(06-21-2021 05:12 PM)emu79 Wrote:  ah those "bags of cash"... we should be asking who makes up the deficits at the rest of these schools. Answer: Their fellow non sports playing students who pay a fee. So now those sports playing students should get more $$$$ for playing sports and the non sports students should pay higher fees out of their pockets?

https://www.bestcolleges.com/blog/do-col...asketball.

https://www.mlive.com/news/page/michigan...bsidi.html

Good stuff. This data and it is a QUOTE from the best colleges link is very telling:

"The majority of universities in the nation’s top athletic conferences lost money through their sports programs to the tune of approximately $16 million each."

"Of the 125 FCS schools, all reported a negative net generated revenue in 2019, with a median loss of $14.3 million per institution.

Finally, Division I includes 97 schools without football programs. All of them had a negative net revenue in 2019, with a median loss of $14.4 million. And not one college in the NCAA's Division II or III saw their revenues exceed expenses that year.

In total, then, only 25 of the approximately 1,100 schools across 102 conferences in the NCAA made money on college sports last year. "

BOTTOM LINE AND THIS SHOULD END ALL DEBATES. Almost all schools in FBS, FCS, D-II, D-III, etc. and even D-I schools withOUT FB lost money.

P.S. I need a red font for this post.

(06-21-2021 10:58 AM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 10:01 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 09:48 AM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 09:41 AM)emu steve Wrote:  This is DP after today's SCOTUS ruling:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/21/politics/...%3A37%3A34

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports...769539002/

"The case doesn’t decide whether students can be paid salaries. Instead, the ruling will help determine whether schools decide to offer athletes tens of thousands of dollars in education-related benefits for things such as computers, graduate scholarships, tutoring, study abroad and internships."

Not there yet - but the NCAA's power is eroding one court case / law at a time.

Okay, I'll give it two:

This quote from Cavanaugh just nukes the hell out of the NCAA:
“The NCAA couches its arguments for not paying student athletes in innocuous labels,” he writes. “But the labels cannot disguise the reality: The NCAA’s business model would be flatly illegal in almost any other industry in America. All of the restaurants in a region cannot come together to cut cooks’ wages on the theory that ‘customers prefer’ to eat food from low-paid cooks. Law firms cannot conspire to cabin lawyers’ salaries in the name of providing legal services out of a ‘love of the law.’ Hospitals cannot agree to cap nurses’ income in order to create a ‘purer’ form of helping the sick. News organizations cannot join forces to curtail pay to reporters to preserve a ‘tradition’ of public-minded journalism. Movie studios cannot collude to slash benefits to camera crews to kindle a ‘spirit of amateurism’ in Hollywood.”

The judge is correct, the NCAA business model would be illegal in any other industry. That accepted and acknowledged, the pro sport model would be illegal as well.

Sports ARE a unique industry and comparing them to restaurants, News orgs or movie studios is not valid.

If Wendy's, Taco Belle, Burger King, Arby's and Sonic were to go out of business, would McDonalds benefit? Of course they would have a near monopoly on the huge fast food business! If NBC, ABC, CNN, Fox and MSNBC dropped their news program would CBS benefit as well? You betcha, their news ratings would skyrocket and they could name their price on ad placements on their new programming.

Now if every team in the B1G conference dropped football except for Michigan would the Wolverines enjoy their monopoly as well. Hell no! They would have nobody to play and thus their industry would die. They would be the Kings of Nothing! Sports teams compete on the field in an entertainment sense, but they rely on each other to cooperate financially to maintain their businesses. Do the major fast food chains have something like the Big Ten network where they broadcast their competition and share the revenue of such? I realize the question is absurd, but then again, so is the comparison of sports to the food industry.

Dan I will always admire your labor-friendly passion and I will not by any means propound the idea that the NCAA is a well run organization. It clearly is not, Mark Emmert is an ex-University President, he simply does not possess a sliver of the managerial, business or political skills of a Roger Goodell or Adam Silver. I suspect that if he did the NCAA would have presented a far more compelling case.

At the end of the day, please don't put forward the idea that "the money is there, they just have to find it". That is wildly preposterous and based on your largely intelligent posts, I suspect your passion for labor has clouded your normally reasonable judgement. The money clearly is NOT there for the vast majority of programs.

'79 is correct, the UAW celebrated ultra lucrative contracts in the 70's and now the results of such have manifested into a whole bunch of shuttered factories in the Midwest. This victory will have the same unintended consequences, Steve is dead on, EMU will be forced into a club sport situation without scholarships.

Make no mistake about it, the NFL will still scout the program as they will need players. The problem is this: An Alex Howie will still play at EMU because his father is successful and is able to foot the tuition bill. How many other athletes on the EMU roster will enjoy similar circumstances?

I will present two words to you, "systemic racism". It is what it is.

https://herosports.com/fcs-football-2021...outs-bzbz/

Payouts from FBS teams to FCS teams in FB. Our game isn't included.

(06-21-2021 05:34 PM)Jerry Weaver Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 10:58 AM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 10:01 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 09:48 AM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 09:41 AM)emu steve Wrote:  This is DP after today's SCOTUS ruling:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/21/politics/...%3A37%3A34

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports...769539002/

"The case doesn’t decide whether students can be paid salaries. Instead, the ruling will help determine whether schools decide to offer athletes tens of thousands of dollars in education-related benefits for things such as computers, graduate scholarships, tutoring, study abroad and internships."

Not there yet - but the NCAA's power is eroding one court case / law at a time.

Okay, I'll give it two:

This quote from Cavanaugh just nukes the hell out of the NCAA:
“The NCAA couches its arguments for not paying student athletes in innocuous labels,” he writes. “But the labels cannot disguise the reality: The NCAA’s business model would be flatly illegal in almost any other industry in America. All of the restaurants in a region cannot come together to cut cooks’ wages on the theory that ‘customers prefer’ to eat food from low-paid cooks. Law firms cannot conspire to cabin lawyers’ salaries in the name of providing legal services out of a ‘love of the law.’ Hospitals cannot agree to cap nurses’ income in order to create a ‘purer’ form of helping the sick. News organizations cannot join forces to curtail pay to reporters to preserve a ‘tradition’ of public-minded journalism. Movie studios cannot collude to slash benefits to camera crews to kindle a ‘spirit of amateurism’ in Hollywood.”

The judge is correct, the NCAA business model would be illegal in any other industry. That accepted and acknowledged, the pro sport model would be illegal as well.

Sports ARE a unique industry and comparing them to restaurants, News orgs or movie studios is not valid.

If Wendy's, Taco Belle, Burger King, Arby's and Sonic were to go out of business, would McDonalds benefit? Of course they would have a near monopoly on the huge fast food business! If NBC, ABC, CNN, Fox and MSNBC dropped their news program would CBS benefit as well? You betcha, their news ratings would skyrocket and they could name their price on ad placements on their new programming.

Now if every team in the B1G conference dropped football except for Michigan would the Wolverines enjoy their monopoly as well. Hell no! They would have nobody to play and thus their industry would die. They would be the Kings of Nothing! Sports teams compete on the field in an entertainment sense, but they rely on each other to cooperate financially to maintain their businesses. Do the major fast food chains have something like the Big Ten network where they broadcast their competition and share the revenue of such? I realize the question is absurd, but then again, so is the comparison of sports to the food industry.

Dan I will always admire your labor-friendly passion and I will not by any means propound the idea that the NCAA is a well run organization. It clearly is not, Mark Emmert is an ex-University President, he simply does not possess a sliver of the managerial, business or political skills of a Roger Goodell or Adam Silver. I suspect that if he did the NCAA would have presented a far more compelling case.

At the end of the day, please don't put forward the idea that "the money is there, they just have to find it". That is wildly preposterous and based on your largely intelligent posts, I suspect your passion for labor has clouded your normally reasonable judgement. The money clearly is NOT there for the vast majority of programs.

'79 is correct, the UAW celebrated ultra lucrative contracts in the 70's and now the results of such have manifested into a whole bunch of shuttered factories in the Midwest. This victory will have the same unintended consequences, Steve is dead on, EMU will be forced into a club sport situation without scholarships.

Make no mistake about it, the NFL will still scout the program as they will need players. The problem is this: An Alex Howie will still play at EMU because his father is successful and is able to foot the tuition bill. How many other athletes on the EMU roster will enjoy similar circumstances?

I will present two words to you, "systemic racism". It is what it is.

If this program did indeed go the way of club sports, it would not matter whether or not I was capable of covering Alex's tuition...EMU would not have been under consideration for him. He would have pursued one of his other options that likely will be able to manage under this new paradigm, like Washington State or the Air Force Academy. Or perhaps he would have shown more aggressive interest in Indiana, Iowa State, or Cincinnati after his unofficial visits there.

The potential risk as this all progresses forward is that schools who can't afford to pay players so who need to scale back their programs are going to lose players like Alex. Or any number of other guys on this team who could have played elsewhere. They will also lose out on the potential to discover talents like Beydoun or Knue. Who would walk-on to a team where there is no chance of earning a scholarship?

I actually don't believe the situation at EMU will become that drastic. I think schools like Eastern will find a way to make this work. But I do believe it will broaden the gap between the Power 5 and the Group of 5 programs. And down the road you may likely see fewer "crossover games" between the two as the talent disparity widens.

The other concern is that as schools (even Power 5) have to start making tough budget decisions, as Jerry points out, how will that effect diversity in programs, and what impact might it have on maintaining Title IX compliance?

To clarify I'm not against college sports, I'm not against players getting more $$$ for their efforts. I would not disagree that the current system is broken. What I want is a system that pay more $$$ to the players, preserves opportunities for all athletes across ALL classes of colleges ie the current system, distributes monies from playoffs, tournaments fairly across ALL classes to make this happen and is self sustaining ie the revenues from athletics sustains whatever shape the new system takes. Lets all hope that smarter folks than me can find a way to make it happen. Win win is always better than winners and losers.

(06-21-2021 04:54 PM)emu79 Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 04:26 PM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 04:16 PM)emu79 Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 03:36 PM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 03:11 PM)emu steve Wrote:  If you can find more athletic monies at EMU. I suggest you email or better yet call Dr. James Smith. He'll be 'all ears."

I watched a presentation sometime ago Dr. Smith made to faculty and staff, "like we got no money..." "We need to reduce faculty and staff."

NO one would say EMU is ''sandbagging' and is sitting on money.

EMU students and the university as a whole are making big contributions to athletics.

The best EMU and other G5 schools can hope is that new revenue sources open up. I mentioned the CFP. My hope is that if a MAC team makes it one year maybe it opens up say another 10, 20 or more million bucks for the MAC to be spread among the other 11 teams.

the NCAA is expanding the playoff to 12 teams. those extra games - the ad revenue, the attendance dollars, the sponsorship - all that money goes into a large pit right?

stop asking about individual schools and think about the corrupt system top to bottom. its a cartel.

The NCAA is made up of individual schools. Why is that so hard for you to see that? And I object that you lump the EMUs of the world as part of your corrupt system. Real athletes will see their opportunities in college sports possibly decrease which means the cure is worse than the disease that you rant about. Reform the entire system so it works for everybody. And stop having non athlete students subsidize it.

Yeah and McDonalds is just a bunch of restaurants.

Should all parts of a school be self-sufficient? Should they fold the theater because it isnt self sufficient? Thats a clown argument bro.

Dan its not a clown argument Komrade, its called reality and if you don't believe it try it with your own personal budget. By the way during the pandemic many movie chain and individual parts of the chain closed shop ditto restaurants. Why because the individual locations weren't self sufficient and that made the chain bankrupt. By the way sports college or otherwise is a business and needs to be run like one. Colleges are in the education business not the sports business Dan. If the sports interferes with the overall mission then eliminate or downgrade it so it doesn't interfere with the main mission which is to educate not entertain. Frankly we should be switching over to all on line classes and cutting the cost of education. Let those with more $$$ pay for the experience if that is their choice. How's that for a corrupt system?

I love being called 'komrade' for arguing the most capitalistic argument in the world : people should be paid for their labor.

College sports is about to go through a SEISMIC shift. mid majors are going to have to 'right size'. maybe that means the creation of a new division between the p5 juggernauts and I-AA. maybe that means more schools drop to 1-AA. maybe that means out of conference games will be closer to ypsi to cut down on travel expenses (hello more MAC / Horizon league showdowns in basketball). i dont know. what i do know is that the current system only can exist because its exploitative to the VAST majority of participants and that with every legal case brought against the NCAA and the member institutions it represents - the wall crumbles more and more.

most of the arguments against players rights brought up on these threads over and over and over again basically boil down to 'This will make it even harder for EMU to compete with Alabama' and 'I don't like it' - neither of which are good arguments.

I love emu football and am a season ticket holder - but it would be deeply selfish of me to want to perpetuate an unfair system for my own entertainment purposes. I've laid out argument after argument for why players deserve rights as labor and some of you have acknowledged coming over to my side - or at very least seeing the issues in a new light. i dont think EMU football is going to go away - but the system as it is right now? its the dodo bird. the sooner we call accept that the sooner we arent old men yelling at clouds and the sooner we can argue about what retro jerseys we want to see (id like the old big Y men from ypsi unis from the 40s) or complain about the food offerings at games (more food trucks - less microwaved chick fil a).

(06-22-2021 06:31 AM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 04:54 PM)emu79 Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 04:26 PM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 04:16 PM)emu79 Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 03:36 PM)dansplaining Wrote:  the NCAA is expanding the playoff to 12 teams. those extra games - the ad revenue, the attendance dollars, the sponsorship - all that money goes into a large pit right?

stop asking about individual schools and think about the corrupt system top to bottom. its a cartel.

The NCAA is made up of individual schools. Why is that so hard for you to see that? And I object that you lump the EMUs of the world as part of your corrupt system. Real athletes will see their opportunities in college sports possibly decrease which means the cure is worse than the disease that you rant about. Reform the entire system so it works for everybody. And stop having non athlete students subsidize it.

Yeah and McDonalds is just a bunch of restaurants.

Should all parts of a school be self-sufficient? Should they fold the theater because it isnt self sufficient? Thats a clown argument bro.

Dan its not a clown argument Komrade, its called reality and if you don't believe it try it with your own personal budget. By the way during the pandemic many movie chain and individual parts of the chain closed shop ditto restaurants. Why because the individual locations weren't self sufficient and that made the chain bankrupt. By the way sports college or otherwise is a business and needs to be run like one. Colleges are in the education business not the sports business Dan. If the sports interferes with the overall mission then eliminate or downgrade it so it doesn't interfere with the main mission which is to educate not entertain. Frankly we should be switching over to all on line classes and cutting the cost of education. Let those with more $$$ pay for the experience if that is their choice. How's that for a corrupt system?

I love being called 'komrade' for arguing the most capitalistic argument in the world : people should be paid for their labor.

College sports is about to go through a SEISMIC shift. mid majors are going to have to 'right size'. maybe that means the creation of a new division between the p5 juggernauts and I-AA. maybe that means more schools drop to 1-AA. maybe that means out of conference games will be closer to ypsi to cut down on travel expenses (hello more MAC / Horizon league showdowns in basketball). i dont know. what i do know is that the current system only can exist because its exploitative to the VAST majority of participants and that with every legal case brought against the NCAA and the member institutions it represents - the wall crumbles more and more.

most of the arguments against players rights brought up on these threads over and over and over again basically boil down to 'This will make it even harder for EMU to compete with Alabama' and 'I don't like it' - neither of which are good arguments.

I love emu football and am a season ticket holder - but it would be deeply selfish of me to want to perpetuate an unfair system for my own entertainment purposes. I've laid out argument after argument for why players deserve rights as labor and some of you have acknowledged coming over to my side - or at very least seeing the issues in a new light. i dont think EMU football is going to go away - but the system as it is right now? its the dodo bird. the sooner we call accept that the sooner we arent old men yelling at clouds and the sooner we can argue about what retro jerseys we want to see (id like the old big Y men from ypsi unis from the 40s) or complain about the food offerings at games (more food trucks - less microwaved chick fil a).

It's all ready unfair you are making all students at EMU pay to give scholarships and cost of attendance stipends to those on athletic scholarships. At the end of the rainbow a few big schools will be left standing and a few players at those programs will get more dollars. The rest will get nothing because the programs won't be there.
Let's hope both the revenue and expense side get reformed so it doesn't happen.

(06-22-2021 07:37 AM)emu79 Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 06:31 AM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 04:54 PM)emu79 Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 04:26 PM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 04:16 PM)emu79 Wrote:  The NCAA is made up of individual schools. Why is that so hard for you to see that? And I object that you lump the EMUs of the world as part of your corrupt system. Real athletes will see their opportunities in college sports possibly decrease which means the cure is worse than the disease that you rant about. Reform the entire system so it works for everybody. And stop having non athlete students subsidize it.

Yeah and McDonalds is just a bunch of restaurants.

Should all parts of a school be self-sufficient? Should they fold the theater because it isnt self sufficient? Thats a clown argument bro.

Dan its not a clown argument Komrade, its called reality and if you don't believe it try it with your own personal budget. By the way during the pandemic many movie chain and individual parts of the chain closed shop ditto restaurants. Why because the individual locations weren't self sufficient and that made the chain bankrupt. By the way sports college or otherwise is a business and needs to be run like one. Colleges are in the education business not the sports business Dan. If the sports interferes with the overall mission then eliminate or downgrade it so it doesn't interfere with the main mission which is to educate not entertain. Frankly we should be switching over to all on line classes and cutting the cost of education. Let those with more $$$ pay for the experience if that is their choice. How's that for a corrupt system?

I love being called 'komrade' for arguing the most capitalistic argument in the world : people should be paid for their labor.

College sports is about to go through a SEISMIC shift. mid majors are going to have to 'right size'. maybe that means the creation of a new division between the p5 juggernauts and I-AA. maybe that means more schools drop to 1-AA. maybe that means out of conference games will be closer to ypsi to cut down on travel expenses (hello more MAC / Horizon league showdowns in basketball). i dont know. what i do know is that the current system only can exist because its exploitative to the VAST majority of participants and that with every legal case brought against the NCAA and the member institutions it represents - the wall crumbles more and more.

most of the arguments against players rights brought up on these threads over and over and over again basically boil down to 'This will make it even harder for EMU to compete with Alabama' and 'I don't like it' - neither of which are good arguments.

I love emu football and am a season ticket holder - but it would be deeply selfish of me to want to perpetuate an unfair system for my own entertainment purposes. I've laid out argument after argument for why players deserve rights as labor and some of you have acknowledged coming over to my side - or at very least seeing the issues in a new light. i dont think EMU football is going to go away - but the system as it is right now? its the dodo bird. the sooner we call accept that the sooner we arent old men yelling at clouds and the sooner we can argue about what retro jerseys we want to see (id like the old big Y men from ypsi unis from the 40s) or complain about the food offerings at games (more food trucks - less microwaved chick fil a).

It's all ready unfair you are making all students at EMU pay to give scholarships and cost of attendance stipends to those on athletic scholarships. At the end of the rainbow a few big schools will be left standing and a few players at those programs will get more dollars. The rest will get nothing because the programs won't be there.
Let's hope both the revenue and expense side get reformed so it doesn't happen.

what you're describing is literally every scholarship program at any university. as a student - some of my tuition dollars subsidized the football program. some of them subsidized scholarships for the COB. some of my tuition dollars paid for big rocks to be left all over campus. we live in a society.

i agree with cid that youre being an alarmist that in a couple years there wont be any mid major football programs in america or that well have a 'club team' or even a non scholarship team. a new normal will happen.

Some more facts to add to the discussion this is an old article

https://moneynation.com/how-much-money-d...ncaa-make/

By the NCAA’s estimate, its member schools make about $6 billion from ticket sales and merchandise sales to regular season games. They also rake in an eye-popping $5 billion from “student fees associated with school athletic programs.” With all the uproar over rising tuition costs, an argument could be made that universities are balancing their sports budgets on the backs of students.

(06-22-2021 08:38 AM)emu79 Wrote:  Some more facts to add to the discussion this is an old article

https://moneynation.com/how-much-money-d...ncaa-make/

By the NCAA’s estimate, its member schools make about $6 billion from ticket sales and merchandise sales to regular season games. They also rake in an eye-popping $5 billion from “student fees associated with school athletic programs.” With all the uproar over rising tuition costs, an argument could be made that universities are balancing their sports budgets on the backs of students.

Then the NCAA as a whole needs to come up with a better business model that doesnt require them to pull that money out of universities. Maybe spend less on coaches or new stadiums. Maybe negotiate better sponsorship opportunities to generate more income. Maybe expand the playoff - oh wait thats already happening.

(06-22-2021 09:49 AM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 08:38 AM)emu79 Wrote:  Some more facts to add to the discussion this is an old article

https://moneynation.com/how-much-money-d...ncaa-make/

By the NCAA’s estimate, its member schools make about $6 billion from ticket sales and merchandise sales to regular season games. They also rake in an eye-popping $5 billion from “student fees associated with school athletic programs.” With all the uproar over rising tuition costs, an argument could be made that universities are balancing their sports budgets on the backs of students.

Then the NCAA as a whole needs to come up with a better business model that doesnt require them to pull that money out of universities. Maybe spend less on coaches or new stadiums. Maybe negotiate better sponsorship opportunities to generate more income. Maybe expand the playoff - oh wait thats already happening.

Bet ya that extra playoff money won't cover additional costs of paying the athletes well deserved extra money let alone taking the burden off their fellow students backs. The reality is the current system works for 20 ncaa schools.

(06-22-2021 10:36 AM)emu79 Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 09:49 AM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 08:38 AM)emu79 Wrote:  Some more facts to add to the discussion this is an old article

https://moneynation.com/how-much-money-d...ncaa-make/

By the NCAA’s estimate, its member schools make about $6 billion from ticket sales and merchandise sales to regular season games. They also rake in an eye-popping $5 billion from “student fees associated with school athletic programs.” With all the uproar over rising tuition costs, an argument could be made that universities are balancing their sports budgets on the backs of students.

Then the NCAA as a whole needs to come up with a better business model that doesnt require them to pull that money out of universities. Maybe spend less on coaches or new stadiums. Maybe negotiate better sponsorship opportunities to generate more income. Maybe expand the playoff - oh wait thats already happening.

Bet ya that extra playoff money won't cover additional costs of paying the athletes well deserved extra money let alone taking the burden off their fellow students backs. The reality is the current system works for 20 ncaa schools.

Need a way to share more TV monies, but it belongs to the individual conferences. Sharing TV monies works very well in pro sports and keeps small market teams afloat.

But in collegiate sports big gate receipts and big TV monies are highly correlated.

(06-22-2021 11:15 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 10:36 AM)emu79 Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 09:49 AM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 08:38 AM)emu79 Wrote:  Some more facts to add to the discussion this is an old article

https://moneynation.com/how-much-money-d...ncaa-make/

By the NCAA’s estimate, its member schools make about $6 billion from ticket sales and merchandise sales to regular season games. They also rake in an eye-popping $5 billion from “student fees associated with school athletic programs.” With all the uproar over rising tuition costs, an argument could be made that universities are balancing their sports budgets on the backs of students.

Then the NCAA as a whole needs to come up with a better business model that doesnt require them to pull that money out of universities. Maybe spend less on coaches or new stadiums. Maybe negotiate better sponsorship opportunities to generate more income. Maybe expand the playoff - oh wait thats already happening.

Bet ya that extra playoff money won't cover additional costs of paying the athletes well deserved extra money let alone taking the burden off their fellow students backs. The reality is the current system works for 20 ncaa schools.

Need a way to share more TV monies, but it belongs to the individual conferences. Sharing TV monies works very well in pro sports and keeps small market teams afloat.

But in collegiate sports big gate receipts and big TV monies are highly correlated.

I wont take that bet because can the money be used to compensate players? of course it can. will it be? hell no the weight trainer at georgia needs a new sold gold weight set.

I've brought up in the past that profit sharing for all 1-A institutions would make a lot of sense. Take baseball for example. The Tampa Rays and Miami Marlins dont need to sell a ticket all year because the revenue sharing checks they get from the sawks and the yanks.

would a system like that make EMU and WMU solvent? probably not but it would help a lot.

(06-22-2021 11:45 AM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 11:15 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 10:36 AM)emu79 Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 09:49 AM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 08:38 AM)emu79 Wrote:  Some more facts to add to the discussion this is an old article

https://moneynation.com/how-much-money-d...ncaa-make/

By the NCAA’s estimate, its member schools make about $6 billion from ticket sales and merchandise sales to regular season games. They also rake in an eye-popping $5 billion from “student fees associated with school athletic programs.” With all the uproar over rising tuition costs, an argument could be made that universities are balancing their sports budgets on the backs of students.

Then the NCAA as a whole needs to come up with a better business model that doesnt require them to pull that money out of universities. Maybe spend less on coaches or new stadiums. Maybe negotiate better sponsorship opportunities to generate more income. Maybe expand the playoff - oh wait thats already happening.

Bet ya that extra playoff money won't cover additional costs of paying the athletes well deserved extra money let alone taking the burden off their fellow students backs. The reality is the current system works for 20 ncaa schools.

Need a way to share more TV monies, but it belongs to the individual conferences. Sharing TV monies works very well in pro sports and keeps small market teams afloat.

But in collegiate sports big gate receipts and big TV monies are highly correlated.

I wont take that bet because can the money be used to compensate players? of course it can. will it be? hell no the weight trainer at georgia needs a new sold gold weight set.

I've brought up in the past that profit sharing for all 1-A institutions would make a lot of sense. Take baseball for example. The Tampa Rays and Miami Marlins dont need to sell a ticket all year because the revenue sharing checks they get from the sawks and the yanks.

would a system like that make EMU and WMU solvent? probably not but it would help a lot.

Would be a great first step.

I've worked in Development (fundraising) pretty much my entire 36-year career. Much of that time was spent working at Universities (including a 3-year stint at EMU). An interesting concept just came to this old fundraiser's mind. In university development offices, the old joke is that if it holds still long enough, a development officer will try to find a donor to name it.

As the era of paying players ushers in, might some of the booster rules be relaxed, allowing donors to fund named endowments to help supplement the cost of specific player positions? For example, you could have the Jerry Weaver Quarterback, the Dansplaining Middle Linebacker, and the EMU Steve Punter as named starting positions, each funded by a contribution from the named generous booster.

Or EMU Steve left OT, unless it is a premium position. Then I 'd go for the EMU Steve Ball Boy. Insert joke here...

(06-22-2021 02:08 PM)cidbearit Wrote:  I've worked in Development (fundraising) pretty much my entire 36-year career. Much of that time was spent working at Universities (including a 3-year stint at EMU). An interesting concept just came to this old fundraiser's mind. In university development offices, the old joke is that if it holds still long enough, a development officer will try to find a donor to name it.

As the era of paying players ushers in, might some of the booster rules be relaxed, allowing donors to fund named endowments to help supplement the cost of specific player positions? For example, you could have the Jerry Weaver Quarterback, the Dansplaining Middle Linebacker, and the EMU Steve Punter as named starting positions, each funded by a contribution from the named generous booster.

I've brought it up before but i think its bonkers the school doesnt sell the naming rights to the convo.

(06-22-2021 02:30 PM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 02:08 PM)cidbearit Wrote:  I've worked in Development (fundraising) pretty much my entire 36-year career. Much of that time was spent working at Universities (including a 3-year stint at EMU). An interesting concept just came to this old fundraiser's mind. In university development offices, the old joke is that if it holds still long enough, a development officer will try to find a donor to name it.

As the era of paying players ushers in, might some of the booster rules be relaxed, allowing donors to fund named endowments to help supplement the cost of specific player positions? For example, you could have the Jerry Weaver Quarterback, the Dansplaining Middle Linebacker, and the EMU Steve Punter as named starting positions, each funded by a contribution from the named generous booster.

I've brought it up before but i think its bonkers the school doesnt sell the naming rights to the convo.

Tried 20+ years ago. Little interest.

(06-22-2021 02:30 PM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 02:08 PM)cidbearit Wrote:  I've worked in Development (fundraising) pretty much my entire 36-year career. Much of that time was spent working at Universities (including a 3-year stint at EMU). An interesting concept just came to this old fundraiser's mind. In university development offices, the old joke is that if it holds still long enough, a development officer will try to find a donor to name it.

As the era of paying players ushers in, might some of the booster rules be relaxed, allowing donors to fund named endowments to help supplement the cost of specific player positions? For example, you could have the Jerry Weaver Quarterback, the Dansplaining Middle Linebacker, and the EMU Steve Punter as named starting positions, each funded by a contribution from the named generous booster.

I've brought it up before but i think its bonkers the school doesnt sell the naming rights to the convo.

Dan, that I will agree with 100%. I thought when OSU built the new Basketball arena and named it the Value City Arena, then subsequently the Schottenstein Center, that would ignite a cascade of others doing the same. It, however did not, sanctimonious NCAA schools can apparently plaster a corporate name like St. Joes on their practice facility but find it unpleasable to do so on actual game facilities. That splitting of a moral hair, I simply don't understand.

U-M is under pressure to rename the Crisler Center due to the former coach's racist past behavior, similar to what happened at Quirk Theatre. The name change is most likely to happen and U-M will of course bear the cost of changing all the signage and spend a ton of money on committees deciding on the new name.

I say contract the naming rights to a corporate sponsor ready to pony up money. It can be a five or ten year deal, there is ZERO need for it to be permanent. The Houston Astros used to play at Enron Field but due to Enron's cataclysmic failure, they now play in the same building now known as Minute Maid Park. Easy Peezy.

Most importantly ANY revenue collected from EMU renaming the Convo or that matter Rynearson would be truly incremental. No costs other than negotiating the contract.

(06-22-2021 05:13 PM)Jerry Weaver Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 02:30 PM)dansplaining Wrote:  

(06-22-2021 02:08 PM)cidbearit Wrote:  I've worked in Development (fundraising) pretty much my entire 36-year career. Much of that time was spent working at Universities (including a 3-year stint at EMU). An interesting concept just came to this old fundraiser's mind. In university development offices, the old joke is that if it holds still long enough, a development officer will try to find a donor to name it.

As the era of paying players ushers in, might some of the booster rules be relaxed, allowing donors to fund named endowments to help supplement the cost of specific player positions? For example, you could have the Jerry Weaver Quarterback, the Dansplaining Middle Linebacker, and the EMU Steve Punter as named starting positions, each funded by a contribution from the named generous booster.

I've brought it up before but i think its bonkers the school doesnt sell the naming rights to the convo.

Dan, that I will agree with 100%. I thought when OSU built the new Basketball arena and named it the Value City Arena, then subsequently the Schottenstein Center, that would ignite a cascade of others doing the same. It, however did not, sanctimonious NCAA schools can apparently plaster a corporate name like St. Joes on their practice facility but find it unpleasable to do so on actual game facilities. That splitting of a moral hair, I simply don't understand.

U-M is under pressure to rename the Crisler Center due to the former coach's racist past behavior, similar to what happened at Quirk Theatre. The name change is most likely to happen and U-M will of course bear the cost of changing all the signage and spend a ton of money on committees deciding on the new name.

I say contract the naming rights to a corporate sponsor ready to pony up money. It can be a five or ten year deal, there is ZERO need for it to be permanent. The Houston Astros used to play at Enron Field but due to Enron's cataclysmic failure, they now play in the same building now known as Minute Maid Park. Easy Peezy.

Most importantly ANY revenue collected from EMU renaming the Convo or that matter Rynearson would be truly incremental. No costs other than negotiating the contract.

I would argue against renaming Rynearson because 1.) its a unique name and 2.) its named after a person as an honor. there are three 'Convocation Center's in the MAC alone.

So many other things at EMU are for sale - it only makes sense to sell the name of the convo on a leased basis like pro teams have. hit an alum up like roush or the estate of bruce halle. work the phones is what im saying.