfill the Pro Sports needs of Las Vegas.
Hawaii is a funky situation.

Except for UConn, none of these programs are funded at a level of a major. And quite frankly the media power of the entire group, excepting UConn is pretty much zero. These are not Football legions you see from Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, Alabama, Georgia, Wisconsin or Ohio State. And that is basically my point. They have no media support, nobody gives a crap about them. They are not majors.

(05-30-2020 03:51 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Optics are in the eye of the beholder. G5 may whine, but they have far fewer supporters. The media who will partner with the P5 will tout it as a move forward. G5 have nothing much to fight against that narrative, and none of their schools carry statewide pride like sat Alabama, Ohio State or Texas. It's a PR mismatch.

(06-01-2020 10:16 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  ... Regarding the "Big Eight", P5 + Big East Basketball + AAC/MWC version of the concept, note on the political front that the states that have FBS schools but not P5 schools are Wyoming, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Hawaii, and Connecticut.

The MWC covers five of those six, and the Big East includes the last one for Basketball.

(06-02-2020 12:12 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  UConn is in the Big East, so irrelevant. If they get in the P5 it will be via the Big East.

Yes, as stated.

Quote: Idaho FCS so irrelevant; besides they share flagship with far more popular Boise State. (Strange situation in Idaho with split flagship)

Idaho is referring to the state of Idaho, it is obviously via Boise State that Idaho is "represented" by the MWC.

Quote: Wyoming and New Mexico are small States.

They are all relatively small states, which is, of course, a substantial part of the point.

Quote: Nevada is split between UNLV and Nevada-Reno. Effectively its a split State. Neither has what you'd call a large football following.
-- Gambling is the #1 sport, the Raiders and Golden Knights fulfill the Pro Sports needs of Las Vegas.

It doesn't really matter whether UNLV and Nevado-Reno split Nevada and whether they are more followed for college basketball than for college football, because the point of the breakaway is to set up the most effective way to generate the most money for the P5 schools, which means establishing a tournament which can attract a media rights bid equal or greater to the media rights bid for the NCAA tourney. Obviously a "P5-only" breakaway would generate a larger percentage of the revenue for the P5, but it would be a smaller tournament, so it would be a larger percentage of a smaller total amount.

Quote: Hawaii is a funky situation.

And another small state.

Quote: Except for UConn, none of these programs are funded at a level of a major. And quite frankly the media power of the entire group, excepting UConn is pretty much zero. These are not Football legions you see from Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, Alabama, Georgia, Wisconsin or Ohio State. And that is basically my point. They have no media support, nobody gives a crap about them. They are not majors.

Except it's not literally nobody who cares about them, but rather "nobody" in terms of a very small share of the total population.

But that is the politics of small states. A small-state Senator is going to feel mighty comfortable grandstanding by "standing up for the rights" of the leading college sports representative(s) of their state. It's very hard to go wrong doing that ... even the majority of people of the state who are not strong supporters of that college will be happy that their Senator is standing up for "their" state.

And five small states may be far less than 10% of the population of the US and far less than 10% of the media value of the US ... but they still represent 10% of the Senators of the US.

Bringing them on board when you need to ramp up the numbers of the breakaway in order to support a 64-ish (maybe 56 with 1st and 2nd seeds getting a first round bye) team tournament is a smart pick, especially since if the inclusion in the breakaway means they can bring BYU with its media reach in the West and remove the Zags with their established brand from the rival NCAA tournament.
______________________________

(06-01-2020 03:56 PM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  If the goal is for the P5 to retain all monies they earn and currently have to share to subsidize the lower divisions, why does it make sense for Alabama to share media money with Vanderbilt or Ohio St to share B1G media money with Rutgers? After all, we all know the money paid to the SEC and the B1G is huge because of the big name perennial winners. Will that be the next goal after the split, to keep the lions share of conference revenue since it is the value Alabama and Ohio St bring to the table as compared to value of Rutgers or Vanderbilt?

The goal is not to aim for "100%", the goal is to aim for more money in terms of total dollars. As the system has evolved relatively slowly over time of big time college basketball subsidizing the entire NCAA infrastructure, it is easy to take it for granted as the "natural" way things are, but the point is there is no particular reason that it should. As the NCAA made more and more money running a 1st Division Basketball tournament, and as the individual schools gained the lion share of the FB media revenue, the NCAA just acted like a non-profit with a lucrative cash cows do, and started growing expenses to spend the money coming in.

(06-02-2020 10:01 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 03:51 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Optics are in the eye of the beholder. G5 may whine, but they have far fewer supporters. The media who will partner with the P5 will tout it as a move forward. G5 have nothing much to fight against that narrative, and none of their schools carry statewide pride like sat Alabama, Ohio State or Texas. It's a PR mismatch.

(06-01-2020 10:16 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  ... Regarding the "Big Eight", P5 + Big East Basketball + AAC/MWC version of the concept, note on the political front that the states that have FBS schools but not P5 schools are Wyoming, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Hawaii, and Connecticut.

The MWC covers five of those six, and the Big East includes the last one for Basketball.

(06-02-2020 12:12 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  UConn is in the Big East, so irrelevant. If they get in the P5 it will be via the Big East.

Yes, as stated.

Quote: Idaho FCS so irrelevant; besides they share flagship with far more popular Boise State. (Strange situation in Idaho with split flagship)

Idaho is referring to the state of Idaho, it is obviously via Boise State that Idaho is "represented" by the MWC.

Quote: Wyoming and New Mexico are small States.

They are all relatively small states, which is, of course, a substantial part of the point.

Quote: Nevada is split between UNLV and Nevada-Reno. Effectively its a split State. Neither has what you'd call a large football following.
-- Gambling is the #1 sport, the Raiders and Golden Knights fulfill the Pro Sports needs of Las Vegas.

It doesn't really matter whether UNLV and Nevado-Reno split Nevada and whether they are more followed for college basketball than for college football, because the point of the breakaway is to set up the most effective way to generate the most money for the P5 schools, which means establishing a tournament which can attract a media rights bid equal or greater to the media rights bid for the NCAA tourney. Obviously a "P5-only" breakaway would generate a larger percentage of the revenue for the P5, but it would be a smaller tournament, so it would be a larger percentage of a smaller total amount.

Quote: Hawaii is a funky situation.

And another small state.

Quote: Except for UConn, none of these programs are funded at a level of a major. And quite frankly the media power of the entire group, excepting UConn is pretty much zero. These are not Football legions you see from Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, Alabama, Georgia, Wisconsin or Ohio State. And that is basically my point. They have no media support, nobody gives a crap about them. They are not majors.

Except it's not literally nobody who cares about them, but rather "nobody" in terms of a very small share of the total population.

But that is the politics of small states. A small-state Senator is going to feel mighty comfortable grandstanding by "standing up for the rights" of the leading college sports representative(s) of their state. It's very hard to go wrong doing that ... even the majority of people of the state who are not strong supporters of that college will be happy that their Senator is standing up for "their" state.

And five small states may be far less than 10% of the population of the US and far less than 10% of the media value of the US ... but they still represent 10% of the Senators of the US.

Bringing them on board when you need to ramp up the numbers of the breakaway in order to support a 64-ish (maybe 56 with 1st and 2nd seeds getting a first round bye) team tournament is a smart pick, especially since if the inclusion in the breakaway means they can bring BYU with its media reach in the West and remove the Zags with their established brand from the rival NCAA tournament.
______________________________

(06-01-2020 03:56 PM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  If the goal is for the P5 to retain all monies they earn and currently have to share to subsidize the lower divisions, why does it make sense for Alabama to share media money with Vanderbilt or Ohio St to share B1G media money with Rutgers? After all, we all know the money paid to the SEC and the B1G is huge because of the big name perennial winners. Will that be the next goal after the split, to keep the lions share of conference revenue since it is the value Alabama and Ohio St bring to the table as compared to value of Rutgers or Vanderbilt?

The goal is not to aim for "100%", the goal is to aim for more money in terms of total dollars. As the system has evolved relatively slowly over time of big time college basketball subsidizing the entire NCAA infrastructure, it is easy to take it for granted as the "natural" way things are, but the point is there is no particular reason that it should. As the NCAA made more and more money running a 1st Division Basketball tournament, and as the individual schools gained the lion share of the FB media revenue, the NCAA just acted like a non-profit with a lucrative cash cows do, and started growing expenses to spend the money coming in.

Don't know why you attribute this post to me. It was written by MinerInWisconsin. My view of the subject is that the breakaway member schools will own the new regulatory body and any other conferences/schools who wish to use the services of the new body could do so for a fee.
This is just me speculating but I envision the regulatory body being one among many functions of a commercial operation owned by the breakaway schools.

Fully 30% of the Senate would be in states not represented by a P6 breakaway. Add NY and MA as Having state schools left out. Look at the havoc Orrin Hatch was able to do regarding Utah.

Add to the fact that the P6 needs games (home and wins) to maintain success, a narrow breakaway isn't going to happen, IMHO.

(06-01-2020 05:48 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 05:07 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 03:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 03:23 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 09:12 AM)JRsec Wrote:  We all experience vignettes of wisdom, glimpses of enlightenment, and epiphanies of inspiration, but ignorance is eternal, omnipresent, and persistent and is present at the end of everything.

JRsec, With your gracious permission, I would like to use this quote the next time I attempt to charm a lovely lady. I suppose it might work much better than my standard: "I like college sports."

Bill you have to use the first half only on women. If they think they are your muse for wisdom, enlightenment, and inspiration it will work. Save the all things end in ignorance for the sticky break up and if you are lucky it will leave them speechless as they wonder what it was that was ignorant. That will buy you some time to "slip out the back Jack and get yourself free" as Paul Simon reflected.

BTW women always think they are wise, enlightened, and inspirational so it plays to their hubris and vanity because it is true, at least the way women look at the world. What it is not is true of men or the world they have to deal with. Women live in the sublime of how it ought to be and men tend to live in the reality of how it is and those are never coincident subsets. You are lucky if they intersect at all.

And Bill always remember that women tend to exchange sex for good conversation and men tend to exchange good conversation for sex. That is the only intersection of our two worlds and the miracle behind the perpetuation of the species.

And so you know, and I'm not trying to spoil the mystery of life, but men tend to marry women because they are pleasant and women tend to marry men with which they feel secure. Good luck and good hunting!

And Bill I did not miss the sarcasm, I just chose to overlook it.

I likely enjoy your posts of this type as much as your spot-on posts regarding college sports, JRsec — which is saying something of note. You and Frank the Tank always deliver the goods.

And here I thought it was the ladies you wanted to charm the pants off...

Beautifully played, esayem. I am both amused yet disturbed.

(06-02-2020 12:23 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 05:48 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 05:07 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 03:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2020 03:23 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  JRsec, With your gracious permission, I would like to use this quote the next time I attempt to charm a lovely lady. I suppose it might work much better than my standard: "I like college sports."

Bill you have to use the first half only on women. If they think they are your muse for wisdom, enlightenment, and inspiration it will work. Save the all things end in ignorance for the sticky break up and if you are lucky it will leave them speechless as they wonder what it was that was ignorant. That will buy you some time to "slip out the back Jack and get yourself free" as Paul Simon reflected.

BTW women always think they are wise, enlightened, and inspirational so it plays to their hubris and vanity because it is true, at least the way women look at the world. What it is not is true of men or the world they have to deal with. Women live in the sublime of how it ought to be and men tend to live in the reality of how it is and those are never coincident subsets. You are lucky if they intersect at all.

And Bill always remember that women tend to exchange sex for good conversation and men tend to exchange good conversation for sex. That is the only intersection of our two worlds and the miracle behind the perpetuation of the species.

And so you know, and I'm not trying to spoil the mystery of life, but men tend to marry women because they are pleasant and women tend to marry men with which they feel secure. Good luck and good hunting!

And Bill I did not miss the sarcasm, I just chose to overlook it.

I likely enjoy your posts of this type as much as your spot-on posts regarding college sports, JRsec — which is saying something of note. You and Frank the Tank always deliver the goods.

And here I thought it was the ladies you wanted to charm the pants off...

Beautifully played, esayem. I both amused yet disturbed.

Perversion, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. It says far more about Esayem's mind than it does yours.