Consensus? I do not think that word means what you think it means, Larry Scott.
Also, I think this “big tent” analogy lacks something. Instead, look at D-1 as a big airplane. Jim Delany wants to sit in first class. Coach? That’s for the Sun Belt.
The NCAA president is all over the place in his remarks about student-athlete compensation at the IMG Intercollegiate Athletics Forum in New York City, but there’s one little mention of something that might be worth keeping an eye on.
Some have suggested players could be compensated by selling their autographs or by being permitted to market themselves. While Emmert said the latter is at least being discussed, he says the autograph issue seems like a non-starter. [Emphasis added.]
The reason I can see there being some movement on that isn’t because it doesn’t violate the NCAA’s sacred rule of amateurism. Face it, the extra subsidy Emmert’s already on board for crosses the pay for play line no matter how hard he wants to deny it. Nah, the reason it’s got a shot, however slight, of happening is because it won’t cost the schools anything. Which is more than you can say for pursuing O’Bannon all the way to the Supreme Court, especially if the NCAA comes out on the losing end of the stick.
Am I being cynical? Is there any other way to be about this?
We’re starting to hear a few things from the poobahs on the selection committee about criteria. There’s a lot of talk about schedule strength, which is welcome, of course. But it’s also one of those easier said than done things, too. Or maybe not.
As an athletic director, one of Radakovich’s prime duties is making Clemson’s nonconference football schedule. He has to mix the right blend of teams with the Atlantic Coast Conference opponents to come up with a slate that draws fans to Memorial Stadium and gives the Tigers a chance to succeed.
He doesn’t necessarily see the implementation of the College Football Playoff as catalyst for sweeping changes in how teams schedule.
“There are certain times when people are going to say, ‘This team that we have coming back is going to be really good. We have a chance to really make a run. Is this schedule set up for us to do that?” Radakovich said. “Now the year following that the same AD may say, ‘I’ve lost all of this stuff. How am I going to make sure that this team has a chance to be successful?’ That’s the difference between football and basketball.
“In basketball you can change your schedule like that. In football it’s a lot more difficult. It could be something that’s an outgrowth of this new system.”
C’mon, Dan, it’s not that difficult to drop a 1-AA cupcake for a neutral site game to start the season against a D-1 opponent. You pull out the ol’ Rolodex – or more likely, you’ve got the number on speed dial – call your friends at ESPN to make something happen, and voilà!, instant schedule credibility. (Plus, do it early, and even if you lose, you’ve got time to regain your stature with a playoff run.)
Expect to see a rise in spot scheduling like this as teams realize ways to game the new system.
Today’s moment of BWAHAHAAAHAHA!!1!! comes from the president of the Georgia Bulldog Club of Jacksonville, who, in speaking about the early enthusiasm level for the Gator Bowl, noted one essential truth:
“I think it’ll raise up to an 8 once we let it sink in,” Daniel said. “It’s not what we thought it would be, but it’s a bowl game. You hear teasing around here that Florida would take the Gator Bowl all day long.”
Delany: Asking us to pay players is like asking pro teams to require athletes to be in full-time study.—
Dan Wolken (@DanWolken) December 11, 2013
I know that’s supposed to be a clever attempt to spin the “hell, no, we ain’t paying the players!” position, but if this is the best Jim Delany’s got, I’d sure love to know what his SAT score was, because as analogies go, that’s incoherent.
Ladies and gentlemen, a rare sighting – the final score on the BDS scoreboard after a(nother) Tech loss to Georgia:
I looked up maybe a minute after it was over, and they’d already pulled that sucker.
Well, now. This is a bit of a surprise.
An NCAA audit report of bowl games released last week shows that every Football Bowl Subdivision conference received more money from 2012-13 bowl payouts than their schools paid on bowl expenses.
The 35 bowls distributed $300.8 million last year to conferences, who negotiate deals on behalf of their teams, and schools reported spending $90.3 million on bowl trips. According to the NCAA report, bowls received $445.6 million in gross receipts and spent 26 percent of it on operating expenses. Bowls retained 7 percent of the receipts.
“The perception is out there that schools are losing money going to bowl games and the reality is that’s not true,” said Wright Waters, executive director of the Football Bowls Association. “Bowls strike deals with conferences, and there very well may be issues that conferences are not giving them a big enough allowance to go to the bowl. But at the end of the day, the conferences are still distributing money at the end of the year.”
In case you’re wondering, “every” conference includes each one of the mid-majors.
So much for the screaming about how the bowls were scamming the conferences to the point of making them run their postseasons in the red. But at least they got those pesky ticket allotment requirements lowered. That’s good news, right? Well, maybe not so much.
However, Waters raised concerns about lower guaranteed ticket allotments, particularly for games not associated with the College Football Playoff. There will be six high-profile bowls next year, not four, once the playoff starts: Rose, Orange, Sugar, Fiesta, Cotton and Chick-fil-A.
Lower guaranteed ticket allotments “will probably create some problems with teams who travel well and who may not get tickets,” Waters said. “Fans will have to pay scalper prices. Bowls will probably try to sell their tickets locally.”
Some days it seems like the only constant in college football is hoovering more money out of fans’ wallets… okay, every day.