Hyman Roth always makes money for his partners.

Mark Emmert, not so much ($$).

“I just don’t understand why you would take a $250 million insurance policy for an $800 million event,” said one Group of 5 athletic director who, like others quoted in this story, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. “Would you put $250,000 worth of insurance on an $800,000 house?”

Most FBS ADs learned of those insurance figures for the first time during a Tuesday conference call that was organized by the Lead1 Association — the FBS athletic directors’ representative body — and featured remarks from NCAA president Mark Emmert.

While understanding that the outbreak of the novel coronavirus has left everyone in the sports world and beyond struggling to navigate uncharted waters, the feeling among many ADs is that NCAA leadership has been lacking in communication on a litany of pressing issues on campuses across the country, after not even consulting with its membership when making the choice to do away with remaining championships for the 2019-20 academic year.

“‘Well, those will be membership questions,’” the same Group of 5 AD said, quoting Emmert. “We’re like: C’mon, man. Everybody’s texting each other like: ‘This is just a joke.’”

It’s always something to watch the light bulb go off in the last person’s eyes.  Of course Emmert’s management is a joke.  It’s been one for a while; it’s just that with the dough rolling in, ADs could ignore it.

All it took for that to change was Emmert not making money for his partners.


Filed under It's Just Bidness, The NCAA

12 responses to “Hyman Roth always makes money for his partners.

  1. I would love to read that policy to see if the National Corrupt Athletic Association has pandemic coverage.

    To think of one good thing that might come from all of this, the Power 5 may finally realize they can do everything the NCAA does for less money and more freedom.

    If everyone believes the value in March Madness comes from the Gonzagas, the San Diego States and the Butlers, they are dumber than we thought.

    Imagine a 16-team tournament where the schools play a best 2 of 3 series over a weekend on campus (higher seed gets 2 home games) leading up to the Final 4. It culminates in a Final 4 with up to 6 games over a weekend at a big site with a winner-take-all game on that Monday night.

    I don’t watch much of the tournament anymore, but I would watch that.

    Liked by 2 people

    • gastr1

      No one would bother with a tournament that left out a ton of top teams. There are (obviously) far more non-P5 top teams in basketball than in football (virtually all of the Big East conference, for example), and that does matter at least in part.

      The screaming about your construct as proposed for BB would be deafening enough that they’d never even dare.


      • If the Power 5 broke away from the NCAA, CBS would still line up to get that tournament. The viewer value is in Power 5 programs that would likely be in the tournament.

        Would the total value of the tournament be lower? Probably. Would the payouts per conference/team be higher? Probably.


      • Macallanlover

        We leave top teams out of every CFB playoff, why not basketball? I think a 16 team BB tourney would work well, and I don’t even watch basketball.

        Looking at the subject of this post from a different angle, if I were an AD I would question anyone paying insurance premiums at all on March Madness. NCAA should have been self-insuring the past 40 years and they would probably be mucho dollars ahead, even with the loss this season. It was such a long shot they were hit by.


  2. 79Dawg

    To Mr. Unknown AD: my guess is that no insurer (or group of insurers) is willing to take the risk of insuring for $800MM on a single event for a premium that would be economically attractive to the NCAA….duh!
    And to the point above, I doubt the NCAA’s policy is a standard business interruption policy – I would imagine it is a specialty policy that is written to provide coverage if the tournament is not held for any reason (i.e., “all-risk”). Assuming that is the case, that would make it even more likely that it would be difficult to find that much coverage for a reasonable premium.

    Liked by 1 person

    • ASEF

      Exactly. House insurance can be pooled across thousand of houses. Not so with an event.


    • Mayor

      I agree with you 79 but likely the NCAA could get the full coverage out of a consortium of carriers including reinsurers. Premium cost would be high though.


  3. Cousin Eddie

    Wonder how many ADs looked into Emmert’s buy out clause after the conference call? That is after all the most important thing on making a decision, to see how deep they are screwed for doing something they should have never already.


  4. FlyingPeakDawg

    I wonder how many of those AD’s throwing stones have adequate coverage for their own glass houses? I’m going to go with “ None”.


  5. JCDawg83

    I would think the NCAA risk managers looked at the likelihood of every game in the tournament being cancelled as so unlikely as to not be worth paying the premium to insure against. I would also think their thought process was framed around addressing a natural disaster or terrorist attack or some one off event that might cancel one of the rounds at one of the locations with the finals being the most valuable round.


  6. dawgtor

    I wonder whether cancelled/altered seasons will change eligibility for athletes such that they can play another year.